Jules Crittenden

. . . remembers the assault, four years ago today in Iraq.

And stud/god Michael Kelly has a cameo!

It's an intense read—very engrossing.

I Am in Love.

I have finally encountered someone over the internet who is so malevolent, so vile and so reprehensible that I simply must make this person into an antagonist.

And not in a book, either: I'm too eager to symbolically crush this person under my size fives.

No one else is wicked enough for me. Those who perpetrate genocide bore me. Serial killers are passe. Child molesters? Whatever. Everyone's doing them.

I've found heart's one true my villain, and I intend to be faithful to him. For at least two weeks, or about 20 double-spaced pages.

If I could physically find him, I'd send him a locket or something.

Is Google Taking Over?

I never used AOL, but I had friends who told me that it was awful—that people kept bugging them, wanting to chat.

Google might be turning into something similar. I mean, as a Mac user, everything seems fine. But when I log into my gmail account from work, using Internet Explorer, Gmail wants to tell me what everyone is doing—based on nothing other than the fact that I've sent them e-mail in the past. People like my colleague at the nonprofit, who is a fellow night owl. And bloggers whom I would never presume to send notes to for any frivolous reason: Gmail wants Windows users to know whether they are at their machines at any given hour of the day or night.

It's kind of creepy. I understand that it's supposed to facilitate chat, but do I really want to chat with everyone I know? Do I want them to be able to chat with me?

And is chatting efficient anyway?—isn't there a certain amount of sitting around while the other person types? And having them wait while I type, producing lines that contain [cough, cough] typographical errors?

Hm. I don't know if I like this Brave New World. I think I want the old one back.

I've Decided

. . . that England doesn't really exist. After all, I've never seen it.

Someone just made it up. That's all.

So. Was It "McCain's Week"?

Probably. (Make sure you watch the video of the guy in the baseball cap: he's another one of the "Attila cousins." There is an extensive network of us all over the country.)

Yeah: Patrick Hynes sent me the link. So sue me.

A Third Strike on ".xxx"

ICANN says no, one more time. James Joyner points out that this thwarts "the hope that pornography could find its way to the Internet."

Yup.

Mark Steyn

. . . cops to being "an effete, sissy-boy latte-sipper," while discussing the Iranian-British crisis and the Conrad Black trial with Hugh Hewitt.

More on Fred Thompson

Yeah: Rudy puts California back in play. But Thompson activates the base, while grabbing some of the swing voters that Rudy would get.

If all the red staters show up (I mean, residents of red states, not writers at Red State), we might not need California. Electorally speaking, of course. (Hey: without the Golden State, try feeding this country.)

H/t: Insty.

Hacker/P.I. Alert

If you had to find someone over the internet—absolutely had to—how would you go about it?

What if their site was a Blogspot site? What if it was a domain, but blind-registered?

What if you only had a name, but wanted to get a social security number?

I'm working on a story. The information I need might not be stuff that should be widely disseminated, so feel free to e-mail me with your thoughts.

On Forbidden Words.

Verity Kindle objects over on this thread to the use of the word "papist" by someone who referred to themselves as a "recovering papist."

The problem being, as he/she sees it, that the word suggests we worship the Pope. Hey—I thought we worshipped the Virgin Mary. And the Saints. And golden calves. Guess I've been doing it all wrong.

You know how I am about language, though: making any word verboten goes against my grain, because it empowers that word and makes it more hurtful simply by being forbidden. So, once more: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits, nigger, kike, spic, faggot, skirt, heeb, whore, mick, lezzie, redneck, gook, chink, slut, wetback. Wingnut. Leftard. Papist.

(Now the Ann Coulter defenders are going to get on my case, on the basis that she only used a transgressive noun. That is not, of course, how I see it: I feel that she applied a perjorative term for homosexual—listed above—to a heterosexual, married man. In public. With cameras rolling. At an event I'd like to take itself more seriously than it sometimes does. So, yes: that was different.)

If anyone is entitled to use the term "papist," it would be a cradle Catholic, whether or not that person is still in the Church.

It's people of faith—Muslims, ironically, being sometimes an exception—who are marginalized the most in society today. I think we can take it as a given that any rocks being thrown around by the devout of any mainstream faith are either (1) done in a spirit of jest, or (2) the mark of idiots.

I can't define true religious slurs. But I know them when I see them.

Death Threats and Sexual Slurs.

I'm with Beth on the Kathy Sierra flap.

Maybe sexual themes should be considered over the line, but chick bloggers will always be the recipients of such remarks, so I prefer to simply have a thick skin. I leave those accusations of ugly sluttiness (and slutty ugliness) up when they are aimed at me, because they speak for themselves about what kind of argument the commenter is capable of making.

Death threats and rape threats, however, are illegal. And they should be.

Be careful when you threaten people over the internet: you're never quite as anonymous as you think you are.

And if you want to be taken seriously, balance your passion with some . . . what were those things? Ah, yes: facts.

UPDATE: I agree with the thrust of Michelle's post, too: when we give in to bullies, we embolden them. I'm not too interested in that.

Games Without Frontiers

Hackbarth suggests that the upcoming showdown between the President and Congress over funding the troops in Iraq might turn into a game of chicken. I hope it doesn't. Of course, the "signing statement" option is worse, as I see it: for Bush to sign something with an exit date on it at all can't help but cheer the insurgents on.

Just as Congress needs to show some backbone and either fund our presence there or not fund it, Bush has to show some backbone and veto anything that contains an exit date or excessive pork.

And the April 16th idea is absurd, tantamount to saying "we support the troops, but not their mission. Nor their operations. Nor their overhead just for being there."

Listen, guys and gals: you took Congress over by promising to be more accountable and less corrupt. You didn't deliver on that: instead, you're trying to turn your victory into a mandate on ending the war. If you believe that—really, really believe it—you know what you need to do.

Cut funding completely.

John McCain: Still Reliable on Iraq

I just got off the phone a little while ago from a conference call with Senator John McCain, who is extremely concerned about the Senate's passing an appropriations bill that includes a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq—not to mention an obscene amount of pork.

One of McCain's goals in gathering a crew of bloggers to talk to on the phone was to get the word out about 1) the damage this bill [and its companion in the House] is doing to the war effort, and 2) the consequences of failure, should we miss the chance to get democracy on a firm footing in Iraq.

He also wants us to keep encouraging the troops, to whom the House and Senate bills must be a tremendous slap in the face.

"In Vietnam, we lost—and that was the end of it," he told us. "In Iraq, if we lose they will follow us home. Failure would be catastrophic."

Senator McCain makes the point that we need the funding for the troops in Iraq by April 15th, so the Democrats are playing political games with this issue pretty late in the day. And, of course, he reminds us that the Constitutional role of legislators is to fund or de-fund: not to set conditions on how or when the money is used to conduct a war.

He quoted General John William Vessey, Jr: "The system is driving policy, rather than policy driving the system." This, of course, is one of his big worries. Remarks McCain: "I've got to tell the American people what's at stake." He warns us that ultimately the war on terrror will be won or lost in public opinion. And all of us participating knew that the mainstream media is not interested in good news about Iraq.

McCain does feel that overall Bush could be doing a better job of reaching out to the American people (but then, who doesn't think this?). He recommends weekly or biweekly updates in which the President uses maps to track our progress and identify problem areas. After all, McCain points out that the surge has given us dramatic progress. He told us that he expected good things from Bush's address today, but regular, detailed reports would be very helpful—even if they were only carried on C-SPAN. (I found this detail interesting in terms of the information dissemination we might anticipate should McCain make it to the White House in 2009.)

The Senator remarked that Bush should read the list of pork projects in the Emergency Supplemental when he vetoes the bill. (Sure enough, the President remarked on some of the more, um interesting provisions included in it when he gave his address this morning.)

Some of the progress the Senator would like us to keep in mind includes the fact that Sheikhs in Anbar province are now allying themselves with us, and encouraging their followers to joing the army and police forces. Also, Malaki's de-Baathification program is about to be implemented.

We spoke briefly about the situation in Iran, which of course is growing more intense every day, with the taking of hostages. He regards these, of course, as "a wake-up call" that should show us how the Iranians might handle nuclear weapons. "This kind of behavior," he tells us, "is a serious, serious challenge."

He underscored the Iranians' age-old ambition for "hegemony in the Middle East," but reminded us that we still have "the best military in the world," while emphasizing that military action is the always the last option.

Ryan Sager of the New York Sun asked if McCain-Feingold should be updated (expanded, really) to meet the conditions of the digital age. The senator's answer: no. Online dialogue is a "marvelous change" that is drawing more young Americans into the political process, he told us. (I read that as a signal that his free-speech-suprression days may be over, which would be nice. Now to repeal the original bill . . .)

The 2008 Election was the big elephant, of course, in this virtual room full of little elephants (mostly) peppering the Senator with questions. When he was asked about Fred Thompson, McCain laughed and said he thought it would be natural that Thompson should have high approval ratings: "after all, he's already been President three or four times, hasn't he?"

Regarding his own campaign, he identified his campaign's biggest weakness as being in the fundraising arena. "My own fault," he told us. "I don't like asking for money, and I've got to get over that." Overall, though, he's "happy" with his how his campaign is coming along.

Participants included Philip Klein of The American Spectator blog; Kim Priestap of Wizbang; Ryan Sager of the New York Sun; Erick Erickson of Red State; Robert Bluey of Bluey Blog; Fausta Wertz of Fausta's Blog; and James Joyner of Outside the Beltway.

Special thanks to Patrick Hynes of New Media Strategics (and, of course, Ankle-Biting Pundits) for facilitating the discussion, which I think helped a lot to bridge the perceived gap between Senator McCain and some elements in the blogosphere.

This Is So What We Need:

More rock 'n' roll about neurological functions.

Oh, and Southlanders: David Linden himself with be on KPCC today, Wednesday, at 2:40 p.m. (It's a pre-taped interview, so it won't be David in the flesh.)

The Senate to the House:

"Hey! We suck just as much as you do!"

Just as cowardly; just as prodigal.

Mr. President, I believe it's your serve.

Listen, You Catholic-Baiting Bastards . . .

Stop Googling my orange, if you're going to use it for the wrong reasons. I ran a picture of an orange to support the Ukrainians—not to take sides in the Irish troubles.

And take it from a Methodist girl who converted to Catholicism: using any form of Christianity as an excuse to beat up or harrass others is not exactly What Jesus Would Do.

Stop killing and intimidating each other. Keep on your leaders to tone down their rhetoric. (Yes: I'm talking about Ian Paisley.)

If the descendants of slaves here in America can live side-by-side with those whose ancesters ran plantations, you can probably manage power-sharing in Northern Ireland. And in case you hadn't noticed, the Liberal Democratic tradition is under attack in all its forms: you have bigger problems now than you have for the last few hundred years.

Pray for your enemies. Pray for peace. And ease the fuck up.

More Rumors of a Thompson Run

Hackbarth has the scoop, but correctly points out that we can't really regard Thompson as serious until/unless we see him raising funds.

Likewise, I won't see Gingrich as serious until he announces: he does seem to be enjoying his current role too much to demote himself to mere candidate status.

One of the most fascinating things about Thompson-mania is the fact that he appears to draw more from Giuliani's supporters than from Romney's; most analysts predicted he'd "take" more support from Romney fans. One possible explanation: people who consider electability to be a serious prerequisite—as I do—will find themselves more drawn to Rudy and Fred. Please don't get me wrong: I heard Romney speak at CPAC, and he did fine. I met him. I think he'd be a competent candidate.

But if star power and serious charisma are on-offer, from either Giuliani or Thompson, we do well to consider them an asset, along with the other factors we look at.

Because in the real world, that matters. Very much.

Goodbye Pete.

Bob Petersen is dead. He changed my life, and the lives of too many others for me to possibly count.

He was an example of how someone could endure unbearable hardship and yet soldier on.

He made hot rods respectable, and gave hunting a cachet it might not otherwise have had out here on the West Coast, in the 1970s—when Hunting magazine (Petersen's Hunting) was founded.

I worked for his staff on Hunting as a copyeditor, and after his company was sold I was Assistant Managing Editor on some of the Outdoor Division one-shots. Later, I moved to Automotive, and spent some time on-staff at Hot Rod Bikes, Custom Classic Trucks, and the Automotive newsstand publications.

Finally, I landed for a year at Sports Afield, which Pete had bought just to keep it from folding. It was a noble effort, though he eventually let it die when 9/11 worsened the recession that was starting anyway in 2001.

Pray for his wife; she's endured tragedy in her life, and needs our best thoughts and wishes.

Thank you, Mr. Petersen. The company you founded did a lot for me, and I'm grateful. I got to taste the prosperity print media used to represent, right before it started to die—or to transmute into something else.

I hope they have many classic cars in heaven—heavily customized, and in cherry condition.

UPDATE: We're losing our shootists: David Arnold, and Jeff Cooper, and Bob Petersen. And the one whose death hurts almost as much as Dave's: Gary Sitton, whom I used to copy-edit at Hunting. The amazing guy whose writing was utterly magical. (And I stole that word from him, by the way: he once wrote in a column that Ernest Hemingway had been both "a magical writer, and a fairly sorry human being." If Gary was in any way a "sorry" human being, he saved most of his wrath for himself.)

Aw, fuck. I'm not good at death. I'm just not.

Why Did They Do It?

Was it for the martinis, the oysters—or the pearl?

(David Corn of The Nation discusses new media and the '08 election with Richard Miniter for Pajamas Media; it's a fun video hosted over at Reynolds' digs. Says Glenn: "it's better than Hannity & Colmes." So many things are.)

Contest-Whoring

The organizers of this year's inaugeral premier conservative conference are holding a contest that I intend to win—due to the fact that I am the most deserving person, and haven't divested myself entirely of my early-twenties socialist leanings. Also: I'll be the cutest person there, even at the ripe old age of 45. So I basically have it sewn up. That will get me into the event in style, and even pay for my room. Furthermore, I'd get 20 minutes with the keynote speaker. If it's Newt, I'll have some fun questions for him!

The Conservative Leadership Conference takes place this fall, October 11-13th, in the fabulous city of Reno—which, as most of you know, is Nevada's answer to Lake Tahoe, California. Nevada, of course, bills itself as "the last free state," and in a number of ways that's absolutely correct. The beautiful thing about this conference is that it openly welcomes libertarians, so we won't have to skulk around in our camouflage clothing like we do at CPAC. (Did anyone get that on video, BTW? I looked like I was on a deer hunt, and not just because I was lugging a .30-06 around with me.)

If you want to be a total running dog and enter the contest as well, I guess I can't stop you—though I was thinking that since I'm clearly the cutest/most deserving blogger, it would be best if only I entered. That way, the drawing would be . . . easier on the organizers. Simpler.

The entire event is sponsored by the New Media Alliance, and co-sponsored by GOP USA, Townhall, and Americans for Tax Reform. So far.

I'll see you there. After all, Reno is a gambling town, and I'm a very lucky person.

UPDATE: I hear that the Grand Prize may be reformatted a bit, in which case I would only get free premium admission to the event—along with a few other people (almost) as lucky as I am. That's fine, too. After all, I like to share my good fortune with the downtrodden.

Why People Think Conservatives Are Idiots.

Because some of them genuinely are, and some—paging Queen Ann—do a damned fine impression of same.

I'm sorry, but it's true.

Via Insty.

Sean Hackbarth points out that Coulter didn't always pose as a blonde Bozo.

Ah, yes; but now she does, and it's done great things for her bank account%mdash;but less for reasoned discourse.

McCain on the "Disgrace" of the Emergency Supplemental Pork

You all know my issues with McCain, but he's talking sense here.

Do You Have Unpopular Opinions?

If not, why not?

Mike Rappaport quotes this Paul Graham essay on how to recognize and avoid mental conformity.

The main litmus test: if you can't say something out loud, maybe you should be thinking it.

It's must reading; via Glenn.

Undermining Iran's Infrastructure

Captain Ed has a nice summary about some of the ways the U.S. has been quietly reducing the amount of capital available in Iran—both for improving oil-industry infrastructure and for funding terrorism.

It helps to answer the question, "what are we doing about these guys?"

A fair amount, it turns out.

More on the Captured Britons

Via James Joyner, who remarks

It would be harder for Iran to be much more isolated in the international community, as even the Russians have backed away from them in recent months. Still, sending such a strong signal that they are not responsible, rational actors makes no sense to me. Their position should be to try to force the world to take them seriously as a regional power, not to reinforce their status as a rogue state.

I'm Learning from the Queen Bois.

Um. Make that Queen Boyz: the cousins who wrote the original Ellery Queen series.

As I work through the list Marvelous Mike sent my of their best puzzles, the engineering side of my brain is, indeed, beginning to kick into high gear.

I realize that on my own project I may be overdoing the Real Clues: I'm only required to give the pertinent information on the real killer once or twice. After that, it's up to the reader to figure it out. If they're like me, they won't want to. (I'm reminded of what my former roommate, the mathematician, used to say: "she's too smart to figure things out that she doesn't want to know." That's a blessing/curse of human nature.)

Of course, the best puzzles are the ones in which the Main Reveal leaves the reader smacking herself on the head, exclaiming, "it was in front of me all along; why didn't I see it?"

That's what I'm aiming for. I'm terrified, however, that the maze will be too easy—that the solution will appear obvious all along, rather than in retrospect. One always runs that risk, of course, if one is playing by the rules. The main rule is the reader gets a shot at solving the puzzle himself/herself.

My mother informs me helpfully that she doesn't really mind if she's reading a mystery and she figures it out. That isn't the level I want to play at, though.

The workshop meets again this coming Thursday night: I need to flesh out my final conflict and take it in. Enough of the procrastination. I have to send the ship out—my draft—and see if it can stay afloat. If not, I'm sure I have a great career ahead of my as a Starbucks barista or something. Or I can stick with my glamorous proofreading endeavors.

There is a moment in any high-wire act wherein one has to take a deep breath, let go of the handle, and reach out for something that may or may not be there.

I am at that point.

What Geneva Convention?

I don't think it applies in the Middle East.

Haven't we been down this road with Iran before?

Via Insty.

Thank Goodness!

We've solved the problem of marijuana-flavored candy being sold to minors.

Whew! That was close!

Change Is Inevitable.

John P. McCann on the new generation of George Takei fans: it's so weird to me that he has followers out there who have never seen Star Trek.

I Keep Forgetting

That McGehee is a bloody genius.

On the Pet Food Recall . . .

Tammy Bruce has up-to-the-minute coverage, and points out that cat owners need to be just as careful as dog owners. She has a listing of the affected sub-brands under the Menu umbrella.

I'm glad that my mother buys the Mandy-chow at specialty stores, and is watching the situation closely. Of course, if her stomach were as strong as her jaws, we wouldn't have much to worry about: she can destroy an expensive pet toy in ten minutes flat.

The Saturn Aura

. . . is getting some positive buzz, over at Reynolds' place and elsewhere.

My 1994 is still going strong; we got it back when Saturn was still making reliable cars. But the husband's 1999 LS (Large Sedan) has been one disappointment after another, and the dealer where we bought three cars doesn't seem to want our business.

So it's probably over between us and GM.

Anyway, I think I'm ready to fall in love again.

"You know," I remark . . .

"the strangest thing happened."

"Strange, you say?" A the H is intrigued.

"Yes. I was in the kitchen, having an intense discussion with a friend on the phone, and after you passed by I moved my head. A styrofoam cup fell onto the counter."

"Why were you wearing a styrofoam cup indoors?"

"'Cause I can't wear it outside; the wind would take it off. Come on: why did you put a disposable coffee cup on top of my snow hat?"

"You think I did that?"

"There wasn't anyone else in the kitchen, and I didn't put it there myself."

"So this relationship has devolved into finger-pointing now? That's sad."

"Oh. You think it would be healthier to wipe the slate clean and discuss this incident only from the moment that you left the kitchen with a coffee cup balanced upside-down on top of my head?"

"Or maybe from the time it fell off. I'll bet that was funny."

Here's an Article from Yesterday

. . . about how the Car of Tomorrow is debuting today. NASCAR fans, cross your fingers!

Friday Night Lenten Supper:

Steamed asparagus with balsamic vinegar. A dry martini.

But no meat.

Am I doing this correctly? I don't seem to have any flair for Catholicism whatsoever.

Do You Ever Feel

. . . that reading of any kind—whether online, or via dead tree—is like walking through that apple orchard in The Wizard of Oz? Typographical errors and incorrect word selections grab at one, tearing at one's clothing and sending one screaming away into the night.

Unless, of course, it's just me. Sigh.

Sudden Impact

From the comments on this Althouse post, on the "No Impact" project—a chilling comment that I fear may be right on the money:

Every day, the GW [Global Warming] faithful act more and more like cultists. I give it about another year before we start reading about how mass suicides are really voluntary carbon-reduction efforts.

Via Insty.

UPDATE: Bidinotto has more.

More on 300

Man, that movie was great. I found it vaguely reminiscent of The Lord of the Rings, especially in the battle sequences—though a bit bloodier, of course.

I can see why war supporters are feeling a bit smug about the fact that this movie got made, and why antiwar activists are upset. There is this feeling out there on the right of "how the heck did this production slip through?"—a sentiment spelled out in the official Libertas review of the film.

Fundamentally, though, the movie doesn't pretend to be anything other than a graphic novel with Serious Ideals. Like Lord of the Rings, it's mythology, though it's also a fictionalization of something that once happened. There's something particularly hilarious about those who want to attack it for being "inaccurate history"—one might as well spell out that Arthurian legands aren't accurate depictions of Medieval times.

It's perfectly delicious that the movie got made, and very satisfying that it's making money hand-over-fist. Yum. And, no: I didn't see Xerxes as being terribly gay—at least, no more than the Pharoah was in The Ten Commandments. He seemed strictly metro to me, but your mileage may vary: the important thing is that the Persians came off as terribly unattractive, and this may have annoyed the current Iranian government, who deserve to be annoyed.

Women who find the violence hard to take will find that there are alternative diversions in the film. Everyone's baser nature is appealed to. No one is left out. You'll see what I mean when you get to the theater.

We Saw 300 Tonight.

And I can see why people are bent out of shape about it.

As for me, I think there are only three things that movie really needed more of: blood, body piercings, and muscular male flesh.

Newt on the Political Process.

I could listen to Gingrich talk all day—particularly when he says things like this.

Goodbye, Cathy Seipp.

You will be missed.

As I'm sure you've heard, her family is suggesting that donations be sent to the Lung Cancer Alliance, which fights to increase the investment in research to prevent/cure lung cancer, along with battling the idea that lung cancer victims should somehow be stagmatized.

Mandy Is Home Again.

She crept into my mother's house in the middle of the night last night via the dog door, went into her room, and licked her hand.

I've got maybe half of the flyers torn down; I'll get the rest of them taken down tomorrow.

I'm very happy now, but I wonder what that dog got into during her 36 hours on the lam: she smells awful.

Stupid dog: she gave us a heck of a fright. I've been punishing her by feeding her treats and petting her and throwing an oversized tennis ball for her to fetch.

So, We Take a Break.

We go out to grab a late lunch, or an early supper, or whatever one wants to call it.

I'm with the mom at Panera, which I love for the good food and the free WiFi.

Mom goes to the loo; I check my e-mail. When she returns, she sees that my laptop is open, and says, "there's a sign over there that says 'high-speed internet.'"

I look up at her, over my glasses.

"Oh. Is that what you're using now?"

"Yes, indeed."

"You don't have a cable hooked up, or anything."

I say nothing, because to get annoyed would mean that I naively expected she was listening to me all the times I've told her how convenient WiFi is, etc. etc., and how I only take a cable with me when I travel, in case the WiFi doesn't work.

And I do not want to appear naive.

Fortunately, the waiter shows up with my onion soup, and I realize quickly that the most magnificent thing in the world is onion soup without an excessive amount of cheese in it. Onion soup in which one can really taste the onion. And I'm too much in love with this long-overdue interpretation of the dish to care much one way or another just how often it is that my mother really does listen to the things I say.

But who knows if I'll be hanging on her every word after this . . .

Oooh, oooh!

I want a print of this poster.

Blogging Will Be Light Until the Cows Come Home.

Or, perhaps, until my mother's dog does.

If you live near LAX, please be on the lookout for a beautiful black pit bull wearing a purple collar.

I tried not to spazz out about it when Mandy went missing yesterday evening, but it rained today, which means that all the flyers I distributed in Westchester this afternoon (Tuesday afternoon, that is) have been ruined.

More importantly, it means that Mandy's sense of smell won't help her to get back home.

If she's still alive, that is: there are big, busy boulevards near my mother's house, and Mandy never seemed to get the idea of what a street was: most of what she does she does very quickly, very exuberently. The odds may not be that good that she's still alive.

I choose to have hope, which means my new hobby is producing flyers and placing them on lamp posts and trees near my mother's house. (My mother is 70 years old, and recovering from a hurt knee. Furthermore, I want someone to be at the house to greet the dog, should she come home.)

Therefore, you'll strictly get what I need to write in order to wind down—for the next several days, or until the heartache I feel subsides to a dull sort of thumpety-thump I can ignore.

If you can bring yourself to pray for a sweet, spirited fourteen-month-old puppy, please do so.

I just want my my mother's dog back. Other than that, I'm pretty much going through the motions right now. Working, doing housework. And thinking about my dog.

Cathy Siepp

. . . may only be on this earth for a few more days.

Pray for her, if that's the sort of thing you do.

I've tried praying, but I may just cuss God out when/if she finally succombs to the cancer. The unfairness of it all gets to me, despite the great attitude Cathy maintained: she was truly aware of what a crap shoot this life business is.

I want a miracle, folks.

"Pitch Your Offsets"

Ace is offering sex offsets, for those whose libertine lifestyles bring them wrenching guilt:

I haven't been with a woman since college, and have had little other sex during this time frame. Given the way I look, my attitude, my lack of charm, and the fact I make crap money writing a stupid moronblog—I don't expect this to change much in the ensuing years.

Especially because I'm beyond my "good years." If those were my good years, Dear Lord, I quake at the thought of middle age. So please send me some money.

Personally, I can offer gin offsets. That is, if you feel your inadequate intake of gin is putting juniper farmers out of business, I can baptize you in the sweet healing waters of a virtual martini. Send me money, and I'll drink more gin, thereby priming the juniper berry economy and bringing you boozey redemption.

UPDATE: Hackbarth has an interesting take on the potential of "checkbook environmentalism." Sure, it's funny to watch hypocritical limousine liberals use their impressive disposable incomes to dispose of guilt, but does the idea have potential for sober adults?

Carbon credits is a new market still in development. Trial and error is the name of the game. Rules need to be established that define a carbon credit. Once that’s in effect we should see the establishment of carbon credit exchanges like those for stocks, bonds, and commodities. Developing such carbon credit markets engages the powerful force of self-interest and capitalizes on dispersed knowledge which may reduce more carbon dioxide emissions at a lower cost than top-down government-mandated regulations.

Blue Cheese in a Ham Sandwich?

I don't know if I can endorse that.

But let me think it through.

The fact is—as some of you know—I'm a bit of a ham and cheese fanatic, and I've tried a number of approaches to this highly unkosher art form. Favorites include the slightly grilled version featured at my local chef academy's cafe that features good cheddar, and a panino with ham, jack, and mushroom served at my favorite coffee house on olive bread.

When I worked at the Foodie Magazine and we had a presentation in the conference room, I tended to order pancetta and gruyere on the company dime.

But blue cheese . . . hm. I suppose it would work, if the ham were low-key enough. Most of the time I see the cheese as providing the yin, and the ham as going yang. If the reverse were to work, it would make me very happy indeed. The challenge, always, is to create a sandwich that doesn't taste like a salt lick: in a mediocre restaurant, that's the first thing that hits you with your bad ham and cheese: salt. Ick.

I imagine if I found the right ham to go with Roaring 40s Blue, I could die right then, content. Prosciutto, maybe.

Suddenly, I'm hungry.

More Rumors on Fred Thompson

It looks like Mary Katherine Ham wants to draft him almost as much as I do.

Light Blogging the Rest of the Weekend.

The good news: I've recovered from producing the monthly newsletter for Ye Olde Nonprofit. It also looks like I'll finally be getting some help with some of the management work I do for them as a staffer.

In our monthly meeting yesterday morning the Chairman remarked that it was perfectly obvious I was overloaded with responsibilities, and that other people needed to start pulling their weight. And for a split second I felt offended—angry that he would insult me by suggesting I couldn't handle the extreme load I was carrying. Fortunately, I kept my mouth shut and allowed myself to be treated as if I were a human being rather than a sort of robotic super-heroine.

Are all women like this, or does it have to do with the way I was raised? It's so pathological, it's funny. Sort of.

So I'm taking it easy today: no politics. Light human-interest blogging if the spirit strikes.

Mostly I intend to work on my fiction, go to the party, and finish consuming the delicious Ellery Queen mystery I have my nose in right now.

A shout-out to Darrell: I got your writing prompt, and have a first draft of a short story based on same. I'm not sure if I'll be presenting it at the reading party today, though. It clearly isn't finished. I might just cop out and read another chapter excerpt there.

And I'll either post the story—about the woman with the mis-matched socks—or send it to you. Once it's finished, of course.

An Eternal Plame

Tom Maguire is having too much fun:

Finally, John Podhoretz provides a funny bit of testimony telling us that, although she did not recommend her hubby for the 2002 Niger trip, Ms. Wilson went to her boss accompanied by the man who did, talked to her hubby about the assignment, and wrote the recommending email. She also (per the SSCI) had recommended her hubby for his 1999 trip to Niger. So please pardon our confusion about her obvious non-involvement here. (And how will this be treated in the movie? Will Val be dragged into her boss's office at gunpoint? Or depending on how they want to position the film, the producer could have the CIA waterboard her into giving up her husband's name - good looking woman, bondage, water everywhere... just thinking out loud and trying to help. TGIF.)

Uh-huh.

Via, well . . . Maguire.

The Plame Game

William Branigin of WaPo:

Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what her legal status was but said it shouldn't have mattered to the officials who learned her identity.

"They all knew that I worked with the CIA," Plame said. "They might not have known what my status was but that alone—the fact that I worked for the CIA—should have put up a red flag."

Translation: No, I wasn't really a covert agent. But I'm happy to play the victim here—particularly if I can get a seven-figure book deal out of it.

She didn't know what her status was. Words fail me.

Plame: I R a Sooper-Secrud Ajent

And I need to live in the shadows.

Brian Flemming's lefty take from 2003 on the Vanity Fair photo flap:

Of course, a logical person would realize that Joseph Wilson and his wife could be self-promoters and at the same time it could also be also true that someone at a high-level in the White House illegally outed Plame for revenge and/or as a warning (especially since the most compelling information has come not from Wilson, but from CIA sources). And it wouldn't even matter if Plame's face were totally shown--her cover was 100% blown already (by the White House, apparently), so she'll never be undercover again, picture or no picture.

Fair enough. But was she undercover at the time? And, if so, why was she consorting with the press while undercover? And why was it distressing for someone in her office to be asked for information by the Vice President? Cliff May from the Corner remarks:

Isn’t providing intelligence to the White House among the main purposes for which the CIA was created?

Evidently not. Evidently junior CIA officers have better things to do.

Does Plamegate make you feel like Alice in Wonderland? You're not alone.

So, It Could Be Worse.

We could be operating without the separation of church and state, as Britain is.

What a great idea: public funding of Islamic schools, without any particular oversight.

Personally, I don't see what the European aversion to headscarves is all about, and I don't have any problem with non-Muslim girls wearing headscarves in Muslim schools. After all, we expect non-Catholic kids to wear uniforms when they go to Catholic schools, and we expect goyim men to wear yarmulkes when they attend synogogues. This is perfectly appropriate.

What I don't get—as usual—is tolerance of the intolerant. Such as accrediting or authorizing schools that refer to Jews as monkeys, and Christians as pigs. And I don't see providing public funds for educational establishments that promote values sharply at odds with those of the society at large.

Just as the Constitution wasn't meant to be a suicide pact, Classical Liberalism was not intended that way. What is going on in the West?

Earning Their Pork Chops

Over at The American Mind, Sean Hackbarth took a look at the Emergency Appropriations bill; he's had to go on cholesterol medication just from reading it through.

I went through his digest of the spending spree: some of the allocations looked like they might even be legitimate, but not without adequate debate. Which brings us to the bad habit of treating normal spending as an emergency. Congress is supposed to provide oversight to the Executive Branch, but who provides oversight to them? A few bloggers like Sean, and that's it:

Slogging through the 2007 Emergency Supplemental put together by House Democrats you wonder what the purpose of the document really is. If you thought it was to fund continuing military operations in Iraq you’re partly right. You’d also be right if you thought it was to pay off constituencies at taxpayers’ expense. “Buying their way to defeat” sums up the Democrats’ efforts here.

But of course the Republicans have never been slouches in the "spending like drunken sailors" department, as James Joyner points out:

There’s not much partisan hay to be made here since, goodness knows, the Republicans had more pork than a Jimmy Dean sausage factory in their bills. It does demonstrate, however, that promises to come to Washington and impose spending restraint are almost always laughably hollow. We’re barely two months into the new Democratic Congress and already any pretense is over.

This is the kind of thing that I tend to lay at Bush's feet: it's not as if he can credibly threaten to veto the bill. His track record there is abysmal, and he's not even particularly cooperative about efforts to create more transparency in spending. This is the President who led the charge to save our endangered earmarks, after all.

Live, on L.A. Commie Radio!

My friend Professor David J. Linden of Johns Hopkins University will be on the Patt Morrison show tomorrow on KPCC, talking about his recent book, The Accidental Mind, which traces fun and quirky features/functions in our brains to the evolutionary processes that shaped the human mind.

If you don't live in the Los Angeles area, or won't be able to listen tomorrow at 2:00 p.m., it looks like you can listen later, right off of Patt Morrison's page, here. I have no idea how long they'll leave the podcasts up, though.

David has a blog, by the way: it contains fun stories from his career—a few of which I remember hearing at parties in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

I hope he sells a lot of books, and gets oodles of readers for his blog. But fewer books than I sell. And, of course, fewer blog-readers. I'd like him to do just well enough in both arenas to be worth beating.

No, seriously: buy his book. It is written for the lay person. He's funny, and he knows craploads of interesting stuff about the brain.

UPDATE: David's been pre-empted by a harrowing tale of the firefight in Sadr City, which Morrison and her guest, Martha Raddatz, see as "a microcosm of the entire Iraq war."

Rick Moran on Mrs. Clinton

He recognizes that the most vocal Democrats want her to renounce the war, but doesn't seem to remember that the further she veers to the left for the primary, the more ground she has to gain in the general election, when it's time to tack back to the center.

Furthermore, it's still very early in terms of what's going on in Iraq and the War on Terror in general: apologizing for her vote now could cost her a lot later on.

I do think, however, that she ought to put her husband on a shorter leash: he's a brilliant politician, but he brings a lot of baggage with him, and she doesn't need that additional weight.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

At least for now, Google Video has the entire UK documentary online here.

It's an hour and a quarter long, so grab a whole carafe of coffee before you go over there. Very nicely done: it's accessible to non-scientists, too.

Prius vs. Hummer

Interesting take.

I'll admit that hybrids are still a bit of an investment, and that in strict dollars-and-cents terms it's often more practical to simply buy a fuel-efficient non-hybrid. But when I look at where electric cars were ten years ago, I'm still amazed that electric engines (or partically electric ones) have come as far as they have. And, yes: I think they have a place in leveraging us away from our sick co-dependency with the House of Saud.

The more demand goes up for hybrids, the more efficiently batteries will be produced. And the more cleanly—because Toyota and Honda are on a roll, and they won't want to spoil that.

More Rejection of

D'Souza's The Enemy at Home, by Stanley Kurtz, over at NRO's The Corner (where they occasionally stop interacting with each other long enough to post something for readers to read). Kurtz plays his ace in the hole: a condemnation of D'Souza's book by Richard John Neuhaus.

Et tu, Neuhaus? Then fall, D’Souza.

Naturally, I thought that was rather good. But you know how I adore Shakespeare.

Over at Hit and Run

Jacob Sullum takes Michael Medved apart for a Townhall column about what "real conservatism" means.

Medved doesn't get it right, though: nearly no one does. A "real conservative" is someone who is running for President of the United States, and hopes to get the GOP nomination. That is all.

The money quote is in Sullum's comments on Hit & Run, by someone named Ashley: "The Right wants control of your body. The Left wants control of your production."

Correct. And they each want control of your mind.

An Alternative to No Child Left Behind?

Robert Bluey on the "A-Plus" plan the Heritage Foundation espouses.

Ace on Obama

Regarding his remark that "nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people":

The left euphemizes the Palestinians' self-defeating choices by saying "The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." By which they mean the Palestinians never forgo an opportunity to kill Jewish children, nor actually choose peace over war, nor to accept reasonable, if not generous by their lights, proposals to cede back most of their lost land. All in favor of killing, and killing, and killing some more.

My own reservoir of pity for the Palestinians ended on September 11th when I saw that grotesque witch handing out cake in celebration of the American dead. They've chosen their path, and that path is misery and murder.

They are suffering. They chose to make others suffer, and to suffer themselves in return. Let there be no tears over their embrace of murder and masochism.

Democratic Jews are demanding to know exactly what Obama meant by the remark. Democratic Jews are, I've decided, idiots. Let me explain what he meant: He meant precisely what you think he meant, and he further meant all the implications that flow from that.

Grow up. Your party has collectively decided that no Muslim outrage cannot be mitigated or explained away by pointing to supposed sins of the west compelling them to behave as monsters.

Sometimes, Identifying the True Irish

. . . is almost as difficult as finding a Real Conservative.

More From Hillary

Cousin Attila has the scoop.

Time to Nuke "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Alan Simpson shares his epiphany with the readers of WaPo.

My thinking shifted when I read that the military was firing translators because they are gay. According to the Government Accountability Office, more than 300 language experts have been fired under "don't ask, don't tell," including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. This when even Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recently acknowledged the nation's "foreign language deficit" and how much our government needs Farsi and Arabic speakers. Is there a "straight" way to translate Arabic? Is there a "gay" Farsi? My God, we'd better start talking sense before it is too late. We need every able-bodied, smart patriot to help us win this war.

Via Ramesh Ponnuru, who points out that

At one point [. . .] Simpson seems to suggest that regarding homosexual sex as immoral is "completely out of the mainstream of American thinking," which seems false.

Yeah. On the other hand, I know both evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics with strong feelings about homosexuality being sinful: one Roman Catholic theologian I spoke with said the Church's stance was that a homosexual person was called to celibacy. The evengelicals seem divided on whether homosexuality is intrinsic, but do not seem to regard its expression as worse than any other form of sexual immorality, such as premarital sex. Both groups—the hard-core Catholics and the evangelicals—seem prepared to accept minority status in mainstream society, particularly when it comes of matters of human sexuality.

If the policy of the Armed Forces is going to be that we can't have people serving who are sinners, then our military readiness is about to sustain a very sharp drop.

Mmmm.

Pi.

I only know ten digits, myself.

But I can roll out an amazing crust, and that has to count for something.

The Nonprofit Center Where I Work

. . . has meeting rooms with names like the Felicity Room, the Serenity Room, the Harmony Room, and the Prosperity Room. And the Room of Rainbows and Cute Kittens.

Okay: I made that last one up.

Firing U.S. Attorneys

is, as Dan Collins points out, almost unprecedented. Almost.

Regarding Global Warming,

the news is not so much that Al Gore exaggerated its potential consequences, and the degree of human responsibility for it; of course he did. The news is that even The New York Times is pointing this out:

Critics have zeroed in on Mr. Gore’s claim that the energy industry ran a “disinformation campaign” that produced false discord on global warming. The truth, he said, was that virtually all unbiased scientists agreed that humans were the main culprits. But Benny J. Peiser, a social anthropologist in Britain who runs the Cambridge-Conference Network, or CCNet, an Internet newsletter on climate change and natural disasters, challenged the claim of scientific consensus with examples of pointed disagreement.

“Hardly a week goes by,” Dr. Peiser said, “without a new research paper that questions part or even some basics of climate change theory,” including some reports that offer alternatives to human activity for global warming.

Geologists have documented age upon age of climate swings, and some charge Mr. Gore with ignoring such rhythms.

“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet,” Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.”

Now that is what I call climate change.

Does Islam Lead, Inevitably, to Islamo-Fascism?

Among the Cotillion bloggers, we argue about this a great deal: some feel that Islam itself is a threat to liberalism and democracy. Some see the possibility that "moderate Muslims" can be brought back from the verge of extinction; others remain tremendously skeptical.

I think we all know that columnist Mark Steyn—a stud/god in so many other respects—is in the latter category.

I agree that Islam must be reformed, but I sympathize with those who are to do the reforming, since they risk death. That's why I admire the members of Muslims for America, and it is why I salute the participants in the recent Secular Islam Summit in St. Petersberg, Florida. Tashbih Sayyed reports at Family Security Matters:

Muslims being brought up under the tutelage of Islamism refuse to allow their co-religionists to think independently and indulge in individual reasoning. The situation has forced the world to believe that Muslims will always remain a threat to world peace and stability unless they find a way to challenge some of Islam’s perceived foundations that are frozen in a time when barbarism, cruelty, ethnic cleansing and muzzling of opposing voices was the norm. These were some of the thoughts on the minds of many who participated in a recently concluded Secular Islam summit in St. Petersburg, Florida, that was organized by the Center for Inquiry of New York. The summit provided Muslims with a platform to voice their concerns regarding the regressive hold of radical Islam on their lives. The summit empowered the Muslims to challenge the growing power of political Islam that threatens freedoms totally and absolutely. The Summit’s success ensured that the free thinking Muslims now have a stage and visibility to propose new ideas, introduce new concepts and advance the causes of secularism without being lynched.

It's hard to forget what happened to Theo Van Gogh, and to so many others who dared to criticize Islam and Islamism—both from within the faith and outside it. Read the whole thing for some of the grim stories, and a message of hope.

All we can do in this country is protect speech, encourage debate, and create a "zone of safety" around those who have left Islam and those who attempt to cure its pathologies from within. I'm not sure whether we are "America alone." But we are the foremost promoters of free speech in the world; we are the nation that placed it first on a list of entitlements God grants to human beings. And we are its primary safeguard in the world.

That could make us Islam's best hope. And that's irony you can take to the bank.

Enter Fred, and

. . . it's time to rock. Frank J. has some important information on Thompson, including the fact that "every night before going to sleep, Osama bin Laden checks under his bed for Fred Thompson."

Over at The American Mind, Sean's waiting for Godot Hegel. Me? I'm hoping for Fred.

Inside Baseball

This RedState Post reminds me of Cousin Attila's assertion that when he plays softball he won't use a metal bat, because "the founders never envisioned them."

Native Americans in Afghanistan

Sean has the scoop.

Gee, that's difficult: use our best trackers to hunt terrorists, or people bringing weed in over the border? That's a tough one; I'll have to think about it for a while.

Paging Tony Hillerman.

Queen Ann: "It's Illegal

. . . to be a Republican."

I'm not so sure overzealous prosecution is limited to the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy, or that all its victims lean right. And I doubt Martha Stewart thinks so.

If You Have a Hard-On for Giuliani,

. . . here's one way to lose it fast.

Just as I'd need to hear Thompson make a clear statement against rationing political speech—and expressing regret over his misguided support of "campaign finance reform"—I'd need to hear some statement from Giuliani about gun rights in order to be able to vote for him.

I think he's sent signals out about a "deal" on abortion, and in truth there's little that the executive branch can do about reducing abortion right now, other than appointing constructionists to the Supreme Court. The gun issue is a lot more worrisome, and that video clip scared the shit out of me.

H/t: Moe Lane, who's undertaken the project of dampening my Rudy ardor—at my request.

As Ace Has Discovered . . .

lefties can be awfully gay.

George Will on . . .

traffic.

Is Fred Thompson Running?

Glenn Ann says "yes!" He She quotes this exchange between Thompson and Chris Wallace regarding the current GOP field, and whether anyone in it can "carry the ball" in 2008:

CHRIS WALLACE: And if you search your soul and if you listen to what they're all saying and it doesn't seem to you that they're catching on, making sense—whatever—then what?

THOMPSON: Well, I'm going to give it serious consideration.

I'm not sure that's a "yes." It seems to me that Thompson is taking the same stance with respect to Giuliani (or possibly Romney) that Schwarzenegger took vis a vis Richard Riordan in 2003 after we recalled Gray Davis: "You may have the ball provisionally. However, I'm going to take it back if I don't think you can cross the goal line."

Me? The idea of voting for someone who truly believes in the Second Amendment excites me so much, I may have to send myself to bed without my supper.

UPDATE: Much discussion over at RedState, with one commenter claiming that Thompson doesn't have as much charisma as Giuliani: I see it in precisely the opposite terms, though I do admit Rudy has a better chance of getting the Golden State back into play.

Still: if the base is excited enough, California is optional. When in doubt, get people to vote for your candidate, rather than against the other person.

UPDATE 2: It wasn't Glenn; it was Ann. I've fallen into the "guest blogger" trap again. Thanks, James: for the link, and for fact-checking my entry.

Mrs. Clinton in New Hampshire

Patrick Hynes caught part of her speech on video. It's a good old-fashioned warm-and-fuzzy speech about taking care of children, the elderly, single parents, and little puppies with big eyes.

Nicely done. She is certainly becoming one hell of a politician, which isn't surprising. She studied under the very best.

Obama has a steep hill to climb.

Completely Smugly,

and to the utter annoyance of my critics . . ."

Via Insty, who adds a comma to the meme—and deletes the word "utter."

But, you know. In a good way.

A Conservative Conference for the Rest of Us

And it'll be held this October in a libertarian state!

They had me at "WiFi throughout the center."

Steyn on the NPR Experience.

God bless him, he still wants to persuade people that Islamofascism is a real menace. (As do I, of course—in case you weren't paying attention.)

She had just told me that “we’re all in this together. I don’t care if you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist.” Good for you. Unfortunately, they do care. In Gaza, in Sudan, in Kashmir, in southern Thailand, they care very much. But the great advantage of cultural relativism is that it absolves you of the need to know anything. For, if everything’s of equal value, why bother learning about any of the differences?

On the whole I prefer those Americans who tune out the foreign-policy bores for wall-to-wall Anna Nicole Smith coverage: at least they’ve got an interest—ask them about the latest scoop on the identity of the father of her child and they’ll bring you up to speed. By contrast, a large number of elite Americans are just as parochial and indifferent to the currents of the age; the only difference is that they choose to trumpet it as a moral virtue.

Holy shit. What if he's right? I'm always afraid of that with Steyn, you know.

The Argument Isn't Whether the War on Terror Should Be Micromanaged.

It's simply that thinking people disagree on how to micromanage it.

Might We Gain the World

. . . and yet lose our souls?

Dave Kopel

. . . on the "Ann Coulter/Paul Campos" style of political discourse.

Via Glenn.

Google: Only Evil If You Don't Work There.

They've found the ultimate way to spoil their employees, with a company bus system:

The company now ferries about 1,200 employees to and from Google daily—nearly one-fourth of its local work force—aboard 32 shuttle buses equipped with comfortable leather seats and wireless Internet access. Bicycles are allowed on exterior racks, and dogs on forward seats, or on their owners’ laps if the buses run full.

Riders can sign up to receive alerts on their computers and cellphones when buses run late. They also get to burnish their green credentials, not just for ditching their cars, but because all Google shuttles run on biodiesel. Oh, and the shuttles are free.

Via James Joyner, who remarks: "They must have one hell of a union. Certainly, no greedy corporation would do this kind of thing simply to attract top-notch employees."

The "Joy's Next Short Story" Contest

Yes, yes: finishing the novel. Really, I am. But there's a reading party later on this month, and I hate reading chapter snippets at those events.

Please provide me with a subject around which I can fashion a mini-short story. Optimum page count would be five pages, double-spaced, so I need a fast little story arc.

Please provide me with a theme, an image, or a premise. And, yes: there are sometimes children at these events. "Dark" is okay, but it should be transmutable into PG-13 material.

Thank you.

The D.C. Court of Appeals

. . . has discovered the Bill of Rights.

I've been wondering how long we would continue to treat residents of the District as serfs of the Feds. This is long overdue.

Insty has an update here.

Eric of Classical Values: "Great news." And he has more links.

The Politics of Outing

Goldstein talks about the latest outing-flap here:

Ironically, the “Rethugs” that swim like moralist sharks through the muck of Bacchus’ fevered imagination don’t seem nearly so bothered by Sanchez’ having done gay porn 15 years ago as Bacchus and pals do that the guy had the audacity to wander off their grievance plantation. He was supposed to come running into their arms, but instead, he embraced a political position that champions the liberal concept of individual primacy, eschewing identity-based totalitarian positions like the one favored by Bacchus, Aravosis, and a host of other petty ideological tyrants who, while they like to fancy themselves ultra-liberal, are in fact filled with the very kind of hatred they project onto their perceived enemies. Being gay, to these people, is no longer an ontological or experiential condition that can exist outside of politics; it is, instead, tied inextricably to their political beliefs. Which is why those gays who don’t adopt the proper politics are to be savaged, while those who do adopt the prescribed positions dictated by the group are granted its protections.

Take the oath, become part of the family; reject the offer, pay the price. Like the mafia, only with nicer shoes and a whole lot less Drakkar.

He's right: the whole thing is about projection. The left projects its hatred of true liberals (us) onto the GOP, and substitutes the word "gay" for "right-of-center."

Is there some kind of ritual wherein one swears the oath to become the "right" kind of gay man/lesbian? Just wonderin'.

Draft Fred!

James suggests I'd be pleased by a Fred Thompson presidential candidacy in 2008: you're damned skippy I would.

When one looks at the top several contenders in the GOP right now, the choices seem to be between conservatism (Romney, Gingrich and Brownback) or charisma (Giuliani, and possibly Gingrich—but Gingrich's is undercut by his personal life).

The idea that someone out there might bring both conservatism and charisma to the table is more than a little bit appealing.

Another Fictional Piece of Dialogue

"You stopped over in Vegas on the way home? You should have hit a casino or two. You could have made out with enough to cover your CPAC trip! Or at least you could have checked out the Star Trek exhibit at the Hilton—help maintain your geek cred."

"My geek cred isn't hurting," she replied. "And there wasn't time to leave the airport. I skipped the video poker in the waiting area, since I'm too broke and too compulsive for that. But I did take advantage of the free WiFi, which in my mind makes up for any flaws the Las Vegas airport may have.

"I am still, for the record, very annoyed with both BWI and the people at U.S. Air."

The Coulter-Maher Civility Forum

Show sponsor Iowahawk has the transcript:

ANN: . . . It's time that we begin the process of healing by restoring civility and decorum to our national dialog. That's why I am asking my fans to take a deep breath, tone down, and cool off. The next time Bill goes riffing off a Condi Rice assassination ad lib, let his studio audience of flag-burning West Hollywood homos bark and whoop and clap like a mindless pack of trained Maoist circus seals. Because if you succeed in driving him off the air again, I stand to lose three chapters in my forthcoming best seller, The Christ-Haters.

BILL: And the next time Ann starts joking about putting anthrax on Nancy Pelosi's dildo, I'm asking my fans to sit politely and allow her audience of inbred Young Republican Jeebus tards to howl and bleat and cheer like demonically possessed preppy Klan chimps. Let's avoid the temptation to hatefully demand apologies and shunning, because let's face it: a typical Ann Coulter comment is good for ten minutes of monologue and $2 million for the DNC.

ANN: A little common courtesy is all it takes. Together, we can insure that our next generation will have access to the same whimsical death wish political humor that we all enjoy today. Let's not kill the free speech goose that lays the golden egg!

BILL: That's right Ann, you emaciated Eva Braun sideshow freak.

Via Hackbarth, who has more.

Robert Bluey

. . . Has a new blog.

What? I Don't Fit In with the Neanderthals?

This is an enemies list I'm happy to be on.

Have you ever noticed that 79% of those who use the term "RINO" are bound and determined to lose elections, no matter what it takes?

LET'S ALIENATE PEOPLE FOR THE SAKE OF ALIENATING THEM! Otherwise, we are just APPEASING the LIBERALS! Being POLITICALLY CORRECT! Ack, ack! Polly wants a cracker!

Can a New Yorker Be President?

Sure. Unless he starts with the anti-West Coast bigotry—by either ragging on L.A. for its relative paucity of delicatessens, or stating categorically that one could not make a good bagel west of the Rockies, because the air quality/minerals in the water won't permit it.

If there's anyone more scary to the Hillaryites than Obama is, it would be Rudy.

Via Insty, who suspects there will be more media attacks on Rudy, but isn't impressed with this one. Yup: it's pretty pathetic.

Of course, like everyone else I'd like to see Rudy come around on Second Amendment issues, and other Bill of Rights concerns. But at least he doesn't believe in stifling speech, like Senator McCain does. That one is a deal-breaker for me.

Back in the City of Sexy Angels

I got home last night after interminable adventures with U.S. Air that I may post about once I recover from them; suffice it to say that I got up at 3:30 a.m. Pacific on Wednesday, and arrived home at the same time this morning—24 hours later.

My attempts to recuperate have involved the following activities:

1) liberating my car from bondage;

2) doing laundry;

3) sleeping until 2:00 p.m., without a shred of guilt over it;

4) driving my car with the window open;

5) playing rock and roll very loudly;

6) checking out all the cool trees in my little town—many of which are covered in little pink blossoms that weren't there a week ago, when I first left for the East Coast. California is so green in the winter and early spring; it doesn't really get brown until late May or early June.

I dig Maryland, but home is pretty gorgeous, too.

Dietary Advice

. . . from Jeff Goldstein.

My Apology to Ann Coulter.

Upon reflection, I've decided that I'm very sorry. You are actually doing a lot for the conservative movement. Just as NAMBLA is doing a lot for the cause of gay rights.

More on The Coulter Flap

Robert Bluey suggests that we "declared war" on Ann Coulter this week, in the blogger letter-writing campaign that originated at The American Mind. I don't know whether I quite see it that way. I don't have any problem with Coulter earning a living; I just don't agree with the American Conservative Union giving her the platform that it does at CPAC, and I'm very disappointed in their response to our letter.

The left votes with its wallet when it buys books by Noam Chomsky; the right votes with its wallet when it buys books by Ann Coulter.

On the right, as on the left, sometimes—as we used to say in my Marxist days, and in technocrat circles—"the masses are asses." People liked VHS videotape and DOS computers. And they like Ann Coulter's style of discourse, just as they dig Howard Stern.

I just don't have to agree with it. And I don't have to think Coulter represents inteligent right-of-center thought (though of course I know she's bright: that's actually one of the irritating things about this phenomenon).

I'm actually thinking of taking the opposite tack, and waging my own style of protest: I'll cover it when she makes a good point, and I'll mostly ignore her when she spouts off silly, offensive shit.

It's like training a dog, you know?

Down at Neuroscience Central

I'm at Johns Hopkins, outside Professor Purkinje's office—where Dr. P is working before we head out to lunch and send me to my plane. He introduces me to one of his employees: "Joy writes murder mysteries."

"Oh," replies the nice young researcher. "Are you in science also?"

"No," I tell him. "Just a writer."

Though it occurs to me that had I known what I'd end up doing, studying a little forensic science would have come in darn handy.

At the very least, I should have taken the precaution of failing human physiology in high school, so I could take it again. That way, I would remember it all better in ripe middle age.

"Ladies Can Be Filthy, Too."

It's so true.

Baldilocks Is in on the Coulter Revolt.

She has some further remarks here.

The Libby Conviction

I dunno: it sounds like there might be grounds for an appeal, but I haven't read the law bloggers on that yet, so what do I know?

Glenn has a mini-roundup, with a link to the big PJ Media roundup.

But If You Really Want to Make Sure

. . . you'll ban paring knives, and make people tear veggies apart with their hands when they want to make stir-fry.

And we'll all be safe.

Eric

. . . is worried about the environment.

As are we all.

The Attila Family

. . . gets together in the nation's capital.

Warning: Don't criticize Cousin Attila's tie. Just don't.

Bloggers Aren't Alone on This.

The destructiveness of Ann Coulter's speaking style is impossible to miss.

And, yes: I've heard her kooky defense of her remarks—that "faggot" didn't mean "faggot," because Edwards "clearly isn't gay." (And we were supposed to know she felt this was clear . . . how? Are there no family men out there who turn out to be gay?) It reminded me of the tortured reasoning Bill Clinton used to defend some of his more outrageous remarks—ones that he at least had a reason (however wrong) for making.

More on Queen Ann

From Kevin McCollough.

An Open Letter to CPAC Sponsors and Organizers Regarding Ann Coulter

Please sign on—via comments, and cross-posting—and spread the word. Enough is enough.

Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civility. This is one of those times.

Ann Coulter used to serve the movement well. She was telegenic, intelligent, and witty. She was also fearless: saying provocative things to inspire deeper thought and cutting through the haze of competing information has its uses. But Coulter's fearlessness has become an addiction to shock value. She draws attention to herself, rather than placing the spotlight on conservative ideas.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2006, Coulter referred to Iranians as ragheads. She is one of the most prominent women in the conservative movement; for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.

At CPAC 2007 Coulter decided to turn up the volume by referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a faggot. Such offensive language—and the cavalier attitude that lies behind it—is intolerable to us. It may be tolerated on liberal websites, but not at the nation's premier conservative gathering.

The legendary conservative thinker Richard Weaver wrote a book entitled Ideas Have Consequences. Rush Limbaugh has said again and again that "words mean things." Both phrases apply to Coulter's awful remarks.

Coulter's vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised. Her word choice forces conservatives to waste time defending themselves against charges of homophobia rather than advancing conservative ideas.

Within a day of Coulter's remark John Edwards sent out a fundraising email that used Coulter's words to raise money for his faltering campaign. She is helping those she claims to oppose. How does that advance any of the causes we hold dear?

Denouncing Coulter is not enough. After her "raghead" remark in 2006 she took some heat. Yet she did not grow and learn. We should have been more forceful. This year she used a gay slur. What is next? If Senator Barack Obama is the de facto Democratic Presidential nominee next year, will Coulter feel free to use a racial slur? How does that help conservatism?

One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses—where they often feel alone—at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter's mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter's invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.

CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter. Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.

Thank you,

Credentialed CPAC 2007 Bloggers

Sean Hackbarth, The American Mind
James Joyner, Outside the Beltway
Steve Verdon, Outside the Beltway
BoiFromTroy, Boi From Troy
Joy McCann, Little Miss Attila
Kevin McCullough, Musclehead Revolution
Fausta Werz, Fausta's Blog
Patrick Hynes, Ankle Biting Pundits
Ed Morrissey, Captain's Quarters
Jane Stewart, See Jane Mom
Alexander Brunk, Save the GOP
Mark Harris, Save the GOP
Ace, Ace of Spades HQ


Other Right-of-Center Bloggers
N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear (CPAC Blogger of the Year)
Glenn Reynolds, InstaPundit
Joe Carter, Evangelical Outpost
Amy Ridenour, National Center Blog
Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres
Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit
Mark Coffey, Decision '08
Russell Newquist, The Philosopher's Stone
Marshall Manson, On Tap
Rob Port, Say Anything
Matthew Johnston, Going to the Mat
Timmer, The Daily Brief
Rick Moran, Right Wing Nuthouse
Dustin Gawrylow, Free Republicans
Dan, North Dallas Thirty
Brennan Monaco, The American Pundit
Nate Nelson, Reality Mugged Me
Christopher Fotos, PostWatch
Soren Dayton, EyeOn08
Greg, Rhymes with Right
Jimmie, The Sundries Shack
John Tabin, JohnTabin.com
Dave Burris, First State Politics
Dan McLaughlin, Baseball Crank
Peter DiGaudio, Texas Hold 'Em Blogger

UPDATE: The first half-dozen signatures have been added. I'll be adding more as they roll in today (and as my travel schedule permits).

UPDATE, March 6th: Another shipment of signatures just arrived. I'll probably do my final update later in the day today.

UPDATE, 3/6 9:35 a.m. Eastern More names--they just keep rolling in.

Jeff Goldstein?

A total f-word.

Actually, I agree with most of what he posts there.

His point that faggot can be a general slam against a man's masculinity is interesting: I find myself wondering how I would have felt if the term Ann Coulter used had been pussy rather than faggot. I certainly fought for a while against those who used the former term as a synonym for "wimp," but as a happy owner of a real pussy I eventually decided that particular organ shouldn't be the standard-bearer for power projection—either in geopolitics, or anywhere else. So, okay: I accept pussy as an indicator of all-yin-no-yang.

But at this point it is broadly acceptable for a woman to show masculine traits in a way it still isn't for a man to show feminine ones. Those who call Ann Coulter a "tranny" are still not putting her down to the same degree as she is putting Edwards down by calling him a faggot—or a pussy, for that matter.

But the term used was, indeed, faggot. And, yeah: I got the cultural allusion to the Grey's Anatomy actors. I'm certainly not interested in a world wherein we have n-words and f-words and all other kinds of words to which we've given so much silly power that we cannot even utter them. I'm more of a J.K. Rowling person: his name is Voldemort, dammit; don't make things worse than they are.

But the primary meaning of that word is still "male homosexual"—on this continent, at least. And if I were Edwards' wife, I wouldn't be happy with its use in that way. (If I were his campaign staffers, I'd be milking Coulter's remark for martyr points and cold, hard cash. And, of course, that's exactly what they are doing.) This kind of usage doesn't do much for our outreach to the gay community, whom most of us want to live with in some kind of harmony (whether that happens to be expressed in civil unions, or gay marriage, or good old-fashioned discretion on everyone's part). What's the argument here?—"Sure we call you faggots and lezzies. But at least we don't want to stone you to death like the Islamofascists do, so come to Momma." That's appealing.

If we concede that transgression for its own sake is always courageous, and therefore acceptable, even laudable, then we are the conservative equivalent of those who promoted Piss Christ. Because it ultimately doesn't matter what line was crossed, and for what motivation: the virtue lies in crossing it. Supposedly.

That's not virtue. It's crass egotism. Or, in Ann's case, a desire to make money by feeding off the darker side of human nature. I'm not necessarily against that in and of itself: Jerry Springer's made a handsome living doing just that. But this impulse is the antithesis of conservatism, and its practioners do not speak for me.

Glenn Reynolds on Rudy

One day while driving home, I was engaged in my usual mental-whiplash-inducing practice of flipping back and forth between Hannity and All Things Considered and I heard people saying nice things about Giuliani on both. That's when I thought he might win big . . . .

More here.

A Purely Made-Up Piece of Dialogue

"Listen. I was going to head down to the National Gallery for a couple of hours—do you want to go?"

"I'm awfully busy," he responded.

"What are you—glued to your laptop over there? You're going to stay online until the moment you leave to catch your flight?"

"I have responsibilities! To my readers, and to my incredible ego."

I'm Not Sure

. . . that I needed to know about this.

Bidinotto

. . . has his extensive CPAC coverage in one long post, here. There's a nice little love letter to Ann Coulter at the end of it:

Since insults have become the currency of political discussion, I suppose I can play, too. You will notice that I placed Coulter's name at the very bottom of those listed on the tombstone image above [on the cover of the latest New Individualist]. In retrospect, however, I owe a profound apology to the others named on it. It was a gross presumption to include Coulter, since, after all, the tombstone is supposed to memorialize the ideas of those listed. And Ann Coulter is nothing but a right-wing attention slut whose arguments fall shorter than her hemlines, and are even less interesting.

George Will

. . . was on one of the talk fests this morning. One of the benefits he pointed out to the GOP nominating Giuliani was that it could conceivably put California back in play.

That would change the political landscape considerably.

More on the Candidates

. . . from Erick at Redstate:

If Brownback, Huckabee, and Gilmore expect to be viable, they will need quickly to make the case that one of them is the anti-Rudy, not Romney. The only way to do that is to go after each other and tear down Romney, while indirectly tearing down Rudy. And when they do? Look for Newt to step in around the end of September -- the 12th anniversary of the Contract With America. The others will be out of money, broken, bloodied, and bruised. And Gingrich will have a front door to claim himself as the anti-Rudy. After all, he did get 14% of the vote at CPAC in a race in which he is not even a candidate right now.

Blogger of the Year:

For 2007 it's N.Z. Bear, one of several California bloggers who were present this year.

I got a few minutes to speak with him yesterday, and he's so sweet and unassuming—as many of the top bloggers are.

This guy is making a difference, in so many ways: James Joyner covers some of his achievements.

The CPAC Straw Poll

Sean has the results here. Basically, if one calculates first choices, it's:

1) Romney
2) Giuliani
3) Brownback
4) Gingrich
5) McCain

But if the first and second choices are calculated together, we end up with
1) Giuliani,
2) Gingrich,
3) Romney

The Attila poll, based on the men's speeches, aplomb in handling questions, and skill in courting the bloggers, comes out:

1) Giuliani
2) Gingrich
3) Romney
4) Brownback

Ranked according to electability, however, it looks more like:

1) Giuliani
2) Romney
3) Brownback
4) Gingrich.

I essentially agree with James Joyner, who suspects that "Gingrich is carrying too much baggage to be elected."

No. I'm Serious.

If I hear the term "Reagan Republican" one more time, I'm going to puke.

This Isn't Really Inaccurate.

Although it doesn't quite capture the bitterness that leads some people to label Romney "Flipper," dressing as dolphins and handing out flip-flops.

Nor the shrillness of people calling out to Michelle Malkin in the hallways: "Michelle! Expose the flip-flopper! Take him down!"

It would really, really suck to be famous. By the way.

Why Is Jeff

so mean?

And There Was That Moment

. . . that Governor Romney came by to talk to us down at Bloggers' Row. There is something hilarious about the fact that no one who isn't a blogger really knows who's big and who isn't, candidates included. There's a "just in case" tendancy to treat us all like rock stars, because who knows what someone's traffic is without checking? And all these websites have such funny names that none of them sound serious to begin with.

Both Sean and James came up with challenging questions for Romney, which he sidestepped with practiced ease.

That doesn't mean I don't like him; this is the kind of things all politicians do. To answer a question like James' "how, specifically, would you go about cutting the budget?" is to risk making a mistake, and it's early in the day.

But I do take back my previous negative post about Romney. I don't think he has Giuliani's charisma, but he has some. What I do not like is the reflexively self-destructive impulse to nominate someone who has no chance whatsoever of winning.

Because, you know: the more conservative, the better. The more like Ronald Reagan.

Everyone here is a "Reagan Republican." It's just that the phrase has about as many different meanings as there are candidates.

Priceless

In more ways than one.

Sean Hackbarth

. . . can't leave poor Ann Coulter alone:

She’s now on non-speaking terms with any gay and lesbian friends.

Paging Al Rantel.

Ace

for President!

"I'm running," he tells me.

"Will you be at the bar tonight?" I ask.

"No—I mean I'm running for President," he explains.

"Explatoratory commitee?"

"Not yet."

"Are you accepting campaign contributions?" I ask.

"Definitely."

Yup.

That's a shocker.

So, I'm Talking

. . . to Charmaine Yoest, and I tell her I just don't see the same level of animosity out there toward Giuliani that exists with respect to McCain.

"I mean, some people aren't enthusiastic about Rudy," I remark. "But it's not like you hear all this anyone but him discourse that one gets with McCain."

She blinks, rather politely, and tells me she knows people who feel exactly that way: "anyone but Rudy."

I pause for a moment, and then I reply that she must have friends who are real conservatives.

"Why McCain Is Doomed."

Marshall:

Americans do not like to be told to shut up.

McCain-Feingold told Americans to shut up.

About That Blogger's Alley Thing

It is not actually a corner. Nor, literally, an alley. It's actually a long table with too few power outlets, a modest number of internet connections, and a bunch of extremely dorky people typing away on keyboards, waiting for either (1) happy hour to start, or (2) Ann Coulter to say something inflammatory.

On the Other Hand,

. . . Romney is doing very well, and the crowds here are glued to the monitor to almost the same degree that they were with Giuliani.

On a personal note, I regret to say that I have failed to provoke a fistfight between the Brownback supporters and the Romneyites—despite whispering vigorously to each side about how the other side regards them as whores.

Full Disclosure, 3

The people from The Center for Consumer Freedom finally gave me one of their stuffed "PETA Killed Me" puppies.

Full Disclosure, 2

I'm drinking a can of Coke courtesy of Red State.

Fear the Government

. . . that fears your decongestants.

Full Disclosure

The Washington Times bought me a beer last night.

I feel cheap/used.

Meta-Coverage

It's impossible for this not to turn into a sort of "inside baseball" situation. We're all fighting the temptation to cover the coverage. I'm sitting across from Captain Ed, who managed to convey—better than I did, anyway—the strange spell Giuliani is casting over the Omni Shorham hotel even as we type away.

Rudy's Speech

It's simply amazing: for all the jaundiced remarks people like to make about Giuliani, he is a superstar here at CPAC. A bunch of us went up to the main ballroom 15 minutes early to cover his speech, but we couldn't get in because the fire marshall wasn't admitting any more people into the room.

Now I'm back here on the floor, and the monitor that has the feed is the epicenter of room, with crowds all around it and the volume turned up high. I've never seen anything like it, even last year. Not even Newt, despite his well-organized young supporters, drew this kind of attention.

Overheard, 6

"I suppose I should cover Rudy's speech."

"Yeah; I should too. But I don't want to. He's such a fascist."

Personally,

I think it's hilarious that Mr. Maverick isn't here. I mean, would it really have made any difference? I doubt it.

I Saw James Joyner Plain

. . . last night. It's so cool to meet people who have been supportive of my work over the years. James and I started out blogging around the same time: his site got big, while mine remained strictly a boutique affair.

But it was lovely to meet him. He's just like I pictured him—only taller, and quite a bit more good-looking.

Isn't it odd that we tend to know exactly what female bloggers look like, even when we don't know their real names? Yet men are less likely to feel they need to exploit their attractiveness for the sake of getting hits. Some say that gives chicks an extra edge, but these people are only partly right. It's just like everything else pertaining to gender relations: different. Not equal, not unequal. Simply different.

Overheard, 5

"What happens at CPAC stays at CPAC."

[pause]

"Does that imply that there's a whole different convention that I'm missing out on? And where, exactly, do I find it—outside of Stephen Glass's fertile imagination? Come on: help a sister out."

It Might Be the Opportunity of a Lifetime

. . . to acquire land or housing in the SF Bay Area; they've just had two small temblors less than a week apart.

Cash in! Buy that condo for less that $750,000! Now is the time!

Naturally, I Forgot

. . . that things are so hectic here at CPAC, one doesn't really have time during the convention to actually, you know—blog.

I Have to Admit

. . . that it's slightly unnerving to blog surrounded by the glitterati of the sphere: people like Kirsten Powers of It's Out There, Mary Katherine Ham of Townhall, and Sean Hackbarth of The American Mind.

There are television cameras all over; I hope I don't feel compelled to pick my nose.