Wednesday open thread

Is anyone having trouble posting comments this afternoon? If so, please email me and let me know as at least one reader is having issues doing so for an unexplainable reason

—–

Update: BTW, if you are a Microsoft user, make sure to visit the Microsoft website and download the update for Daylight’s Savings time, which is this weekend. If you don’t, the dates and times on your compu will be screwed up.

23 Responses to "Wednesday open thread"

Severian says:

March 7, 2007 at 4:40 pm

Testing…no problems.
CavalierX says:

March 7, 2007 at 6:32 pm

>If you don’t, the dates and times on your compu will
>be screwed up.

I survived Y2K, and I’ll survive this…
Mwalimu Daudi says:

March 7, 2007 at 10:18 pm

To test out the commenting section and see if it is working properly, I will now post the Global Warming Test Post:

Global warming is real, and it is now! Respected leading scientists such as (Deleted – Ann Coulter) and (Deleted – The Hon. Richard Cheney) have discovered (Deleted – Washington Times) and (Deleted – FOX News). Furthermore, proof of the Bush administration’s criminal activities can be found at (Deleted – RNC) and (Deleted – CPAC). Alternate sources of energy such as (Deleted – Halliburton) and (Deleted – ExxonMobil) are our only hope. Act now to save the planet and avoid (Deleted – Karl Rove).

For further reading:

1. (Deleted – Military-Industrial Complex)
2. (Deleted – RJ Reynolds Co.)
3. (Deleted – WalMart)
4. (Deleted – Elmo, Big Bird and the Cookie Monster)

This concludes this test of the VRW Conspiracy(TM) Double-Secret Thought-Control Filter.
sanity says:

March 8, 2007 at 12:40 am

Bombing of US Cole – former US navy sailor arrested for allegedly passing military secrets to Al Qaeda.

If he is guilty I hope he fries. I have no sympathy for selling out your country and your brothers and sisters which he caused to die in the Cole attack.

A former U.S. Navy sailor has been charged with allegedly passing military secrets about U.S. Navy movements through waters in the Middle East to al Qaeda-related Web sites during the spring of 2001, just months after the USS Cole was attacked in Yemen.
Hassan Abujihaad, formerly known as Paul R. Hall, allegedly passed information about U.S. Navy warship movements in the Straits of Hormuz in April 2001 while he was a member of the Navy. The information passed along contained details about vulnerabilites of U.S. vessels — including susceptibility to small boat attacks by terrorists.

Abujihaad was arrested today in Phoenix, according to a criminal complaint unsealed tonight that charged him with providing material support to terrorists who planned to kill U.S. nationals.

The complaint claims Abujihaad was an associate of Derrick Shareef, who allegedly tried to explode grenades at the CherryVale Mall outside Chicago during the height of the holiday shopping season last December. Shareef was arrested on Dec. 6, 2006, when he traded stereo speakers for dud grenades in an FBI sting operation.

First read at Captain’s Quarters.

Full Story Here.
sanity says:

March 8, 2007 at 12:43 am

Captain America shot dead.

The winged-hooded Marvel Entertainment hero created in 1941 is shot dead in New York by a sniper in the latest Captain America issue that hit newsstands this week, in a sensational comic-book plot twist that had been kept a closely guarded secret.

Blood seeps from his red-white-and-blue costume as life ebbs from Steve Rogers, the scrawny student who was transformed into the physically perfect superhero when he volunteered to be injected with “Super Soldier” serum during World War II.
karl says:

March 8, 2007 at 1:27 am

Gotta love modern education.

We didnt have shop class like this:

The Warren Township student sex scandal gets stonewalled then defended: No danger to the kids says attorney for the State DOE
sanity says:

March 8, 2007 at 6:29 am

Fox: Rosie’s ‘Idol’ Rant ‘Ridiculous’
Executive Producer Refute’s O’Donnell’s ‘Absurd’ Claims Of Racism, Weightism.

Fox responded to O’Donnell’s charges Wednesday afternoon.

“Without wishing to add to the obvious self-promotion of Ms. O’Donnell, I feel as though I must refute her absurd and ridiculous claims that ‘American Idol’ is racist and/or weight-ist,” the reality show’s executive producer, Nigel Lythgoe, said in a statement given to CBSNews.com’s The Showbuzz. “Ms. O’Donnell has, once again, spoken without thought or knowledge. Viewers need only look at the show tonight to realize that ‘American Idol’ constantly confirms to America that talent has nothing to do with weight or color.”

“The View” co-host, Barbara Walters, responded on the show by saying that O’Donnell’s comments were “very strong accusations” and that “Rosie’s opinions are Rosie’s opinions.”

But Walters instructed, “don’t insult them with your left hand and ask for favors with the right hand.”

Link

I like this quote especially:
“Ms. O’Donnell has, once again, spoken without thought or knowledge.

But it is amazing how many times Barbara keeps having to state over and over again that these opinions are Rosie’s and Rosie’s alone….

At one time in the show she made mention to quit emailing complaints to herself (Barbara), and you can contact Rosie by email to complain, in which Rosie was all in agreement, but a commenter on another blog noted that all emails were present at the website for the View EXCEPT for Rosies. Imagine that.

Funny thing is, I find Rosie is the one that seems ot be hate-filled and rediculous in many of her rants, and then there is the ever-present Behar (supposed comedian) who does her best imitation of a dummy sitting on Rosie’s knee going “Yeah!” everytime Rosie says something.

Pretty sad when the creator of the show, Barbara Walters, states she has no control over Rosie and has to keep adding in “Rosie’s opinions are Rosie’s opinions.”

Very sad indeed.
sanity says:

March 8, 2007 at 6:53 am

You may not like Coulter because of her comment recently, but I give her props on her article HERE where she states it seems it is Illegal to be a Republican and lists all the reasons why – and compares them to Democrat illegalities and how they get away with things.

I may not like what she said or how she went about saying about Edwards, but she is definately a woman with biting humor and definately zeroes in on where the problems lie.

We all defend freedom of speech, but will you defend that freedom even if what is said is something you disagree with? Even something you abhor or hate?

The side note on what she said, I think was blown WAY out of proportion, and I think people got hyper-sensitive. Personally, I find what damages the party and the way people think, is not what she said, because if you read it all, you would understand what she was getting at, but that if someone speaks of something you don’t like, that you abandon them or run petitions against them….even if they are the biggest proponents of truth and telling it how it is.

I think that is what damages us even more than a simple slur of “faggot” that she put in as a joke, is that because of hyper-sensitivites, we are so willing to abandon our support and cave to the wishes of the Deans and Reids of the Democrat party.

Anyways read her article because she hits yet another homerun.
Sister Toldjah says:

March 8, 2007 at 7:19 am

So now it’s “hypersensitive” to hold our own side to account, but holding the other side into account is perfectly sensible? That makes no sense. I, and other people who don’t like Ann, aren’t “caving” to the left. There is nothing wrong, nor should anyone be ashamed of, holding their own side to account. The day we stop doing that is the day our party goes down the tubes.

I don’t see anyone on the right complaining when others complain of the outrageous spending of the admin, and their caving on illegal immigration – all things clearly meant to hold their own side to account, but when Ann Coulter is held to account, there’s a different standard at play to some people. That’s not right.
Tom TB says:

March 8, 2007 at 10:53 am

Hey everybody, want to have some fun? Go to PETA.org. They sent a letter to Algore telling him to stop eating meat! Wasn’t there an expression “when pigs fly…”
sanity says:

March 8, 2007 at 10:58 am

So now it’s “hypersensitive” to hold our own side to account, but holding the other side into account is perfectly sensible?

Never said we can’t hold our side to an account, if it truly warrants it. Perhaps in the context of the joke it wasn’t right, but first she never did call him a ‘faggot’, though in the joke it was implied – most people would call that double-edged humor. The clamor and petitions to remove her from CPAC that have now been going on for this seems way overblown in my opinion, and in reality I believe people are acting like the left does, making a mountain out of a mole hill.

That makes no sense. I, and other people who don’t like Ann, aren’t “caving” to the left. There is nothing wrong, nor should anyone be ashamed of, holding their own side to account. The day we stop doing that is the day our party goes down the tubes.

Perhaps, but when the left is screaming bloody murder over an implied slur, and candidates start falling all over themselves to apologize for her, I call that caving. The only one who is responsible for her actions is Ann Coulter – and should be the only one who, if others feel is necessary, then it is she who needs to apologize, not Republicans. Otherwise I feel we will have another Trent Lott ‘debacle’.

I don’t see anyone on the right complaining when others complain of the outrageous spending of the admin, and their caving on illegal immigration – all things clearly meant to hold their own side to account, but when Ann Coulter is held to account, there’s a different standard at play to some people. That’s not right.

Sorry to say ST, but I don’t think that is right, because at least for myself, I have been highly critical of the admin when it comes to spending like a Democrat, and Illegal Immigration and Eminent Domain, two things that push my angry button HARD. I believe others, including Baklava have spoken out about this here also. But when it comes to Illegal Immigration and Eminent Domain, I scream bloody murder because there is not enough done or it is overlooked or downplayed. I also think this is apples and oranges, an implied slur vs illegal immigration and Republicans spending like Democrats seems way off.

Again for something implied and supposedly done in jest, people are up in arms it seems – while real outrage like you said, spending, Illegal Immigration, this farce of a witch hunt concerning Libby in the hopes of bringing down cheney, ect, really should set everyone up in arms, and holding our side accountable – that is why I find it bit rediculous. I see more outrage and petitons and such for this implied slur of a joke she cracked, than anything dealing with the major issues.

That is what I don’t understand is that it seems we are more concerned about this joke; this schoolyard taunt; this implied slur; she cracked than the real issues.
Sister Toldjah says:

March 8, 2007 at 1:00 pm

Never said we can’t hold our side to an account, if it truly warrants it. Perhaps in the context of the joke it wasn’t right, but first she never did call him a â€˜faggot’, though in the joke it was implied – most people would call that double-edged humor.

Oh please. That’s like someone telling me that they’d call me a b-tch, but then they’d have to go to therapy, and then when I complain that the person did call me that, someone else saying “no they didn’t.” It is beyond comprehension to understand how people can say that she didn’t call Edwards the “f” word. Whether it was intended to be humorous or not, it wasn’t funny, and none of us would be saying it was funny if it were directed towards the President.

The clamor and petitions to remove her from CPAC that have now been going on for this seems way overblown in my opinion, and in reality I believe people are acting like the left does, making a mountain out of a mole hill.”

This isn’t just about one incident, but several. Hardly a molehill.

Perhaps, but when the left is screaming bloody murder over an implied slur, and candidates start falling all over themselves to apologize for her, I call that caving. The only one who is responsible for her actions is Ann Coulter – and should be the only one who, if others feel is necessary, then it is she who needs to apologize, not Republicans. Otherwise I feel we will have another Trent Lott â€˜debacle’.

No one else was trying to apologize for Ann Coulter. They were embarassed because of the perception that she is the conservative movement. She isn’t. And it wasn’t just the left upset over the real (not “implied”) slur, but the right. As a side note, for the record I know that the left’s ‘outrage’ over this is purely manufactured.

Sorry to say ST, but I don’t think that is right, because at least for myself, I have been highly critical of the admin when it comes to spending like a Democrat, and Illegal Immigration and Eminent Domain, two things that push my angry button HARD. I believe others, including Baklava have spoken out about this here also. But when it comes to Illegal Immigration and Eminent Domain, I scream bloody murder because there is not enough done or it is overlooked or downplayed.

Not by the people like me who were criticizing Ann Coulter this past weekend it isn’t.

I also think this is apples and oranges, an implied slur vs illegal immigration and Republicans spending like Democrats seems way off.

Again, it wasn’t an implied slur. This cuts to the very heart of who we are. We can have a meaningful debate in this country about those important issues if we leave the stupid real slurs out of it. Just because the left routinely makes jerks out of themselves with their stupid antics doesn’t mean we should, too.

Again for something implied and supposedly done in jest, people are up in arms it seems – while real outrage like you said, spending, Illegal Immigration, this farce of a witch hunt concerning Libby in the hopes of bringing down cheney, ect, really should set everyone up in arms, and holding our side accountable – that is why I find it bit rediculous. I see more outrage and petitons and such for this implied slur of a joke she cracked, than anything dealing with the major issues.

You’re kidding me, right? You can take a look at any number of people who condemened what Ann said, from Malkin on down the list, and almost everyone of them tackles issues like illegal immigration and the Dem witch hunts and everything in between on a almost daily, if not daily basis.

That is what I don’t understand is that it seems we are more concerned about this joke; this schoolyard taunt; this implied slur; she cracked than the real issues.

See above. The conservative push on multiple issues didn’t stop just because Ann Coulter made a crude ‘joke’ – but it did take notice.
Baklava says:

March 8, 2007 at 1:12 pm

I am torn. Ann makes great points but then discredits herself as a source because SHE becomes the issue. To me it’s about the issues/facts/concepts/solutions which most of the time she is right on. But now you can’t even mention her name to a lefty when trying to pursuade.

That’s a problem.

I personally don’t feel the need to go out of my way to mention her and then discredit her though but if the subject of Ann comes up I’ll say what I just said.

A CA govt. employee just asked me 2 days ago what I thought about Ann and I told her what I just said. She said she was surprised at what I said (because she always ascribes negative things to me as a conservative). She learned from this example and I pointed out the example that she really doesn’t know what I think and almost always ascribes things to me that I don’t believe. Now her outlook is changing on me. She even got interested in my take on the next presidential election. It makes progress to be in favor of decent discussions and remove the “personalities” out of the equation and it allows you to discuss the issues/solutions/facts/concepts.
Baklava says:

March 8, 2007 at 2:03 pm

You see? Ann makes great points here today. But that is irrelevant. Look at the comment’s section… 50% of the comments seem to deviate towards saying to Ann “stay the course” or “go away”. That isn’t productive.
sanity says:

March 8, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Nods, I posted that earlier Bak here, but it was under a news.yahoo link, but was the same article.

Coulter has always drawn fire, she is like a lightning rod to the left, same as Savage is, yet not sure what Savage is, since he seems to throw ‘hate’ at all sides.

I think of Coulter as more of the crazy aunt.

Question is Bak, how many in the comments are leftists who hurl hatred at most of the well-known conservatives and how many are actually right or conservatives?

I would hate to see Malkin’s email she gets, and if she ever opened up a comment section, I am sure it would look exactly like Coulter’s article comments also.

I do agree her comments do make it more about her and not the message she is trying to get out, but I have to wonder, would the message get as much play if she was less…abrasive?

I don’t know.

I also agree that what she does causes problems with what she is trying to get across, because then it becomes about her and not about what she is trying to get across when she does things like that.
Baklava says:

March 8, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Could be 300 of the 400 comments are from leftists. We can’t control them. We can only control our own selves.

If give crazy people ammo you can expect crazy people to use it. Ann is not “horrible” or “mostly wrong” and not “perfect” but it in my opinion is ok to distance yourself from comments made by her that hurts our side. It helps to distance yourself as in the coversation I had with a CA govt. employee that I outlined above.

Sanitize me wrote, “I would hate to see Malkin’s email she gets, and if she ever opened up a comment section, I am sure it would look exactly like Coulter’s article comments also.”

You know it! Actually Michelle’s blog used to have comments open a few years ago. You’ll see me as a commenter there. It was disgusting. Leftists left comments about the color of her c**t and what they would do with it and for how long. It was absolutely sick. It just about made me cry and I’m a grown man who had been through many character building experiences.

As far as I know Malkin is not Ann – and nothing Malkin has said do I feel the need to distance myself from. Malkin’s posting of addresses was a re-post of their own press release (referring to criticism of her posting addresses). Her book is on FDR’s internment was an excellent book that many who don’t read it find problems with.

What men and women in the marketplace of ideas have to endure from leftist haters is reprehensible. And if I know of a conservative spreading hate I call them on it as I did a few months back with I.M. Neiman or whatever his name was here on ST’s blog.

The only thing we can control is ourselves and we should strive to make our words and actions positive.

I know you are with me. But I hope you understand where I’m coming from with Ann. If I was Ann’s husband I know it’d be a long talk sometimes about looking at our own behavior/words.
Sister Toldjah says:

March 8, 2007 at 4:19 pm

I am posting this comment for ST reader Karl, who is having issues commenting from his current location–ST

I need to respond to both ST and Sanity, so I will try to carefully direct my comments:

ST:

” So now it’s “hypersensitive” to hold our own side to account, but holding the other side into account is perfectly sensible?
That makes no sense. I, and other people who don’t like Ann, aren’t “caving” to the left. There is nothing wrong, nor should anyone be ashamed of, holding their own side to account. The day we stop doing that is the day our party goes down the tubes. “

This problem is multi layered. First you have to assess Ann’s comments fairly, which requires looking at them in context. Yes, she did not actually call him a faggot, she just said if she talked about him, she had to use the word. She used a method know as an apophasis or perhaps a paralipsis, a way of mentioning something without mentioning it. Very canny. But sure, the implication was there.

But…

By her use of the word rehab and faggot together, she revealed the full context which was clearly a dig at the PC nature of the left that deems word use a crime using the recent Grey’s Anatomy scandal. In that sense she was spot on and I got it immediately. There is also a possible connection to the fact that Edwards hired/fired/hired a potty mouthed blogmistress, who then quit over the hoopla.

So there was a wider context that matters, and more conservatives should note that.

But…

Her remark was not that funny in or out of that context and was obviously going to offend, and Conservatives have every right to feel that warrants a certain condemnation. While I reject the association of faggot as the gay “n” word, it is still one that will generate a reaction.

Conservatives do tend to take a more consistent stance on civility and fairness and against ad hominem attacks and vulgarity then Democrats, and I don’t have a problem with anyone dealing with it on those terms.

But what bothered me was a lot of people were very focused on where she said it more then what she said, and in that, I think the conservatives have played into the democrats hands.

Yes, she made the comment at a place that clearly negated any useful context of it, because of the nature of the gathering. It was clearly going to be used not only against her, but against all conservatives. That is largely because of a false stereotype that the democrats like to exploit, that of Republicans being howling bigots. By their constant accusations about conservatives being bigots this was an easy one to see. Right or wrong, they were going to make hay of it, and she should have considered that.

And that brings us to Sanity’s comments.

” The side note on what she said, I think was blown WAY out of proportion, and I think people got hyper-sensitive. Personally, I find what damages the party and the way people think, is not what she said, because if you read it all, you would understand what she was getting at, but that if someone speaks of something you don’t like, that you abandon them or run petitions against them….even if they are the biggest proponents of truth and telling it how it is.

I think that is what damages us even more than a simple slur of “faggot” that she put in as a joke, is that because of hyper-sensitivites, we are so willing to abandon our support and cave to the wishes of the Deans and Reids of the Democrat party.”

He does have a point. We are playing into their hands to a degree. But ST, you are right, it is not caving to the left to speak against our own when we disagree with what they said. I am proud when conservatives break ranks to police their own. It proves we have values and apply them consistently, even in house. Clearly they do not.

But the left has hijacked it and they are gaining more traction on it because we have not dealt with it strictly on its moral face, we allowed them to see us treat it as a matter of political expediency.

When I read the complaints about her comment, most accepted the implied homophobia complaint and then complained about the damage done to the movement because of it.

While I see their point, I have to wonder, if the conservative movement dealt with her comment in context, on its moral face, and them condemned it on that level, I think we would be better poised to gain the high ground on that condemnation.

By addressing her comments in context and on their content, even if you disagree with them, you can still isolate them as ill timed comment of a single person, rebuke the person and fight back against the sweeping generalizations. By acting defensive, and bemoaning the damage to the movement, we appeared more concerned with political expediency, and allowed accusations of a violation of our values.

If her comment was bad on its face, then condemn it based on fairness and right thinking. That is why I will not endorse the CPAC petition. It cares more for the political ramifications then the moral ones.

And all along there is an under point that Ann is brilliant at being the focal point of. The hypocrisy of the left who condemns the right on all counts but never or rarely police’s their own. That cannot be stated enough, in context.

While that should not be thought to give Ann protected status, I think it is a point conservatives need to capitalize on better if they want to survive the spin war. It mitigates nothing, but it is a necessary item to debate.

Does that make sense?

Comment by: Karl
Mwalimu Daudi says:

March 8, 2007 at 6:25 pm

Could Edwards Become First Woman President?

For those of you old enough to remember him, perhaps John Wayne Bobbitt can become a candidate for the Democrat presidential nomination as well.
Great White Rat says:

March 9, 2007 at 9:11 am

Peggy Noonan’s take on the Coulter controversy.

Among the key points:

I realized as I watched it all play out that there’s a kind of simple way to know whether something you just heard is something that should not have been said. It is: Did it make you wince? When the Winceometer is triggered, it’s an excellent indication that what you just heard is unfortunate and ought not to be repeated.

I used the term “cringe” a couple of days ago commenting about this, but it’s the same principle.

Ms. Noonan doesn’t go as far as ST or even I would go – she thinks simply exhorting people like Coulter and Maher to be “nice” is enough. I’m not sure that would work. Almost everyone on our side agrees that Coulter’s comments were out of line, but most of the libs still defend Maher’s cheerleading for the attempted assassinations. That makes it tough to maintain a level playing field.
sanity says:

March 9, 2007 at 11:39 am

Hypocrisy from All sides it seems (liberal and certain groups):

Homosexual-rights groups employ a double standard too, it appears.

In its response to Coulter’s remarks last Friday, GLAAD not only slammed the author but accused CPAC itself of promoting “discriminatory policies,” and GLAAD president Neil Giuliano called on media organizations — NBC News in particular — to stop offering Coulter a platform.

Three years ago, however, GLAAD took a rather different approach when rapper 50 Cent told Playboy magazine, “I ain’t into faggots … We refer to gay people as faggots, as homos. It could be disrespectful, but that’s the facts.”

In that instance, GLAAD responded with a polite — almost respectful — press release expressing “concern” about the comments, and inviting 50 Cent to attend GLAAD’s annual media awards.

And no, there was no suggestion that anyone stop giving the platinum-selling New York “gangsta” a platform.

Link

Read the link, has an excellent breakdown from other blogs / bloggers / groups / and even governmental staff that have used the same term.

Just thought it would be interesting to read some hypocrisy while drinking coffee.

I guess it is what you call selective outrage? Similiar to selective hearing, but that is something only husbands seem to have…..

..at least that is what my wife tells me.

[chuckles]
sanity says:

March 9, 2007 at 11:46 am

Justice Dept.: FBI Misused Patriot Act

WASHINGTON (AP) – The FBI improperly and, in some cases, illegally used the USA Patriot Act to secretly obtain personal information about people in the United States, underreporting for three years how often it forced businesses to turn over customer data, a Justice Department audit concluded Friday.

FBI agents sometimes demanded the data without proper authorization, according to a 126-page audit by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine. At other times, the audit found, the FBI improperly obtained telephone records in non-emergency circumstances.

The audit blames agent error and shoddy record-keeping for the bulk of the problems and did not find any indication of criminal misconduct.

Still, “we believe the improper or illegal uses we found involve serious misuses of national security letter authorities,” the audit concludes.

Link

Ok isn’t this a contradiction in itself?

It didn’t find any criminal misconduct, but “they believe the improper or illegal uses found”, seems to be contradictory.

Sounds like more than an audit needs to be done at the FBI level.

But remember, they are more trustworthy than Libby though……

Agent errors and shoddy record-keeping – and yet they had such good memories and well-written notes from Libby.

Still think something stinks to high heaven with the Libby trial.
karl says:

March 9, 2007 at 11:49 am

the problem is that everyone’s wince meters are not synched, so certain people trigger too quickly and others not quick enough.
Baklava says:

March 9, 2007 at 5:34 pm

China boosts military spending by 18%. It’s 17th double digit increase in 18 years.

Comments are closed.