July 30, 2013
— Ace A local San Diego tv station tweeted that there would be a press conference or interview with an eighth accuser, but then deleted the tweet. I assume they didn't just make that up, though, and there was some reason to tweet it originally.
Per the deleted tweet, it's schedule for 5pm Pacific Time/8pm Eastern.
Yes that's right. You're not dreaming.
The city is voting on the request today. They've already announced that if they're exposed to any costs themselves due to "Fingers" Filner's various headlocks and ass-pats, they will seek to sue Filner in turn to recover the costs from him.
Despite my efforts on Twitter yesterday to shame the media into interviewing Democratic officials who covered for "Fingers" Filner, and the assemblywoman who says she was threatened into supporting him, it appears they are shameless and they just don't care.
The War on Women
Victims of Democrats are not "women," by definition.
If they were Real Women, they'd keep their whore mouths shut.
— Ace Apparently the statement itself is true, and is usually true for the wealthiest-states-per-capita (California, New York, Connecticut, NJ). It is a true and yet politically-touchy thing to note that many of the more conservative states are actually net-federal-dollar importers.
Of course, it should also be noted that California, New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey are directly responsible for growing the size of government (in as much as they reliably elect mostly liberal, statist Representatives and Senators every cycle, and always vote for the statist, socialist-tending candidate for president). So perhaps it's only right that they should bear most of the burden of their political folly.
The primaries will not begin for two years and yet here we are, in nearly full primary mode.
Question: As many conservative states are net-federal-dollar-importers, has Christie wounded himself badly with a whole passel of states?
Or was he never going to win in those states anyway?
— Ace I have some calls to delete this comment by "WHOOPS."
Nope. I'm front-paging it.
Come bear witness to the furious intellectual firepower of the Marxist bien pensants.
Gee, wonder which former CIA asset will give us an excuse to invade yet another country, engage in crimes against humanity and war profiteering?
And when we shoot down your bullshit as fast as you can sling it, will Christian fundamentalist elements in our military stage another NBC attack on our nation?
You know, it really sucks that there's nothing much of value in teabilly country to attack. We shouldn't have to pay for the crimes of the "my god is bigger than your god" crowd.
But hey, keep disenfranchising minorities and desperately trying to control the sexuality of women. The rest of us humans will eventually push you 19th century cretins and your weaponized kids out of American life forever.
I don't know which I love more, the rote recitation of Internet-based "learning" and banal cant, or the screechy histrionics.
Leftism is not a politics, it is a psychology. Always was, always will be. It is the philosophy of the loser, a justification for his failure to excel in society.
This is not ideology; it is self-therapy. A bit like alcoholism but the poison flows outward.
LEFTY: Dear dear, it's so much more complicated than that. ME: In what way? LEFTY: What? ME: In what way? LEFTY: Um... because Nuance.— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) July 30, 2013
Polar Bears, Serious You Guys.
— Ace This Charles C.W. Cooke piece makes a specific point about this syndrome. First some of the backstory again.
[C]onsider the words of one Michael Shulan, who really believes that the way America will look best, the way we can really do best, is to not be Americans so vigilantly and so vehemently. Mr. Shulan, who is the creative director of the 9/11 Memorial Museum, also expressed his distaste at what he called the rah-rah America instinct.
The news that a New York Citybased creative director is disheartened by muscular American self-assuredness will presumably not come as a hefty surprise to many. Nevertheless, I might venture that if ones sole job is to memorialize for the nation the revolting attack that unrepentant barbarians perpetrated on the United States on September 11 of 2001, ones calculations as to what level of patriotism is and isnt seemly should change a touch.
Elizabeth Greenspan's new book documents the resistance of Shulan to memorialize 9/11 in the 9/11 Memorial Museum. The whole article is worth reading, but here's the part I'd like to noodle on:
My concern, Shulan explained, as it always was, is that we not reduce [9/11] down to something that was too simple, and in its simplicity would actually distort the complexity of the event, the meaning of the event.
The never-ending search for complexity where it neither exists nor belongs is the unlovely signet of the pseudo-intellectual. What, precisely, are Americas flag-waving rubes missing about the events of September 11, 2001? What does the photograph show that distorts anything? If Mr. Shulan disagrees with Rudy Giulianis admirably Manichean statement that, the attacks of 9/11 being an attack on the very idea of a free, inclusive, and civil society, we are right and they are wrong, then he should say so. He might tell us also what he conceives to be the apparently unknowable meaning of the event. Absent an explanation, we should presume that the curator of the 9/11 Memorial Museum considers that there was a better time for firemen to be vigilantly and so vehemently American than the day their city crashed down around them. This is unacceptable.
I do not know the name of this particular rhetorical gambit but it is widely deployed I'm sure it must have one: The gambit of the vague blanket contradiction without -- and this is key -- the forwarding of a concrete positive statement which one is willing to defend as more true than the denied one.
If that's a bit abstract, I just mean this: You've all been in arguments with this type of dishonest "intellectual," the person who believes that argumentation consists of only denying any proposition you make, rarely offering any kind of debatable rationale for the contradiction, and never offering her own competing claim for debate. This sort of interlocutor is simply not playing by any sort of rules of reasoned and fair debate, but is simply being a dishonest juvenile prat.
And if that's still too abstract, well, I just mean this.
The reflexive contradiction is, again, couched in such vague terms that you cannot even intelligently debate the grounds for contradiction -- the tactic is designed to avoid that sort of counter-argument entirely. The entire point of the shabby gambit is to ensure the "battle" can only take place on "your ground," because the enemy never sketches out ground of her own.
The open-ended, undefined contradiction can take many forms, from a simple negation of your proposition without ever offering one's own ("we must not reduce 9/11 of its true, complex meaning" without ever saying what that other meanings one may have in mind), to the sandbagging Death By a Thousand Sneers in the Forms of Questions ("Oh you think that do you?") to the stripped-down, let's-just-stop-pretending-we're-really-having-a-debate-at-all all-purpose universal negation by juvenalia, "LOL." more...
— Ace But he's already pled guilty to several other charges and still faces a long stay in prison.
Yet-- this is a very strange message for a military court to send. I suppose one message is "They won't just convict you based on national security grounds, but will closely examine the evidence to determine if you are really guilty of what you are charged with."
On the other hand -- "They won't just convict you national security grounds." You can download millions of documents to a man known to be venomously anti-American and yet even the US military courts will sort of give you a pass on it, if you say your heart was "in the right place."
The suspense at the court martial session was limited because Manning previously pled guilty to 10 of the 22 counts he faced. Those charges carry a potential sentence of 20 years. The aiding-the-enemy charge can lead result in a sentence of up to life in prison or event to the death penalty, but the military did not seek capital punishment in Mannings case.
If convicted on all charges apart from aiding the enemy, Manning faced a potential sentence of up to 154 years.
— Ace Meghan McCain said something foolish. Okay, that's not the funny part.
Worth a read. It's funny.
— Purple Avenger Teachers. Professionals. Role models. Example setters for the next generations.
Teachers in Lewis County will no longer be allowed to wear blue jeans, faded jeans or shorts to school...Sensible professional clothing choices. They're on your plate. They're something you have to deal with and worry about. It really is quite overwhelming and emotionally draining having to decide between the tan or dark slacks. I confess, this kind of weighty decision used to cost me several hours a day working in a professional setting. With years of practice, I eventually got it down to under 5 seconds though. Shirt choice was always much easier. If it was on a hanger and clean, it was good enough. The slacks though, they were just a total time killer that put me in a foul mood for the rest of the day.
...Lange said teachers have enough to worry about during a school day.
Its pretty tough to enforce and just another thing on peoples plates that theyve got to try to deal with and theyve got enough stuff to deal with and worry about, he said.
Jeff Blaydes, the lawyer representing the American Federation of Teachers, said that it will most likely file a lawsuit against the Board of Education and that the dress code is against the constitutional right of the teachers.more...
— Pixy Misa
- FBI To Rand Paul: Domestic Drone Surveillance Doesn't Require A Warrant
- Verdict In Bradley Manning Case Expected At 1pm Today
- Fading Weiner Tells Clintons To Pound Sand
- Charles C.W. Cooke: Ashamed Of Patriotism
- Weiner's Sexting Pal Pretty Much A Prostitute
- Rand: Christie Is Draping Himself In The Cloak Of 9/11 Victims
- Lockerbie Bomber Release Linked To Arms Deal
- Obama Back Pushing An Increase In The Minimum Wage
- Needed: Tragic Hero
- Individual Health Insurance Rates To Rise 30-40% In Florida
- Tax Exempt Groups Were Targets Of IRS Probe
- Filner Asks San Diego To Pay For His Legal Fees
- It Didn't Occur To NYT Writer To Ask Weiner If He Stopped Sexting Back When He Wrote A Profile On Weiner
- Republican Wins In Heavily Hispanic District In CA
- Relive The Architectural Glory Of Now Bankrupt Detroit's Golden Era
- China Losing Another Ally
- Reuter's Twitter Hacked By Syrians
Follow me on twitter.
— Purple Avenger
Notice the wording THE sequel, not some possible sequel, THE sequel. more...
— Gabriel Malor Happy Tuesday.
D.C. police have arrested a woman for the green paint vandalism at the National Cathedral. They're still trying to determine if she's also responsible for the similar vandalism at the Lincoln Memorial and a statue near the Smithsonian Castle.
The Quran is no longer the most-requested book at Guantanamo Bay's secretive detention facility, Camp 7. Now it's Fifty Shades of Grey.
San Diego Serial Toucher Bob Filner wants the city to pay for the legal costs of defending him from the sexual harassment suits that go back to his time in Congress.
July 29, 2013
In which Heidi Yewman who intensely fears and dislikes guns buys a 9mm Glock and carries it around for a month just to see what it's like. With a completely open mind and everything despite being a board member of the Brady Campaign. Swearsies.
And you'll be shocked, shocked to discover that after four weeks she found it scary, dangerous, and all together icky. So of course we need more gun control. Because the children. And the middle class.
Tony told me a Glock doesn't have an external safety feature, so when I got home and opened the box and saw the magazine in the gun I freaked. I was too scared to try and eject it as thoughts flooded my mind of me accidentally shooting the gun and a bullet hitting my son in the house or rupturing the gas tank of my car, followed by an earth-shaking explosion. This was the first time my hands shook from the adrenaline surge and the first time I questioned the wisdom of this 30-day experiment.
I needed help. I drove to where a police officer had pulled over another driver. Now, writing this, I realize that rolling up on an on-duty cop with a handgun in tow might not have been fully thought through.
I told him I just bought a gun, had no clue how to use it. I asked him to make sure there were no bullets in the magazine or chamber. He took the magazine out and cleared the chamber. He assured me it was empty and showed me how to look. Then he told me how great the gun was and how he had one just like it.The cop thought I was an idiot and suggested I take a class. But up to that point I'd done nothing wrong, nothing illegal.
Because apparently the law is expected to limit every possible foolishness and bad judgment a person could ever make.
And of course she found the gun dangerous - mostly because she refused to learn anything about the weapon and also because she did willfully dumb and dangerous things like this:
I played two tennis matches with the gun in my backpack next to the court, and I went to three parties in homes where children played just feet from the pile of guests' jackets and purses, including mine with the gun inside.
I put my purse on the counter and then spent the next hour out on the back deck. Walking into the kitchen to refresh our drinks, I noticed my purse with the 9mm Glock still inside it. I'd forgotten to lock it up! Panic set in as I realized my teen son was playing videogames just 10 feet away. What if he'd decided to get the socks I'd bought him from my purse while I was out on the deck?
Also it's quite possible her gun was possessed since it seemed to emanate brain rays that constantly put the idea of pointing the gun at random people into her head. A competent gunsmith/priest could probably fix that.
Bottom line: Heidi Yewman has no business owning or using a gun. Or a car or anything heavy or sharp or electrically powered. And no pets or children either. Smaller spider plants might be okay though.And she has quite a future in fiction.
Gelman stabbed Joseph Lozito in the face, neck, hands and head on an uptown 3 train in February 2011, after fatally stabbing four people and injuring three others in a 28-hour period. Lozito, a father of two and an avid martial arts fan, was able to tackle Gelman and hold him down, and Gelman was eventually arrested by the transit officers. Lozito sued the city, arguing that the police officers had locked themselves in the conductor's car and failed to come to his aid in time.more...
The city, meanwhile, claimed that the NYPD had no "special duty" to intervene at the time, and that they were in the motorman's car because they believed Gelman had a gun.
— Ace Because the other one's pretty long.
Oh, and in political news:
Latest Weiner boner drops a load
of support from polling figures.
I Just Seized Plenary Power on Behalf of the People
— Ace If it sounds chilling, it ought to.
This is how democracies die -- or rather, this demarcates the end of democracy.
NYT: People questioned your legal and constitutional authority to do that unilaterally to delay the employer mandate. Did you consult with your lawyer?
MR. OBAMA: Jackie, if you heard me on stage today, what I said was that I will seize any opportunity I can find to work with Congress to strengthen the middle class, improve their prospects, improve their security
NYT: No, but specifically
MR. OBAMA: but where Congress is unwilling to act, I will take whatever administrative steps that I can in order to do right by the American people.
And if Congress thinks that what Ive done is inappropriate or wrong in some fashion, theyre free to make that case. But theres not an action that I take that you dont have some folks in Congress who say that Im usurping my authority. Some of those folks think I usurp my authority by having the gall to win the presidency. And I dont think thats a secret. But ultimately, Im not concerned about their opinions very few of them, by the way, are lawyers, much less constitutional lawyers.
I am concerned about the folks who I spoke to today who are working really hard, are trying to figure out how they can send their kids to college, are trying to make sure that they can save for their retirement. And if I can take steps on their behalf, then Im going to do so. And I would hope that more and more of Congress will say, you know what, since thats our primary focus, were willing to work with you to advance those ideals. But Im not just going to sit back if the only message from some of these folks is no on everything, and sit around and twiddle my thumbs for the next 1,200 days.
I am livid that this is not the white-hot core-of-the-sun issue it should be. A lawyer quoted by Allah notes:
Republican opponents of ObamaCare might say that the suspension of the employer mandate is such good policy that theres no need to worry about constitutionality. But if the president can dispense with laws, and parts of laws, when he disagrees with them, the implications for constitutional government are dire.
It is like this:
It is like the so-called elites are no longer even pretending to be part of a democratic republic anymore.
And let me say this:
The primary problem with the so-called elites is not that they are not humble.
The primary problem with the so-called elites is not that they are not patriotic.
The primary problem with the so-called elites is not that they are not godly. They're not, but that's not the primary problem.
The primary problem with the so-called elites is that they are not elite, and they are neither wise, nor intelligent, nor educated, nor enlightened, nor superior in any fashion save two, accident of circumstance and elevated self-regard.
They do not have any conception of what they're doing, of the history of this country, or of the disasters their stupidity visits upon the ruled every day of the year.
And they will be the death of us all.
A Republic, if you can keep it ~ Ben Franklin. LOL ~ Barack Obama— The H2 (@TheH2) July 29, 2013
— Ace Okay, consider this an Open Thread as well as a Palate Cleanser. Maybe at least have a laugh as the country crumbles into apocalypse.
I did this with a friend like, literally, twenty years ago, and we were dying laughing. It went on for like five hours.
So here's the game: You just make up an album title or song title that could conceivably have been released by a specific band, but tweaked ever-so-slightly to sound ridiculous.
For example, here are some Made Up Albums and/or Songs. Songs get quotes, album titles don't. (Sometimes it sounds more like one than the other!) Throw on a year of release just to make it look official.
Yes, Euclid's Tesseract (1973)
KISS, "Just the Tip" (1974) (by AllahPundit)
KISS' collection of B-sides, Sloppy Seconds (1979)
Judas Priest, Guts for Garters (1982)
Smashing Pumpkins, Whinge (1994)
L'il Kim, "M.U.F.F" ft. Vagina (2002)
Jethro Tull, Shepherd's Pie (1981)
Hall & Oates, Mmm! Sweet (1983) (@nykensington)
Radiohead, Fortnight (2001) (@derakahunter)
Iron Maiden, To the Hilt (198
AC/DC's double-A side single, "Love In the Dark"/"You'll Never See Me Comin'" (1977)
AC/DC, "Box Lunch" (1980)
Rush, Portents (1980)
Madonna: The Anal Album (1997)
Kenny Rogers, The Riverboat Scamp & Other Tales (1982)
Bonjovi, Sexual Cowboys 1987
Pink Floyd (re-assembled band, post-Waters), "Meet Me At The Corner of Chance and Fate" (1994)
Sammy Hagar, "Ramona's Minge" (1979)
Van Halen, "Fine Dining at the Y" (1984)
Tori Amos, Urethra (1983)
Squeeze, live album, Crosswise & Topsy-Turvy (1983)
Kei$ha, U Can P on Me (2004)
Duran Duran, EP, Sextant (1981)
Prince, "Quim" (1996)
Steel Panther, Jerk Sock (2009)
— Ace Sorry, I just can't.
Sheila Jackson Lee, That's Who
— Ace Nailed it.
I mean, we were all thinking the same thing, and then bang!, you said it, and we were all like, "Abso-f'n'-lutely."
How About the DC Media?
— Ace Narratives.
There are no Stupid Questions, but there are Forbidden ones.
Regardless of how the Bob Filner mess eventually endsand it will end, somehowthere are questions that need to be asked and answered.
They are questions that should have been asked long ago, and should have been asked by those whose job it is to ask such questions: us.
Who are us?
Us are the San Diego news media reporters, editors, producers and writers who pretty much knew who and what Bob Filner is and has been.
Yes, Im including myself in that group. Ive covered Bob Filner off and on since he was elected to the San Diego Unified School District Board in 1979. From the beginning, most of us saw how arrogant Filner was and is, how abusive he could be to his own staff members, how he felt elective office entitled him to be all those things and more.
We all saw that in Filner, and yet we did nothing about it. Filner was often a topic of conversation among us when we gathered at news conferences or when we would gather at the various watering holes many of us frequented together when off work.
The near universal opinion among us was, Can you believe this guy? Why does he get away with acting like that? Then another round of drinks would appear, and talk went on to other things.
But we never asked those questions on air or in print. We never really tried to find out what was behind the near-incessant rumors that always floated around Filner. We never tried to confirm any of those rumors, or, if we did, we quickly gave up when presented with the denials, or refusals to talk about it.
We didnt do our jobs. We didnt try to work our way to the truth or what appeared to be the truth.
I've been saying this for a week -- it is simply capital-I Impossible that the Washington media did not know that this 20 year Congressman was molesting his staffers and those who came to meet with him to discuss actual government business.
People talk about these things. People talk about two things:
2, People's misbehavior and scandals.
It is absurd to say otherwise. This is what 75% of human conversation consists of.
For the media to even suggest they didn't know is yet another stinking lie in their already-monstrous pile of horseshit.
via @johnekdahl and @starchambermaid
— Ace First, the covering up for years part. You've probably seen this already, but the national media apparently hasn't.
The local Democratic Party has known for a long time about sexual harassment allegations against Bob Filner, a former Democratic assemblywoman said in a Thursday interview.
I blew the whistle on this two years ago to the Democratic Party leadership, former Assemblywoman Lori Saldaña said.
Saldaña said that in summer 2011 six prominent women in local politics, business and education told her that Filner had physically or verbally harassed them. Saldaña had been exploring what turned out to be an unsuccessful bid for Congress and the conversations came in the context of the 2012 elections.
Saldaña said she contacted former party Chairman Jess Durfee with the allegations and Durfee was among a group of Democratic leaders who met with Filner to discuss them that summer. She said nothing happened.
As disgraceful as Bobs behavior has been, its been tolerated by our Democratic Party leadership, she said.
And yet she supported him for mayor. Why? Because she was threatened with being politically blackballed if she didn't:
Party leaders, she said, made it clear that if people didnt support Filner they wouldnt receive their support again.
So that's the prior cover-up. Now here's the current one.
Now, a recall drive has been initiated. This requires some 101,000 signatures. The law here is sketchy -- what happens if someone "files for a petition to recall" but actually doesn't bother seeking the signatures because he's actually an ally of Filner's and doesn't want the recall to happen at all?
Does his fake, political-sabotage "petition for recall" effort blockade legitimate efforts to collect signatures?
It looks like we're confronted with that situation:
Stampp Corbin, a close Filner ally and publisher of the LGBT weekly in San Diego, has filed a recall notice to recall Mayor Filthy Filner. Corbin was the first to mount a recall effort when he published a notice in the San Diego Union Tribune on Friday.
Publishing a notice for a recall starts a 60 day clock for the process...
San Diego Gay and Lesbian News reports:
By triggering the recall process on July 25, and without much fanfare, Corbin appears to be taking time away from organizers to mount a proper campaign. And it calls into question whether another recall effort led by land-use consultant Michael Pallamary, who has given Filner until today, July 29, to resign or face a recall petition, can now go forward.
Corbin has also stated he will not run a paid campaign with staff to collect signatures. If the effort fails, the recall effort would be set back as the rules dictate that there is a six month waiting period if a petition has failed.
But is there any proof that's his intent? I mean, apart from not bothering to hire staff to collect 101,000+ signatures?
Indeed there is -- a witness says he stated, explicitly, that it occurred to him that his effort would "derail the other group," that is, the real group really seeking a recall. That's at the link.
Now, this appears to be a coordinated Democratic effort, by the local party and now by this local Filner ally, to cover-up for Fingers Filner and help him escape the people's judgment about his actions. Nevermind creating a target-rich environment for him, lots of victims and a political machine determined to make sure they remain victimized and silent about it.
The national media completely refuses to report on this angle. As I've said one thousand times, the media template for a Republican scandal is "Culture of X enables Y crime," but the template for a Democratic scandal is always, "It's just One Man's Failing (TM)."
The dog will not fucking hunt. The local Democratic Party, the State Party, and Nancy Pelosi's California caucus in DC all knew or must have known about this and chose to cover it up. Even now Democrats seem to be scheming to help Filner, while they supposedly call for his resignation publicly.
George Will noted that if Filner and Weiner were a Republican the media would be lecturing us on the "somber sociological" roots of the GOP's War on Women.
Yet here's an actual war on women -- with a Democratic city councilwoman serving a chief witness -- and they, as usual, embargo the story, just like the did with Kermit Gosnell.
Don Lemon: Black Folks Have to Aspire to Better
Goldie Taylor: Don Lemon is a "Turncoat Mofo"
— Ace Okay, so are we done now?
Can we now dispense with the farce that we're having a discussion on anything?
Do we have to continue pretending?
Is there some value in lying that I'm not seeing?
There is no need for the "discussion." There is nothing to be said. The black leadership, such as it is, panders to keep its position, and will continue saying, until the stars burn out of the sky, that there is no bad outcome in the black community that is attributable to a choice a black person makes, that every single failure is traceable to whitey.
We understand this. That's why we don't bother talking about it.
Incidentally, just so Goldie Taylor knows: The only method the honest mind uses to contradict a statement is to prove that it is untrue. Anyone who employs a different tactic -- such as the "if you say this, you are a Traitor to the Race" (how ugly and sinister that concept is, and yet Goldie Taylor deploys it without embarrassment) -- you're not a honest mind, you're just a shouty demagogue, same as a thousand venomous thugs as have come before.
43 queries taking 1.9467 seconds, 279 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.