October 31, 2006
— Ace Reporting for duty, idiots!
He really said that. Well, he said it in the negative. He said if kids didn't make themselves smart and get educated, they'd wind up in Iraq. Allah has the audio.
"The suggestion that only the least educated Americans would agree to serve in the military and fight in Iraq, is an insult to every soldier serving in combat, and should deeply offend any American with an ounce of appreciation for what they suffer and risk so that the rest of us can sleep more comfortably at night. Without them, we wouldn't live in a country where people securely possess all their God-given rights, including the right to express insensitive, ill-considered and uninformed remarks."
Thirty damn years and John Kerry's attitude towards his
fellow soldiers lower-class inferiors hasn't changed an iota. For some of the upper class, "mixing" with the lower classes in the military produces a certain humility and sense of egalitarianism.
For others, it produces nothing but contempt for people who ought to be serving you high tea, not acting as your equals in a combat unit.
— Ace Dan Riehl thinks it's about time to get out.
Iraqi Shiite militants won a major political victory Tuesday when Prime Minister Nuri Al Maliki ordered US and Iraqi units to lift a blockade around the flashpoint suburb of Sadr City.
The Sadrists are "jubilant."
I have to chew this one over. On one hand, it's apparently important that the PM be perceived as his own man, and not merely a creation of the US government, if he's to assert his authority.
On the other hand, if nation-building in Muslim countries can only occur if we allow the jihadists to assert their authority over us, what's the point?
I've been wondering for a while if Bush doesn't have his own exit plan on the slow cooker. One of the exit plans always mentioned -- we'd leave when the Iraqi government requests it.
If he has an idea like that, then right now US envoys are instructing Maliki to either get the Sadrists under control, let the US troops deal with him in their own special way, or expect a withdrawal.
— Ace Conservative-leaning videos sure get flagged as inappropriate in a hurry, but pretty much anything goes for jihadi propaganda clips.
— Ace Seriously.
Meadow muffins. Guano. Feces. Solid waste. Caca. The words for poop are endless, but the Miami Metrozoo has another term to add to the list: educational.
Now on display is a 5,000-square-foot exhibit on excrement titled "The Scoop on Poop," which invites visitors to explore the science of scat. The exhibit is filled with photos of animals in some of their most indelicate moments. Stool sample models abound: haylike football-sized balls (elephant), kidney-bean-looking pellets (porcupine) and coallike lumps coated with fur (black bear).
Beyond the "ick" factor, however, zoo officials and the exhibit's creators say there is a lot of information being imparted. Visitors can smell the stench of flowers that mimic dung to attract flies for pollination. Videos include one of a hippo spreading its droppings around to mark its territory. Simple games include "Who Dung It?"
"We didn't want this to be a gross exhibit for shock value," said Chad Peeling, who helped create the display. "Our goal with the exhibit was to make people think, kids especially, about the science in all aspects in life and this thing that adults don't like to talk about."
Mr. Peeling went on to say that the next exhibit would be the Webb Collection, featuring interactive "Funucational" displays including a plastic Cambodian boy who can be picked up, turned upside down, and have his penis put in your mouth.
Thanks to chickpea, who doesn't believe that everybody poops.
— Ace They've previously supported a Republican here or there to make-pretend they were evaluating candidates without reference to party.
October 30, 2006
— Ace Upset?
Thanks to Larwyn.
I wonder if it's ever been determined how blacks vote when there's a black Republican candidate on the ballot. There's the famous belief that blacks overpoll with whites, presumably because whites want to seem nice and liberal to pollsters so they say they're voting for the black candidate, even if they're not.
Could it be that blacks do something similar? They know they're "supposed to" vote Democratic, and they're not supposed to vote just for someone because they're black, and so they overpoll as far as their support for, say, Cardin.
Heh: Heather Wilson's ad. Her opponent seems to have a stroke when asked about taxes.
— Ace How come he can't seem to get anyone to say nice stuff about him without paying them to?
— Ace Stoo Pid sends this. Similar to the "3 differences in the picture" gag below, a website asks people to figure their way through a maze, then a picture of Linda Blair from the Exorcist pops up.
A guy videotaped a coworker being shocked by this. Pretty funny.
If I can link to a clip from a Gmail, this might just work.
I'm a Moron Update: Okay, so that doesn't work.
It worked for me... but I guess that's because I was logged into my Gmail account.
Here is the clip on break.com, thanks to Gunslinger.
— Ace Well, dismal science, anyway. It's an analysis using economic techniques. Which I think just means regression analysis. (Whatever that is.)
Homophobic Messaging From The Left? It just occurred to me-- using the same reasoning the left used to brand the Playboy Bunny ad "racist," it seems to me there's a nasty attempt here to play on people's homophobia--
If you vote for Bob Corker, Julia Corker might try to date your white daughter.
— Ace Can you find the three differences in these photos?
Thanks to Dad.
Weird: Allah tells me this is real.
It's an audition tape from 1984 or so, offered to Stanley Kubrick. It's painful.
An IMDB search reveals no credits for the actor involved, at least under the name he gives on the tape.
Which doesn't mean it's fake, given the acting chops on display here.
Supposedly... This is Brian Atene, in a sequel, twenty years later. Smells like a parody.
— Ace With a homemade Samurai sword.
...Flemons' lawyer says he is schizophrenic with a psychotic obsession with fantasy role-playing games, including Dungeons & Dragons.
Murder? I don't think so.
Williams arrived at his job the day of the killing armed with a homemade 38-inch samurai sword. Witnesses told police that Flemons appeared to hand Williams a piece of metal in a chivalrous manner, as if challenging him to a duel, before chasing him and stabbing him to death.
The medical examiner ruled that Williams died as a result of "multiple chop wounds to the neck."
Sounds like the "victim" just failed his saving throw against being a total pussy.
I'd love to get on that jury. I'd be a total OJ juror. He's a D&D player, so we must "send a mesage" to the country by setting him free.
We're just not going to be discriminated against anymore, America.
— Ace Again, don't expect the media to pick up on this of their own volition.
Whether he also was in the Put A Boy's Penis In Your Mouth group is thusfar unclear.
This seems to be an odd group for a politician to be in. Married? What's he doing in a group about fucking? Smoking some shit? Is he a pot enthusiast?
I'm kind of unsure what a man this age is doing in the Facebook anyhow. (Do people older than 30 use this thing?)
Only Allen can directly inject it into the campaign, at the risk of increasing his own negatives.
But you can be damnsure had Allen had a similar Facebook membership, it would be headlined in the NYT and on CNN without any prompting from the Webb folks.
— Ace In case you hadn't heard, US soldiers are dying in Iraq.
Page One, baby.
CNN aired the terrorist propaganda footage of the soldier being killed by a sniper. The New York Times now runs this a week from the election.
They claim it's necessary to inform the public. Even if such reportage serves the purposes of the terrorists, the public has the right to know precisely what's going on in Iraq (presented as shockingly, or sadly, as possible, of course).
If it's the job of these organizations to report, no matter what the political consequences, will CNN and the NYT be as eager to report on Al Qaeda's celebrations of victory after a Democratic congressional win?
Or will they suddenly take the position that the fact terrorists want that victory lap in the American media is proof that we mustn't allow terrorist propaganda to infect our media?
— Ace Emphasis added.
Jim Webb's novel is mentioned briefly towards the end.
Lynn Cheney's novel causes controversy in Senate race.
Who'd have thought this could have been so easily turned against a nonpolitician not running in the race at all?
Well played, CNN. Very well played.
The other cute thing is that the article quotes Webb and other Democrats insisting the book features "graphic" scenes of lesbian sex, and that Cheney denies this.
Gee, I guess it's an open controversy -- he said, she said.
Except it's not. If the passages were graphic, CNN would quote them and settle the dispute. But they're not, so they don't, leaving it up to readers to guess at.
I've read the supposedly "graphic" passages quoted, and they're not graphic. They're Harlequin-type melodramatic silliness, but I didn't see anything "graphic."
I Question The Pattern: It always seems to go the same way.
1) The liberals cry foul over something absurd.
2) They then use this as a justification to push something nasty they would have pushed anyway. (If no immediate source of fake outrage is available, they claim they had to do this to "get tough" and because of the now 18 year old Willie Horton non-scandal.)
3) The media goes after the story like gangbusters, sparing the Democrats of the inevitable loss of favorability rating caused by going nastily negative. So it's a win-win for the Democrats-- they get the benefits of negative campaigning, as it's the media, not them, most responsible for it, and none of the drawbacks.
I notice that Jim Webb's novel Lost Penis In Boy's Mouth did not becomne a media issue until the George Allen campaign took the risky step of making it an issue through a press release. Blogs like Right Wing News had it for a while, but the media refused to bite.
Notice how quickly, however, the media is willing to run with dirty laundry pushed to them from the left.
— Ace Attacking a madrassa? Killing 70 to 80 terrorists? Including a couple of fairly-high ranking deputy Al Qaedas? Possibly hitting Zawahiri himself?
Bill Roggio thinks this was actuallly a US strike, which the Pakistan government is taking "credit" for -- as the outrage over the Pakistanis hitting the site would probably be less than the Pakistanis allowing infidels to hit a "religious school."
He does have a point -- few countries can attack at night.
— Ace Gotta be. These girls have to be plants. Otherwise, wouldn't there be lawsuits?
Still, pretty funny.
Thanks to Brett Weir.
From Wonkette , which now seems to be officially a gay website, and which is crowing that it got the smooch story pushed into the MSM. (Well, defnining MSM as a "nobody columnist from the Atlanta Commercial Appeal -- but of course now all the MSM will pick up on it).
The justification for this? Well, of course, Republicans did it first (as they've noted the Ford clan seems to make most of its money as lobbyists), Republicans hate gays (no need to elaborate), and hypocrisy (about something or other).
As usual. The left apparently holds itself to very high standards, or rather they would, but they have to "get tough" against all these mean and racist and homnophobic attacks by Republicans.
Update: A parody anti-Ford ad, which is slightly more racist than the real one. (Moderate content warning.)
— Ace The guy lives and breathes this stuff. So he knows what he's talking about.
What's with the polls?
In 2004, the electorate that went to the polls or voted absentee was, according to the adjusted NEP exit poll, 37 percent Democratic and 37 percent Republican. In party identification, it was the most Republican electorate since George Gallup conducted his first random sample poll in October 1935.
But most recent national polls show Democrats with an advantage in party identification in the vicinity of 5 percent to 12 percent. Party identification usually changes slowly. Historically, voters have switched from candidates of one party to candidates of the other more readily than they have changed their party identification.
Over time, big changes in party ID can and do occur. When I started in the polling business, in 1974, national party identification was almost 50 percent Democratic and not much more than 25 percent Republican.
Since then, Democratic party ID has fallen, particularly in the South, where many voters who considered themselves Democrats found themselves voting Republican for president and, increasingly in the 1980s and 1990s, for other offices, as well.
Republican party ID has increased. But that's a process that took decades. If you could go back in history and conduct polls, I don't think you'd find any, and certainly not many, two-year periods when the balance in party identification shifted from even to having one party 12 percent ahead of the other.
Worth reading in full. He also notes that while highly partisan folks might view this as virtually a presidential election year, for most voters, it's just another midterm election, and that means lower turnout -- and the possibility that strong GOTV efforts can have a large impact.
Based on Polls and Best Guesses... Real Clear Politics predicts an 18 seat shift in the House, with a range of 7 to 37.
The great unknowns still lurk. Has the country really moved five to twelve points in party identification in just two years? Are conservatives really so dispirited they'll sit this one out? Or is the Republican GOTV advantage even more potent in a midterm election, with fewer voters going to the polls?
— Ace Even I'm offended.
— LauraW. Looks like an honest mistake. Check it out.
"This should only be available to the most depraved people who want to corrupt their children."
I dunno. That stinks of elitism and discrimination.
43 queries taking 2.4059 seconds, 279 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.