Two Questions: How long before

Two Questions:

How long before terrorism like this in Finland swings a number of more countries firmly into the current administration’s line of thinking?

How long before the left-wing kooks and the Common Dreams crowd start to claim that the CIA and the Bush administration are behind these acts to manufacture support?

If This Is True (via

If This Is True (via DailyKos)

Then it is just downright disgusting. I have not seen the ad (won’t run on my puter for some reason), but any claim that a triple amputee from combat wounds is ‘afraid’ to lead is enough to make my blood boil. The Chambliss campaign should be embarassed if this is as bad as what the write-ups I have read have stated, and Georgia voters should give him a nice swift kick in the ballot box.

Although the Dems seem to monopolize bad taste, the Republicans have some serious jackasses of their own.

I would rather have Republicans in control of the Senate (despite their loathesome stands on a number of issues), but I can’t support candidates that stoop to this level.


For an example of the kind of things about Republicans that drive me up the damned wall, check out this quote (via Eschaton):

Christian Coalition leaders fired up the faithful Friday with a pro-Israel rally and a pitch to renew the group’s power by rousting out the vote in November for conservative candidates.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., exhorted the crowd at the Washington Convention Center to vote liberals out of office.

“If you don’t do it, it ain’t gonna be done,” he said. “You will be doing the Lord’s work, and he will richly bless you for it.”

There are a lot of good reasons to support Israel and to vote liberals out of office. The Lord ain’t one of ’em.

New York Mayor Will Not

New York Mayor Will Not March Without Sopranos

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said on Friday he will not march in the Columbus Day parade because organizers have refused to let him bring actors from the hit television show “The Sopranos.” The Italian-American group Columbus Citizens Foundation, which has run the parade for 58 years, asked Bloomberg to rescind his invitation to two Sopranos cast members because it was “deeply offended by this program’s extremely negative and ugly stereotyping of our people.

Apparently no one has told Mayor Boomberg, the Nanny of New York, that some of the Sopranos characters smoke. He’d probably march without them if he knew that.

I watch it every time

I watch it every time I stay in on Friday nights, but sometimes the WSJ Editorial Board on CNBC is up there with watching paint dry. Tonight was one such night.

Congratulations, Jonah.

Congratulations, Jonah.

Compare and Contrast According to

Compare and Contrast

According to the Nobel site:

Teddy Roosevelt received the prize in 1906, while President, for this reason:

But what has especially directed the attention of the friends of peace and of the whole civilized world to the United States is President Roosevelt’s happy role in bringing to an end the bloody war recently waged between two of the world’s great powers, Japan and Russia.

Woodrow Wilson received the prize in 1919, while President, for these reasons:

As the name of President Wilson comes to the fore on this occasion as the recipient of the Peace Prize, I know that the award is accompanied by the thanks of the people of Norway, because in his celebrated Fourteen Points the President of the United States has succeeded in bringing a design for a fundamental law of humanity into present-day international politics. The basic concept of justice on which it is founded will never die, but will steadily grow in strength, keeping the name of President Wilson fresh in the minds of future generations.

Jimmy Carter received the award in 2002, 22 years after being beaten to a bloody pulp in his last election for these reasons:

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2002 to Jimmy Carter, for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.

Oh, this too:

“It should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken,” said Gunnar Berge, chairman of the Nobel committee. “It’s a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the U.S.,” he added.

When I am Right, I

When I am Right, I am Right

Earlier, I predicted that the New Republic would attempt to use to their advantage the fact that Republicans are decent enough to follow EXISTING election code in Montana. In fact, here are my exact words:

Nothing yet from The New Republic, although I am willing to bet that they will continue to defend the Lautenberg/Toricelli switch using this exact case as evidence that candidate switching will not happen frequently. Of course not- Mark Racicot believes in the rule of law.

Here are the New Republic hacks today, justifying the unjustifiable:

Then later in the day came word that the Republican U.S. Senate nominee in Montana, state Senator Mike Taylor, was dropping out of the race after his opponent, incumbent Democrat Max Baucus, aired a commercial so hard-hitting it quickly expanded Baucus’s lead from 19 to 33. Surely these developments undermine our earlier bloviating about the trivial precedential value of the New Jersey case.

Actually, no. At the time, we confidently predicted that there would be almost no situation in which a party would find it worthwhile to substitute one candidate for another after the state’s deadline for doing so–usually only a couple of weeks out from election day. That prediction remains perfectly intact today. While some rank-and-file Pennsylvania Republicans have indeed floated the idea of a Fisher-Schweiker substitution, it’s turned out to be entirely idle chatter. As The Washington Post reported yesterday, “Republican officials emphasize that nothing of the kind is being contemplated”–presumably because the disadvantages (i.e., looking like you’re trying to hijack an election) outweigh the advantages. Meanwhile, in Montana it appears that Taylor dropped out of the Senate race completely of his own volition–and not under pressure from the party. And while Montana Republicans are considering putting forth another candidate as a write-in–and even that probably won’t happen–there is basically zero chance they’ll follow New Jersey’s example and replace Taylor on the Senate ballot.

Predictably, the party of Clinton marches ever onward. The nerve of these people.

Does This Count as Multilateralism?

Does This Count as Multilateralism?

First the American People.

And the British.

Then the House.

Then the Senate.

Now the French.

Russia next?

Jimmy Carter, Man of Peace

Jimmy Carter, Man of Peace

Carter finally wins the Nobel Peace Prize, and with this presentation, any hopes of Bill Clinton EVER shutting up on international affairs completely and permanently disappear.

William Sjostrom comments (link via Instapundit):

The Wall Street Journal (subscription only) reports that in awarding the prize to Carter, the committee said:
“It should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken,” said Gunnar Berge, chairman of the Nobel committee. “It’s a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the U.S.,” he added.
I think it is interesting that neither the Washington Post or the New York Times picked up this line. Are they covering up just how degenerate the committee is?

If they really wanted to kick this administration, they would have manufactured a reason to give it to Clinton (Ireland, maybe). Also, as the Instapundit noted, let’s remember the company Carter now keeps.

Greg Hlatky of A Dog’s Life fame says it best:

TOTAL BANKRUPTCY… Jimmy Carter – international Mary Worth, white-bread version of Jesse Jackson, whose every foreign policy effort came to utter grief, who opens his mouth only to say something foolish – has won the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.

Ibk! Gaaack! Spew!

Gay Montana, continued Lost of

Gay Montana, continued

Lost of interesting stuff on the Taylor/Baucus gay ad today:

To their credit, The Daily Kos and Ted Barlow have essentially ‘come out’ (sorry, I couldn’t help myself) against the ad.

Andrew Sullivan notes, quite correctly, that if the roles were reversed, the libs would be screaming bloody murder.

Jane Galt thinks the whole problem could be solved by giving the Democrats a wedgie.

As expected, Josh Marshall describes himself as equivocal. Depends on what the meaning of the word is, is, I guess.

Nothing yet from The New Republic, although I am willing to bet that they will continue to defend the Lautenberg/Toricelli switch using this exact case as evidence that candidate switching will not happen frequently. Of course not- Mark Racicot believes in the rule of law.

John Fund reports this isn’t the first time Max Baucus has dabbled in sleazy campaign tactics:

That’s pretty much what political observers also said in 1978, when the Montana AFL-CIO decided to unload on Republican Larry Williams, an investment adviser who was running against Mr. Baucus for the Senate. The union distributed hundreds of thousands of copies of a photo, taken when Mr. Williams lived in California, that showed him wearing love beads and with an unkempt hairdo, a sharp contrast to the buttoned-down image he tried to convey in his Senate race.

Mr. Williams claimed the photo had been taken after he had finished a long flight, but the damage was done. Charles Johnson, a journalist for the Lee newspaper chain in Montana, says that “at the time, some election observers credited the move as a factor in helping Baucus win the tight race.”

Apparently homophobia is only bad when it hurts Democrats.

Orrin Judd asks:

When nuts blow up a government building in Oklahoma City we are told it is because talk radio is anti-government. When a black man is dragged to death in Texas we are told it is because George Bush didn’t sign a hate crimes bill. The next time some gay kid is beaten to death will we hear that it is because the Democratic Party has made gays into objects of derision?

Meet Sour Bob’s Best Friend:

Meet Sour Bob’s Best Friend:

My Best Friend Is The Most Annoying Person In The World

I didn’t plan to end up with this guy as my best friend.

He’s painfully uncool. He watches wrestling for chrissakes. He loves video games and insists on discussing their nuances in agonizing detail, even as I’ve assured him repeatedly that I do not give a fuck. His wardrobe is an odd mix of items that should have died on the Old Navy clearance rack and tattered college sports memorabilia. He has thick glasses and what has been uncharitably called both a “proceding hairline” and a “forehead deficiency.” His musical tastes would embarrass a fifty-something Iowa cross-stitcher. He owns three of every conceivable electronic appliance, and they all suck. If you need to borrow a temperamental laptop or a badly aging offbrand television set, he’s your man.

He owns the most aggressively awful automobile I have ever seen. The fact that it continues to run is both a testimony to his pathologically obsessive maintenance and an affront to the millions of far more worthy cars that had long since gone to the great parking lot in the sky by the time his odometer crossed 175,000 miles. You’d be dumbfounded by how gutted and horrific the interior looks… if the sagging fabric from the ceiling wasn’t blocking your view.

Doesn’t everyone have a friend like this?

Hypocrisy Alert Check out this

Hypocrisy Alert

Check out this new strategery from the New Republic weblog, which last week spent a great deal of time screaming about how unfair it would be for New Jersey voters not to have a choice, even to the point of stating this whopper:

All of which is to say, you can argue that it’s not fair to allow Democrats to sub in Frank Lautenberg at this late date. You can argue that it violates some cherished abstract principle like rule of law. But, please, spare us the gloom-and-doom talk about what future elections holds if this precedent stands. The answer is nothing appreciably different from the present.

So, what do our fearless defenders of the franchise offer up for us today? A plausible way to UNDO the results of the 2002 election if it does not go the Democrats way:

Conventional wisdom holds that Democrats can’t afford to lose even one seat from their 51-49 (technically 50-49-1) Senate majority. That’s because, in the event of an effective 50-50 tie (49 Democrats plus Jim Jeffords), Republicans would reclaim Senate control by virtue of Vice President Dick Cheney’s tie-breaking power. But we’ve long wondered whether the Dems have some margin for error–namely, Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island. Soon after Jeffords’s party-switch last year, Chafee also dropped hints (albeit in typical flaky fashion) that he might be the next to defect.

Surely the New Republic would not want to overturn an election in this manner, disfranchising all those Rhode Island voters. Yeah, right.

New Democrat Slogan- If you can’t beat ’em, cheat ’em.

Neither Rain, Nor Sleet, Nor

Neither Rain, Nor Sleet, Nor Snow

Or common sense will keep the West Virginia Democrats from voting against the left wing of the Democrat Party. From the NY Times Roll call of the vote:


Democrats — Mollohan, N; Rahall, N.

Republicans — Capito, Y.

Sniper Advice From Tony Woodlief

Sniper Advice From Tony Woodlief

Tony Woodlief is living with the fear of being shot by the disgusting D.C. Sniper, and is tired of being told to ‘go about business as usual.’ Here is what he thinks officials should be saying:

Far worse than pronouncements of public officials, who have to say something, after all, if only because voters won’t tolerate Tony’s version of a press conference (“Guy out there with a rifle. If he’s aiming at you, you’ll probably get shot. If you see him first, aim for the upper body and save the taxpayers some money. Have a nice day”)

Attention Bill Quick (aka Dailypundit):

Attention Bill Quick (aka Dailypundit):

This headline says it all:

Bay Area standing apart on Iraq vote: MOST LOCAL LAWMAKERS TO REJECT USE OF FORCE

Love your neighbors.