OediPOTUS Wrecks: Scene I

by Smitty

(Start here) Character List
Synopsis:

1. In the Prologue, a Rose Garden press conference announces a connection between the tanked economy to a monstrous evil pertaining to the death of the 42nd POTUS.
2. Scene I brings in a prophetess with a palindromic name and a chip on her shoulder. Verbal sparring ensues, ending in an accusation.

Still in the Rose Garden.

OediPOTUS Wrecks: Everyone unite behind me! I admit that I'm johnny-come-lately come to this quagmire. I don't mind being responsible for the cleanup, but I do want the obstructionists to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess.

Let me be perfectly clear: we're going to have an ex-Presidential Assassination Investigation Czar going over this case with a fine-toothed comb and a magnet. He'll be reporting to me, so I can make sure that none of the information discovered is distorted by the usual suspects, and goes instead directly to the people.

Whoever is responsible for the death of Jefferson Williams is going down. I will not hesitate to pardon anyone helping to solve the mystery that my incompetent predecessor left for me to solve, even if they're worried about self-incrimination. My word is more powerful than the 5th Amendment. Oh guilty one: you are pardoned in advance. Merely come forward, help us reach justice, and help the economy so terribly beset by this evil.

Jefferson Williams was an honorable American; not to denigrate my own father, but I would have been proud to call President Williams 'dad'. Sadly, he had no sons to avenge his demise, so that duty falls to me. As always, I rise to the occasion.

Matthew Olberchrist: I swear it wasn't me, but I have a suggestion: why not ask the Oracle that pointed out the problem where to find the perpetrator?

OW: Excellent point, but who commands destiny? Surely not one as humble as I.

MO: There is someone, some say a clairvoyant. You do remember your election opponent, Hanah, from the opposition ticket?

OW: Her fame is well known, and I've authorized Ramen to send for her. You'd think she'd have had time to heal from the 2008 election and trek here from Alaska by now.

MO: About that old investigation file from Jefferson's death: it seems rather useless. However, anyone still alive who knows anything should be shaken loose by your proclamation. We should start a fresh round of hearings.

Enter blind Hanah, led by a functionary.

MO: Here is someone whose instincts and knowledge may help.

OW: Hanah, oh ye of the palin-dromic name (heh). They say you know most everything, with the exception of how to win elections. You know the economic situation. You've no doubt heard the rumors surrounding this old crime that must be solved before we can turn the corner on this unpleasantness.

If you have any wisdom that you can lend to the problem, I shall thank you in advance for the patriotic help you lend.

Hanah: Looks like I picked the wrong week to go cold turkey on the kickin' chicken[1]. This ain't goin' to go well. Can I just leave?

OW: How ungracious! How can you ignore the plight of your country?

H: Easy. There's no pickin' up a turd by the clean end. And that's about what you got here, mister. I'd rather quit while I'm behind. You brought me here to make fun of me. I was told a serious discussion is why you called me up.

OW: For heaven's sake, we beg you--

H: Keep begging. When you reach sincerity, heaven may hear. 'Til then, I'll keep the misery to myself.

OW: So you do know something, yet you place your feelings above the State? Selfish woman!

H: If I thought there was a point, I'd tell you. What part of "NO" didn't you get? The N, or the O?

OW: You are so out of line! Can you not grasp the crisis? Are you out of your mind?

H: You callin' me crazy? Heh, if only you could see yourself.

OW: In my office, you'd be equally upset. We're awash in crisis, you have information, and you're not sharing. How does this help?

H: Like it makes a difference. We're doomed, dude. It's gonna get us.

OW: What is this "it"?

H: Takin' the Fifth, bucko. Rage, as if against the machine.

OW: Rage? Why not? I think this is all your doing. You set the whole scenario up, you and henchmen, just to engineer your own sort of coup. Had you eyes, I'd say you killed Jefferson Williams yourself.

H: Oh, really? Since you accuse me, I'll return the favor. Your own curse comes back to haunt you, for you killed Jefferson Williams.

OW: Oh, "Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not," said King Lear, and it applies to you, as well. Should you be allowed to go free, after this hate speech?

H: I am free, in the truth.

OW: Slander! I thought you, rather, a speaker of knowledge. Where did you learn such?

H: From you. I'd have kept my peace, but you made me say it.

OW: Say what? I heard you echo an accusation.

H: Wasn't it clear the first time?

OW: Again, for the internet audience.

H: I said you are the murderer you seek.

OW: That's twice!

H: More? Where is this gettin' us?

OW: Say anything, no one believes your lies.

H: I say you live a life of twisted shame, and you're blind to your own evil.

OW: Oh, sure. Troll on.

H: No problem, when what I say is true.

OW: If only you knew the truth, you sightless, witless, senseless, mad old crone.

H: That would be you. Mad as a hatter. Soon they'll all curse you, for that matter.

OW: Look, you have no power. You're like so many fools trying to question my birth certificate.

H: That's for sure. Your fate comes from elsewhere. Jimmie crack corn, and I never cared two hoots in the first place. Others do, though.

OW: Who, Ramen?

H: Pshaw. Ramen's not your problem. You are your problem.

OW: How could I not see Ramen's hand in all of this? He has been present at every turn, aiding my ascension, and now standing to reap the fortune of my woe.

MO: Both of you are overly passionate right now. How is this helping? Kum-ba-yah, my Lord, kum-ba-yah...

H: You are the President. But that don't mean the 1st Amendment is a Rodney Dangerfield joke. You mock my disability? I see more clearly than you, bub. Your life is too messed up for Jerry Springer. Do you really know who your parents are? Go ahead. Blame me. Blame Ramen. You put the F in "false".

OW: OK, I've had enough of you. Begone.

H: Wouldn't have come here in the first place, if I could have avoided it, you clown.

OW: How was I supposed to anticipate you'd act a total fool?

H: Fool? Your parents said I was sane.

OW: Again, my parents. Who were they then, in your wisdom?

H: This day will reveal your father. Break your heart, too.

OW: More facts, less crap! I don't have time for your conundrums.

H: You won an election talkin' up your skill at solving them.

OW: Keep up the mockery.

H: Your skill at solving problems made your main one.

H turns to functionary.

May I have your hand, please?

OW: Yes, lead this hag from my site.

H: At my age, I can speak my mind to any audience. The murderer of Jefferson Williams is here in DC. He'll be found rather close to the victim, but that revelation won't please a soul. He's a blind man, currently sighted, a beggar with bank, at the moment. He loves his mother with an affection some might call strange.

Let me know later if I got that wrong, and then you can say I should stick to palm reading.


Exit H stage left, OW center

Scene II

---

[1] Wild Turkey
Copyright 2009, Christopher L. Smith

Aurelio Vallerillo-Sanchezis so totally going to Hell

Worst. Rapist. Evah!

OMAHA, Neb. — A Nebraska man who stole a painting of the Virgin Mary to finance an abortion for a teen he raped has been convicted of first-degree sexual assault and felony theft.
Aurelio Vallerillo-Sanchez, 39, of Omaha pleaded no contest to the charges Friday . . .
Beadle said Vallerillo-Sanchez fled to Mexico with the 300-year-old painting worth $100,000 and the pregnant teen in March 2007.
"The plan was that when they got to Mexico, she was to undergo an abortion," she said.
When an abortion wasn't possible, Vallerillo-Sanchez pushed to have the baby given up for adoption, Beadle said: "He wanted to do everything he could to get rid of this baby 'cause it was evidence against him."
The teen returned to Nebraska after giving birth, the prosecutor said.
Vallerillo-Sanchez was arrested in February after DNA linked him to the September 2006 assault of the then-14-year-old girl.

Hat-tip to Ann Coulter, who remarks:

"He better hope liberals are right about there being no God."

Miss Coulter knows, of course, that liberals are wrong about everything.

Trig Truther research guy 'Patrick' researches . . . hot WebCam action?

What wonderful characters these crusaders for Truth -- note the capital "T" -- inevitably prove to be!

Back in the spring, when "Audrey" at Palin's Deceptions was doing a land-office business posting photographic "evidence" pulled from the Internet (perhaps significantly including MySpace pages), she was assisted by "Patrick (PD research)," who since has begun Twittering as "Palin Deceives." Here is one typical posting by Patrick:

the confirmation that Bristol worked as a Barista at Nordstrom in Anchorage in June/July 2007 can be found in SP's financial disclosure form for 2007 - download:
http://www.box.net/shared/7u1bxqm3ba
We have also a confirmation of this fact by another source which we cannot disclose.
We also know for sure that Bristol worked at PacSun in Anchorage in June 2007, and it is interesting to note that this job is not mentioned in the financial disclosure form. It is actually possible that the engagement at PacSun was cut short...
Patrick (PD research)

Oh, and here's another sweet one from Patrick:

I am not a journalist. If I were, I would pick up this story with no hesitation, because a simple research of the facts which are already known to the public shows without any doubt that Sarah’s birth story has to be wrong. . . .
In my opinion, it’s certain that Sarah Palin has not given birth to Trig. And Sarah is truly vicious, because she now uses Trig more and more aggressively for her political purposes . . .

Well, as Patrick says, he is not a journalist. I am, and "a simple research of the facts" shows that "Patrick (PD research)" used a Yahoo e-mail account: patrick12344[AT]yahoo.com. That link is to a Google search, and a bit more specific search shows that "Patrick (PD research)" likes him some "Free Web Cam" action. (NTTAWWT.)

Ah, but under his Yahoo account, Patrick was telling the Web Cam hotties: "hi baby my msn are curvers_23[at]hotmail.com," and if you search for that e-mail address . . . well, NTTAWWT.

UPDATE: As I was researching this, I came across this "Audrey" posting from Aug. 1 about "breaking news . . . too hot to ignore" :

About four hours ago, on Alaska blog Immoral Minority, the news comes: Sarah and Todd Palin plan to split. The Alaska Report follows suit.
I too have sources in Alaska. Over the last week, I have also heard rumors of things not being quite right at the Palin abode.

Right, "Audrey" -- you've got "sources in Alaska," and your sources are as full of crap as Jesse Griffin and Dennis Zaki. You idiots never know when to stop trying to milk those 15 minutes of anti-Palin fame, do you?

UPDATE II: Breaking new legal ground, in the comments below, "Patrick" accuses me of defaming his Internet pseudonym. Think about that.

The case of "Patrick12344" v. McCain could establish an important precedent for the landmark Supreme Court decision in Doe v. "HotBiChrlder19."

UPDATE III: More fun with moonbats: "Patrick12344" (who insists he most certainly would never look at a Free Web Cam) presumes to lecture us on "facts" and what constitutes an acceptable level of online proof. He then proceeds to claim that photos of Bristol Palin looking a little chubby in fall 2007 constitute definitive proof that Bristol is Trig's real mother -- because no teenage girl has ever gained weight unless she was pregnant -- and then, to top it all off, tells me that I owe him a retraction!

Patrick, you need to get a dictionary and look up the word "effrontery," which I believe you'll find a few pages past "douchebag."

PREVIOUSLY:

• 'Just Asking Questions' (Uncut Version)
• 'The Facts Are Well Known'
• Who is 'AnnieB393'?
• A Trig-Truther's Anonymity

Trig Trutherism, 'Audrey' and Sully:'Just Asking Questions' (Uncut Version)

NOTE: I had this ready to post last night, but hesitated because I wondered if she was worth it. Ah, he who hesitates is lost! And so Aaron Gardner beat me to it. But here is what I had written. -- RSM

When you're a Trig Truther just asking questions -- "Who's not your mama?" being the latest question from "Audrey" at the Palin's Deceptions blog -- sometimes people might get the idea you're dropping hints and perhaps making unsavory insinuations that you don't have the moxy to state outright.

A declarative statement might be proven false, but an insinuation made by just asking questions tends to foster suspicions difficult to disprove simply because they are so darned nebulous.

For example, the moonbats obsessed with Sarah Palin's fifth pregnancy -- when she gave birth to Trig, whom no self-respecting moonbat considers to be Sarah's actual son -- frequently discuss this alleged pseudo-pregnancy in relation to Palin's daughter Bristol. Here is our friend "Audrey":

In particular, Bristol’s attendance during the 2007-08 school year has been questioned on this site and on others. This school year, of course, is the focus of our interest. Why? . . . Someone had to be pregnant with Trig Palin during most of what would have been the 2007 - 2008 school year. If it were not Sarah Palin, it had to be someone else. Period.

And more recently, "Audrey" wrote:

[F]ormer [Anchorage Daily News] editor Michael Carey gave an interview with PBS on September 2nd . . . Carey had not heard that Bristol was pregnant as of September 1 at all. But he had heard that Sarah had faked a pregnancy to cover for Bristol the previous spring.

Many more such examples could be cited. One gets the idea, given the proximity with which these two phenomena (Trig and Bristol) are discussed by these Truthers, that the moonbats are insinuating that Bristol is actually Trig's mother, and Sarah his grandmother, and that this was the "deception" which inspired the name of "Audrey's" blog.

Such insinuations collapse at first contact with reality:

• Bristol Palin gave birth to her own son, "a healthy 7 lb., 7 oz., baby boy . . . Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston," on Dec. 29, 2008.
• Trig Paxson Van Palin was born on April 18, 2008.

What the Trig Truthers are trying to insinuate is that Bristol gave birth in April, conceived again almost immediately after Trig's delivery and then, barely eight months after the birth of her first child, delivered her second child -- healthy and apparently full-term -- shortly after Christmas.

To the extent that this is not a medical impossibility, it certainly seems both unlikely and unnatural to say nothing of what we bloggers sometimes call "nucking futs."

This is especially true considering that Trig was born with Down Syndrome, a condition clearly associated with advanced maternal age (Sarah Palin, d.o.b. Feb. 11, 1964, was 44 when Trig was born) and quite rare among the offspring of teenage mothers (Bristol, d.o.b. Oct. 18, 1990, was 17 when Trig was born).

Given the basic biological/mathematical dubiousness of the Bristol-as-Trig's-real-mom theory, the Down Syndrome factor adds powerful dispositive evidence of the moonbat Trig Truther hypothesis. See this chart on the age-related risk factor for Down Syndrome, which I first cited Sept. 1, 2008:

For women ages 20-24, the frequency of Downs Syndrome is 1 in every 1,400 live births. By age 35, however, the frequency is 1 in every 350 births -- a quadrupling of risk. At age 39, the frequency is 1/140 -- 10 times the risk at age 20-24.

And yet here we are, nearly a year later, and "Audrey" is still peddling her moonbat crap, OK?

Her name is not "Audrey."

Given her persistence in promoting a theory against which so much evidence weighs, it is a fair supposition that The Person Whose Name Is Not Audrey is either (a) stupid, (b) crazy or (c) dishonest. Perhaps even (d) all of the above.

Dan Riehl finds evidence of dishonesty by The Person Whose Name Is Not Audrey. And we shall let her obsessive Trig Trutherism serve as abundant evidence that she's crazy. What about the evidence that she's stupid?

Well, before we get to that, let's mention that The Person Whose Name Is Not Audrey is not just any random, insignificant moonbat. Her crackpot insinuations have been repeatedly cited and linked by that most eminent of Trig Truthers, Dr. Andrew Sullivan, M.D., OB-GYN, chief resident of the renowned Alaska Republican Obstetric Research Clinic at The Atlantic Monthly Memorial Hospital.

• "Audrey" blogs, Sully links.
• "Audrey" blogs, Sully links.
• Sully blogs, "Audrey" links.

Lather, rinse, repeat. While certain right-wing hatemongers have dared question Dr. Sullivan's authority on matters gynecological, no one has ever questioned the Good Doctor's expertise on the penis.

Dr. Sullivan's decades of tireless phallic research have led him to a breakthrough discovery, yea, even the answer to a question that penis aficionados have debated endlessly:

Cut or Uncut?

The answer, according to Dr. Sullivan, is most definitely "uncut." (The alternative he decries as "male genital mutilation.") The man's unrivaled enthusiasm for the uncircumcised penis puts him foremost among foreskin fetishists.

Well, guess what, boys and girls? Foreskin fetishists of a feather flock together. I refer you to "AnnieB393":

Personal Info
Audrey (Not tellin')
Lives in charlottesville, USA 22901
Homepage
http://www.palindeception.com/
Interests
midwifery
Who am I
I am a childbirth educator and midwife's assistant

And this reminder from Palin's Deceptions:

The facts are well-known: I am Audrey, a mother of six, childbirth educator and author . . .

OK, then, if we Google "AnnieB393" and "Charlottesville," one of the results is entitled "Contact Circumcision Author," and if we click on the "similiar" link we find this leads us to the "order" page for a book entitled, Circumcision: What Every Parent Should Know.

Google "Charlottesville" "circumcision" "childbirth" "classes" and you then learn about the author of aforesaid book:

She has been active in childbirth circles for over twenty years. Her interest in neonatal circumcision stems from the numerous questions she received on the topic during her childbirth classes.

Remember, friends, that this is merely intended as evidence that The Person Whose Name Is Not Audrey is (a) stupid. Because if you start poking around a bit on Google using "AnnieB393" and other such data as may be derived from online research . . .

Well, all this was as easy as following Hansel and Gretel's bread-crumb trail. I'm kind of new at all this blogging stuff, having been a professional journalist since 1986. Certainly, no professional journalist would post the actual name of The Person Whose Name Is Not Audrey.

But these crazy blogger people . . .

PREVIOUSLY:

• 'The Facts Are Well Known'
• Who is 'AnnieB393'?
• A Trig-Truther's Anonymity

She's insignificant and she has a family

Such is the "don't do it" argument against outing the blogger "Audrey" at the Palin's Deception blog.

On the other hand, she's Patient Zero of the Trig Truther pandemic, she's been repeatedly linked by Andrew Sullivan, and her most recent post had 94 comments.

I'm weighing these considerations. I'm also weighing the utter stupidity of the aforesaid "Audrey," who has practically outed herself, leaving an online bread-crumb trail like Hansel and Gretel. And the relentless cruelty of the Truthers . . .

If I don't do it, somebody else is likely to add 2+2 and get the traffic. And I'm all about the traffic.

Understand, people, that I've got the entire post already written, and must now merely decide whether to hit the "publish" button. And this is the thing that gets me about "Audrey."

She has children of her own, and yet apparently never hesitated to hit "publish" on some of the most vile insinuations about Sarah Palin's family anyone could ever imagine. I think of my own wife and children, and hesitate to publish the simple facts. Audrey published lie after lie after lie -- and evidently never thought twice about it.

UPDATE 12:13 a.m., 8/25: Y'know, Sully's on vacation. Think about that. Sully relentlessly beat the Trig Truther drum, repeatedly linking "Audrey" at Palin's Deceptions, and now Sully's on vacation, with guestbloggers to run his prestigious blog at The Atlantic Monthly while he's gone.

The Atlantic Monthly bears tremendous responsibility here. So as I ponder this decision, I'm kind of wondering, "What Would James Fallows Do?"

And also, "What Would Ace of Spades Do?"

UPDATE 12:20 a.m. 8/25: Doggone it! Didn't I tell you? Some clever fellow named Aaron Gardner beat me to it!

UPDATE 1 a.m.: He who hesitates is lost! (If only I hadn't been cruelly deprived of those Special Genius Cells contained in the foreskin . . .)

Bill Whittle fans: probably his best yet

by Smitty

First, to make you prim and proper, a primer: The History of Politcal Correctness.

This link also embeds the HoPC documentary, but acts as a sort of transcript.

Now, watch Bill Whittle expand on this documentary with a passion and contemporary tie-in that will likely leave you stunned.

I subscribed to PJTV when it was still experimental. I hope you consider supporting this wellspring of excellence.

My only question, and a quick Google and Wikipedia scan bore no fruit, is the tie between Saul Alinsky and this Frankfurt School.

Let me see if I can explain, Allahpundit

by Smitty

Reacting to AmSpec's concerns about re-branding 9/11 as a National Day of Service, Allahpundit plays the 'so, what?' card:

What it sounds like, though, is that AmSpec's claiming this is some sort of nefarious plot to brainwash the country into forgetting what happened that day — i.e. to "reshape the American psyche." Er, really? Leftist phone banks about gun control are going to dim the memory of jihadists steering jumbo jets into the World Trade Center? That’s kind of like saying that if the left declared December 7 to be Drum Circle Day henceforth, the memory of Pearl Harbor would fade beneath the din of the sweet, soulful tapping on those bongos. Frankly, if there are any political repercussions from this at all (which I doubt), I'd imagine they'd redound to the advantage of hawks. Passing a crowd of college kids chanting about ethanol when you’re busy thinking about people jumping out of skyscrapers isn't likely to convince you of the merits of ethanol, but it may convince you that those kids are callous douches who don’t have their priorities in order. What am I missing here?

A few points, Allahpundit:

• You're probably not a representative sample. Left un-interrupted, they will render all the youth in this country into so much clay. Just watch some "Jay Walking" on YouTube. The kids are not all right.
  
• This is the most propaganda-oriented administration in US history.
• Pearl Harbor was not an attack upon the Great Satan that 9/11 was. While both events bore their fruit, this is in some ways an apple/orange comparison.
• As with the release of the Lockerbie bomber, there may well be some external drivers.

Do I think that there is deliberate manipulation afoot? Of course: we have an Alinskyite in the White House.

Is the blowback a distraction? Perhaps. If everyone just ignores the Community Organizer in Chief and supports Project 2996 instead, that might be an improvement.

OediPOTUS Wrecks: First Blog Review!

by Smitty

The Camp of the Saints wins three whole internets!

Granted, this is a bit of a cheat: because Bob supports this blog so well, I emailed him the whole enchilada, plus some of the background notes. Also, I gather he's familiar with the original work that I'm abusing.

Nevertheless, here is an excerpt, just in case you want to borrow from his impressive ego-massage technique:

Short Review: Love it!

Full Review: Smitty has taken the classic story of the tragic Greek king and meshed it wonderfully with the spirit of the story of Barack Hussein Obama to form an amusingly witty take on the current political scene, complete with the classic theme of vaulting ambition. It is an old truth that Hubris begets Nemesis [When the Fates are against you, watch out.], and we have been living through seven long months of Hubris Gone Wild. The time is right for a corrective and Smitty supplies it, if only fictionally. We may find, however, that he is our Delphic Oracle.

'I Did Not Have Blogospheric Relations With That Corndog . . .'

On Sunday, Smitty did some Rule 5 linkage to frequent commenter Red's cleverly-named "Caught Him With a Corndog" blog. Red was so thrilled by this that she put up a post with this unfortunately suggestive headline:

Rockstar Blogger
Throws Me a Bone!

Given Red's blog name -- combined with the fact that a few of our commenters have of late indulged in risque slang -- I just want to make one thing clear: In the immortal words of Mr. Potato Head from that cinematic classic Toy Story 2, "I'm a married spud! I'm a married spud!"

Despite Red's insinuation of bone-throwing, Smitty is also a married spud. And considering that Red is herself wed in holy potatomony, I'd hate for Mr. Red to get any wrong ideas. Now, let's all enjoy some wholesome family entertainment:

Who Is Trig Truther 'Audrey'?'The Facts Are Well Known . . .'

Because Dan Riehl and I are currently in Trig-Truther "just asking questions" mode here, of course we cannot claim to know that "AnnieB393" is the same person as "Audrey" of the Palin's Deceptions blog.

We can, however, point out the evidence that they share the same obsession, such as this comment by "AnnieB393" on a YouTube video showing Sarah Palin at the 2008 IronDog race:

When you watch this video remember this woman is supposed to be nearly seven months pregnant with her fifth child.

Or this comment by "AnnieB393" at HuffPo:

Let's be accurate here. The blog picture you refer to identifies Sarah Palin as "mommy in law," not grandmother. It seems fairly obvious from the photographs that Mercede Johnston (Levi Johnston's younger sister) views herself as having some relationship with baby Trig that seems to go well beyond "good friend's little brother" or "future brother in law of my brother," but what exactly it is is not clear. These photos are discussed here: http://www.palindeception.com/blog/2008/11/at-long-last.html
It is also interesting to note, however, that allegations that Sarah was Trig's grandmother were published in comments on Anchorage Daily News in response to Trig's birth announcement with four hours of the announcement being posted, on April 18th . While Gov. Palin would like people to believe that this whole story is something concocted to hurt her after her V.P. pick, this is categorically false.

Well, that certainly is interesting! "AnnieB393" cites "Audrey" as her source for information on photos of the Palin/Johnston families!

OK, so now -- "Just asking questions," remember -- let us ask, who does "Audrey" say she is?

The facts are well-known: I am Audrey, a mother of six, childbirth educator and author, lactation consultant married to a physician.

So, if "Audrey" is a "childbirth educator and author," what about "AnnieB393"?

Personal Info
Audrey (Not tellin')
Lives in charlottesville, USA 22901
Homepage
http://www.palindeception.com
Interests
midwifery
Who am I
I am a childbirth educator and midwife's assistant

Of course, we're just asking questions, right? So while I already know the identity of "AnnieB393" -- and I know what book she has authored -- my question now is: Are all these apparently connections between "Audrey" and "AnnieB393" just random and coincidental? Is it possible that someone is engaged in deception to make us think there is a connection that is more than random and coincidental?

Because this could all be merely another one of those "Palin's Deceptions," I suppose.

It looks like Dan Riehl has some more questions.

UPDATE 8/25: While I hesitated about whether to go further, the 2+2 formula was added up by Aaron Gardener, which sort of rendered moot my own post on the "foreskin friend" and Palin-hater.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Who is 'AnnieB393'?
• A Trig-Truther's anonymity

Trig-Trutherism and Audrey's Deceptions: Who Is 'AnnieB393'?

On April 22, 2008, the Daily News-Miner of Fairbanks, Alaska, carried a story by Rebecca George about the birth of Trig Palin headlined, "Palin says she felt safe flying to Alaska to have baby."

On Sept. 13, 2008, "AnnieB393" added a comment on that story, reprinted here in its entirety:

I am a midwife, and am happy to comment on some of the information here. First, with all due respect to thehardway, there is no different to a medical professional between a women whose aminiotic sac is leaking and one where it is "broken." It might be more dramatic in movies but that's it. I have no idea what happened with your mother fifty years ago, but now any woman who had a similar circumstance would be hospitalized. In my midwifery career I have seen one mother on her fifth delivery give birth after two hours of "leaking" aminiotic fluid and ONE contraction. There is NO WAY an experienced mother who has had four previous deliveries leaking amniotic fluid would get on an airplane and no physician who would permit it. Period.
Second, IF Bristol Palin is the mother and did not breastfeed, it would have been theoretically possible for her to conceive again within six weeks of the birth. She easily could be pregnant again.. just not five months.
Third, it is clearly established on the Internet that the rumors that Bristol and NOT Sarah was pregnant began in Alaska BEFORE the birth, not after. No one can know if the Palins were aware of them, but they are well-connected and savvy, so it is certainly reasonable to assume they did. What did they do? Did they set up a photo-op of Governor Palin baby clothes shopping with her three daughters? Did they invited camera crews into the governor's mansion to show the family painting the nursery? One (ONE!) photo of a pregnant Governor with her non pregnant daughter would have shut all of the down, then and now. They didn't do it. It's valid to wonder why. (Emphasis added.)

On Sept. 15, 2008, in her first post at the Palin's Deception blog, "Audrey" posted this:

But the very first day - when I heard the brief news blurb about how Gov. Palin had traveled twelve plus hours supposedly with ruptured membranes with her fifth child, I could not believe it. My first thought was that it probably was not true . . . because, after all, no one really would do that. Then when the story persisted, my opinion changed to: was she effing nuts? Something is really wrong with this picture.
In my labor coaching and childbirth experience, I have personally seen one (fifth) baby born after two hours or so of "leaking" amniotic fluid followed by ONE contraction. And while this is admittedly an extreme example, I've seen MANY third, fourth, fifth or more (I worked for awhile among the Amish community) babies deliver after just an hour or two of "active labor." It's NOT uncommon. And the moment that amniotic sac ruptures (whether it's a "leak" or something more dramatic) believe me the clock starts clicking. The whole story just "bugged" me on some level... and this was long before I'd seen any references to the "baby swap." Then, when THAT hit the Internet, I had an "aha!" moment. (Emphasis added.)

Just to be sure you didn't miss that, here is "AnnieB393" at the News-Miner on Sept. 13:

In my midwifery career I have seen one mother on her fifth delivery give birth after two hours of "leaking" aminiotic fluid and ONE contraction.

And here is "Audrey" at Palin's Deceptions Sept. 15:

In my labor coaching and childbirth experience, I have personally seen one (fifth) baby born after two hours or so of "leaking" amniotic fluid followed by ONE contraction.

If there were no other evidence available online, a reasonable person might ask merely on the basis of these two posts whether "AnnieB393" and "Audrey" were one and the same.

Oh, but I did not say this was the only evidence available online, did I? Remember the post a couple of hours ago, in which I noted this claim from "Audrey":

As has been stated so many other places, it is incomprehensible that a doctor would not have told Gov. Palin to go to a hospital immediately and get checked out. . . . (Or, as my physician husband has quipped: "I must have missed that day in medical school.") (Emphasis added.)

So "Audrey" says she's married to a doctor. If "Audrey" is "AnnieB393" -- who is known to be a real flesh-and-blood person, but whom I won't name now -- then this is most curious, as research indicates no evidence that "AnnieB393" is married to a doctor.

Dan Riehl may have more soon. Remember, however, that in the grand tradition of Trig Trutherism, we're "just asking questions." Stay tuned for updates.

UPDATE 4:45 p.m.: "The Facts Are Well Known"

'Palin's Deceptions' and aTrig-Truther's Anonymity

The anti-Palin blog "Palin's Deceptions" proudly proclaims itself "The Web site that started it all" -- a link to the original site, "Sarah Palin's Lies," of which the blog is part -- and "all" in this case is that notorious fever swamp of obstetric speculation known as Trig Trutherism.

Palin's Deceptions blogger "Audrey," in her first post dated Sept. 15, 2008, began a discussion of the bizarre Trig-Truther theory this way:

"In my labor coaching and childbirth experience . . ."

So, from Day One, "Audrey" offered her professional expertise in support of this speculation that Trig was not actually Sarah Palin's child. And it was not merely her own expertise that she cited:

As has been stated so many other places, it is incomprehensible that a doctor would not have told Gov. Palin to go to a hospital immediately and get checked out. . . . (Or, as my physician husband has quipped: "I must have missed that day in medical school.") (Emphasis added.)

Now, I wish to raise a question in blog ethics: When an anonymous blogger claims a special expertise in a field, so as to support a particular line of personal attack on a public figure, has that blogger thereby made her own real-life identity a matter relevant to the discussion?

This is not strictly a hypothetical question. IYKWIMAITYD.

Given that there is an actual answer involved -- that "Audrey" is in fact a flesh-and-blood human being whose identity can be discovered -- what I'm wondering is how best to share that answer.

Would readers prefer that I adopt the favorite mode of Trig-Truthers? "Just asking questions," as they say.

Please feel free to comment. I've got 28 browser windows open, and must start compiling the next post before I crash my laptop. Guess who else may be interested?

UPDATE 4 p.m.: "Who is 'AnnieB393'?" Remember, "Just asking questions."

They're sorry!

"That squeaking sound at night isn't crickets. It's people scraping the Obama stickers off their bumpers."

OediPOTUS Wrecks: Prologue

by Smitty

Character Listing

Prologue

A Press Conference in the Rose Garden.

OediPOTUS: My fellow Americans. I have done a wonderful job, as you know, in spite of the naysayers. I have saved you from the threat of another failed President like Sphinxor, rescuing you out from under the bus of his tyranny, restoring the economy, renewing the place of the United States in the world. Thank you for coming here today, but please temper the adulation. One would not wish to grow egotistical in the process of serving such a flawed, but not entirely irredeemable country.

Now, I understand that some on the other side are continuing to spread misinformation, so I've called this conference to gather the straight dope.

Thomasina? As the senior member of the press corps, I'm sure that you've located the pulse of what you think is gnawing at the people. Please give us the unfiltered, no-spin details. You'll find me, as always, the soul of helpfulness.

Thomasina Helenson: Mr. President, peace be upon you. And also on the poor of the country, one in four of whom lack employment, thanks to the Sphinxor; while the drought destroys the harvest thanks to the weather; and trade is non-existent, thanks to the ill-will pent up against our land during the previous administration around the world.

We understand that you're but a mortal, albeit one of surpassing intellect and urbane upbringing.

We know that, lacking your wise counsel, things would be two to three times as bad, according to MoveOn.org.

However, we need more. It is not enough that you have saved the banks, and the auto industry, and fought valiantly to ensure fairness, justice, and equality for all Americans, taking the good fight into the teeth of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy to Thwart Progress. We need action, and we need it quickly, to save us from the demagogues who, even now, stir up discontent against your wise policies, citing ancient documents whose words have lost all meaning.

OW: I feel your question. Let me respond. You may be sure that I knew of these haters, peddling falsehood and fear in an attempt to derail the recovery. No one feels the pain of the empty belly of the child in the bread line more than I. The pain is such that even the blessing of rest escapes me, in my anguish. I have sent the members of Congress to scour the planet in search of clues, to check against my internal grasp of what must be done. For example, Charlie Rangel has gone to the Punta Cana Yacht Club in the Dominican Republic in search of ideas. Also, Chris Dodd has repaired to a shack in Ireland, and intends a stop by the Oracle, in Devon, England, in search of clues. The country is in the very best of hands.

TH: And here is your Chief of Staff, Ramen Lewis Cyphre, perhaps with a report.

OW: And what good news do you have for the American people, Ramen?

Ramen Lewis Cyphre: Great challenges will be overcome, so long as we remain united.

OW: Listening to my speeches on your iPod yields dividends, though we need to work on your pacing. Nevertheless, can you be more specific and forceful? The people hear you not, over the growling of the collective belly.

RLC: Can you not allow me to indulge my usual modesty? The news is somewhat…complex, and may digest better initially in confidence.

OW: Ramen, your usual demure behavior can not be given free reign in a situation this dire. The people suffer, and I with them, not the least of which due to these delays in communicating information. Out with it.

RLC: Fair enough. The report from Dodd is that his cottage needs a new roof, and Devon reports that we must "expel from the land…an old defilement we are sheltering. It is a deathly thing, beyond cure; we must not let it feed upon us longer."

OW: What is Devon on about? How do we rid ourselves of this…foe betting against Hope and Change?

RLC: Exile or death. Murder helped this foulness rise to become a threat.

OW: Murder? While I never had time to prosecute much, focusing on rising to the level where I could do battle with the naysayers, I would love to have a Perry Mason moment. Who is the victim, and when can we get a 'reliable' special prosecutor in from Chicago, just in case the truth becomes inconvenient?

RLC: President Jefferson Williams, your predecessor's predecessor.

OW: JW, Secretary of State Cthulia Williams' husband? Would that I'd had the chance to meet him. Poor, widowed Cthulia, who struggled nearly as hard as I do against the forces of conservative darkness in this land. I don't remember the details of the investigation. Didn't President Sphinxor find evidence of a terrorist plot and knock over a banana republic somewhere over that?

RLC: There was evidence and an invasion, yes. However, the Oracle seems to indicate that the case should be re-opened.

OW: OK, Mr. Cypher. You know that openness is the hallmark of my administration. Members of the press corps can filter out as they need to. Now, I'm sure you would not have come out here without facts at your fingertips: how did Williams die?

RLC: As the chief servants in the country are wont to do, Williams went to Martha's Vineyard, after Sphinxor was sworn in, to console his losing Vice President, Jay Pettifogger. There was a car accident, with only one survivor.

OW: Terrible. Did the survivor offer evidence?

RLC: Little.

OW: And?

RLC: Williams had cut his Secret Service detail down to the one car. There was an ambush at the Chappaquiddick ferry terminal. The guards were overwhelmed when attackers hit the car in a head-on, suicide attack.

OW: Tragic. Probably revenge over some foreign-policy thing we can't discuss right here, one expects.

RLC: Indeed. The evidence seemed to lead to Zambiniland, and President Sphinxor, in his bumbling way, made a cock-up of the whole situation.

OW: Sphinxor's cock-up; our arse. Once more, I must step in and wipe up after the Sphinxor. The Oracle doesn't lie. We must pursue this threat to the end, wherever the facts take us. Who knows? There could be another sleeper cell waiting to take me out. Chasing down Williams' killers could prove critical to preserving my own safety.

Members of the press, I think this news trumps whatever trivial questions you may have. Feel free to take up any further questions with the Press Secretary, Lars Gibbon. Thank you.

Press departs

Next: Scene I

Copyright 2009 by Christopher L. Smith

Aaron Gardner is da total bomb

One of the most brilliant young minds of the conservative movement has been dissed . . . by me!

Sorry, Aaron. My bad. I'm so used to linking Moe at Red State . . . well, force of habit.

No, it's not the Onion, it's ABC

by Smitty

Gateway Pundit has an ABC clip about national parks. Apparently, slavery is at the root of the lack of black usage of national parks

There maybe something in this (wildly) NSFW rant from Chris Rock (50% potty mouth, 50% stone cold truth) about the real issues. Interestingly, Rock makes no mention of slavery.

While Rock would have a half-life of about 10 seconds as a network news anchor, given his belt-driven f-grenade launcher, maybe he could be a consultant to ABC so that their reporting would not suck so much pond water.

Out of bounds protesting

by Smitty

This blog disagrees heavily with dumb drivers as much as ignorant government policies, but decries all violent expressions of dissent.

In particular, attacking red-light runners with a brick.

Now, what they should do with people who

• Can't turn into the nearest appropriate lane, but swing wide like a tractor/trailer rig Every Godforsaken Time, or
• Never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity to make sure there is room across the intersection for their chariot before entering the intersection

is use traffic cameras to afford those twerps the opportunity to pay more for the privilege of driving like a Complete Loser.

UPDATE (RSM): There are some people -- including a majority of drivers in the Greater D.C. Metro Region -- who, when they apply for a driver's license, should instead be issued a bus pass.

My older brother Kirby is a truck driver. He refers to bad drivers, those who can't choose the proper lane on the Interstate, as "commuters."

Why? Because the commuter is accustomed by habit to a certain type of driving: Slow, and in situations where it really makes no difference, speed-wise, which lane you choose on the eight-lane freeway.

The commuter gets used to driving under such conditions, morning and evening, five days a week. And the only other driving the commuter usually does is a brief trip to the nearby grocery store, etc.

Then comes the moment when, on vacation or making a longer-distance trip on the weekend, the commuter heads out onto the open road and becomes a traffic hazard, an obstacle to progress.

Let's say the speed limit on the Interstate is 65 mph. Those accustomed to long-distance open-road driving know that you're never going to get pulled over for driving 14 mph over the limit, so set your cruise control at 79 mph and you can cover the distance in the minimum time without fear of a ticket.

However, there will be those keen-eyed motorists who, when they spot an open straightaway with no troopers in sight, will push it up even faster, to 85 mph or more. The veteran long-distance driver, seeing such a speedy fellow approaching in his rearview mirror, knows to yield the left lane to these people -- get out of their way, or they'll zoom over and pass you the right.

Not so the commuter, who will plod along in that left lane doing 71 mph, often forming a "rolling roadblock" with traffic going the same speed to his right. Even when there is a line of eight or 10 cars stacked up behind him, eager to pass (what I call the "cork-in-the-bottle" problem) the commuter resolutely hugs that left lane. The commuter either is completely oblivious to the meaning of that long queue behind him, or else feels himself entitled to drive in the left lane, no matter his speed.

Like I said, some people ought to be issued a bus pass, not a driver's license. -- RSM

Announcement: OediPOTUS Wrecks

by Smitty

Update:
For those too distracted by people named Tonya or whoever back in the day, this work modernizes the Sophocles classic Oedipus Rex, still an excellent read after these ~2,500 years. Give that URL glance, or this series may be slightly bewildering.

As your foremost source of cultural diversion, this blog takes pride in announcing the Porch Manqué Production of:

Which sad little affair will play out in this blog over the course of the next week, with an obscene going up daily at high noon.

Scenes:
Prologue
Scene I
Scene II
Scene III
Finale

Characters:
(Alluded)
Jefferson Williams, OediPOTUS's father, 42nd POTUS
Lucius Sphinxor, 43rd POTUS
Kerry Kennedy, foster father of OediPOTUS
Olga von Kleindrubble Kennedy, mother of OediPOTUS
Pettifogger, Vice President under Jefferson Williams.
Folderol, Vice President under OediPOTUS

(Actual)
OediPOTUS Wrecks, 44th POTUS
Cthulia Williams, widow of Jefferson, Secretary of State to OediPOTUS
Ramen Lewis Cyphre, OediPOTUS's Chief of Staff
Hanah, palindromic source of mayhem
Matthew Olberchrist, fawning journalist
Sandy Hamburger, walking file cabinet
Dr. Esarhaddon Cyphre, brother of Ramen
Rosor, bored mastermind
Thomasina Helenson, queen of the press corps

Porch Manqué Productions has moved couch and chest freezer to make this the best possible collision of Greek tragedy and political farce. You can always tell how well you've accomplished the task by the intensity of the critics:

• Sophocles: My work! My opus desecrated! Has this Smitty neither taste nor judgment?
• Baldric: Next time Smitty thinks he has a cunning plan, assure him society'll sooner see Sullivan sane.
• Pontius Pilate: Note to self: wash hands, crucify, wash hands again.
• William Shakespeare: He hath sought Puckish, and begat puke-ish.
• Oscar Wilde: There is a fine line between delightfully clever and deserving cleaver. By the time it reaches Smitty, that line separates a morning star and a machete.
• "Half-Cocked" Jack: Never has me inability to read been such a blessing.
• Inspector Grimm: This hoity-toity, namby-pamby, colonoscopic colonial is stealing my lines!
• Marcellus Wallace: Dis bitch is Pulp Fiction meets some medieval s**t meets mah man Obama. 'Cept Pulp Fiction didn't suck.
• William Wallace: Speaking of medieval, the ending of Braveheart has a more pleasant face than this tripe.
• Mike Wallace: Speaking of tripe, at last we have something so fantastic as to make 60 Minutes comparatively sane and realistic.
• H. P. Lovecraft: Typically, consumption by Cthulhu diminishes literary output. Smitty writes on; fearless, mindless, soulless. Scientifically fascinating.
• Rob Roy MacGregor: O! many a shaft, at random sent, Finds mark the archer little meant! A thousand words, at random spoken, Would improve upon this jackass jokin'!
• John Wayne: You've got ta be kiddin' me, pilgrim. Why, I haven't seen a manure stream that bad since they drove a herd of diarrhetic cattle across the river feedin' Michael Moore's ranch, givin' us Fahrenheit 9/11.
• Spinal Tap: Smitty needs one.

OK, the John Wayne remark did hurt a little. But do come back and tell your friends. Stacy says that if we don't do a quarter-million hits on this, he's going to cut me back to half a pizza crust a day. Do not let this happen!

Copyright 2009, Christopher L. Smith

Blogger Rosemary Port has saggy breasts

And I dare her to sue me for that!

Speaking out for the first time since a court order forced Google to reveal her identity, blogger Rosemary Port tells the Daily News that model Liskula Cohen should blame herself for the uproar.
"This has become a public spectacle and a circus that is not my doing," said Port, whose "Skanks in NYC" site branded the 37-year-old Cohen an "old hag."
"By going to the press, she defamed herself," Port said.
"Before her suit, there were probably two hits on my Web site: One from me looking at it, and one from her looking at it," Port said. "That was before it became a spectacle. I feel my right to privacy has been violated."
The pretty 29-year-old Fashion Institute of Technology student added that she's furious at Google for revealing her identity, so much so that she plans to file a $15 million federal lawsuit against the Web giant.
"When I was being defended by attorneys for Google, I thought my right to privacy was being protected," Port said.

Aw, shut your ignorant yap, you saggy-breasted blog skank. You're just a slightly less creepy Jesse Griffin, supposing that you can hide forever behind an online pseudonym while hurling invective at others whom you deny the very "right to privacy" that you so ludicrously assert.

And why? Because you're bitter, Rosemary. Bitter because your breasts are so saggy, they're pointing due south. You want to sue me for that? Fine. But then the laughably pathetic condition of your saggy, shriveled breasts will become a matter of public record.

So unless you're willing to show us otherwise, you'll forever be known as Saggy-Breasted Rosemary Port.

Obama Discovers Formula:Dishonesty = Disapproval

Thanks to Moe Lane* for pointing me to this nifty little chart from Rasmussen Reports:

What went wrong? How did Obama screw the pooch? Politico's Mike Allen and Jim Vandehei try (and fail) to get a straight answer out of David Axelrod, but leave it to some dude with a blog to explain everything in a single sentence:

Largely missing from the analysis, which is punctuated with a lot of 20/20 hindsight observation, is any appreciation of how Obama and his administration’s lack of candor might have affected perceptions of his trustworthiness.
-- Dan Collins

Bravo, Dan! If dishonesty were genius, the Obama administration would sweep next year's Nobel Prizes.

Oh, and even though that one sentence explains it all, Dan Collins wrote more than one sentence, so please read the whole thing.

* UPDATE: I am informed by Aaron Gardner that it was his Red State post, and not Moe's, which contained this information. Aaron Gardner is da total bomb.

Da Tech Guy gets it

"What else is a private Tropical Island for?"

Exactly. Any guy who buys his own private tropical island is obviously just trying to score. You've got to figure Ricardo Montalban didn't spent too many nights alone. I bet even Herve Villechaize was a pretty popular dude.

Same thing with a sports car or a yacht. I don't care if the guy's 93 years old. If he's driving a Maserati, you know he's looking for some action.

Not that this kind of carnal motivation can't be sublimated so as to be socially beneficial. Had it not been for the trying-to-score factor, Keith Richards would have been just another English drug addict instead of a world-famous rock guitarist.

Come to think of it, the entire "British invasion" was just a bunch of guys with bad teeth trying to score. Did you ever take a close look at the guys in Gerry and the Pacemakers? The Animals? The Kinks? Without guitars, those dudes would have been completely hopeless.

Which Is Worse: Anti-Semitism or Protectionism?

This morning, I happened to catch a few moments of The McLaughlin Group. The subject had apparently turned to economics and trade, and Pat Buchanan was railing about his idee fixe, the idea that our "trade deficit" with China was evidence of a purposeful policy of Chinese economic sabotage.

OK, to start with, there is no such thing as a "trade deficit." Trade is the exchange of economic goods. If I give the gas station $3 and the gas station gives me a gallon of unleaded, do I have a "trade deficit" with the gas station?

The United States has, relative to China, a surplus of wealth. China has, relative to the United States, a surplus of labor. Chinese labor produces goods which are then exchanged for American wealth. There is no "deficit" in the pejorative sense suggested by Buchanan.

If U.S. manufacturers could produce fireworks as cheaply as do the Chinese, then I wouldn't buy Chinese fireworks. In fact, the Chinese make fireworks so cheaply, no U.S. manufacturer even attempts to compete with them, and I don't even have a choice: If I'm going to buy fireworks, I must buy Chinese fireworks.

Why is this? Well, we are a wealthy nation, fireworks manufacturing is dangerous work, and people in wealthy nations do not do dangerous work cheaply. Also, the United States has a lot of tort-happy trial lawyers who'd sue a fireworks maker into bankruptcy the minute a stray spark ignites the kind of accidental explosions that routinely kill Chinese fireworks facctory workers. (e.g., "Fireworks factory explosion in China kills 13," "Second China fireworks factory blast kills 11," "16 killed in China factory blast," etc.)

In addition to such considerations, the U.S. has OSHA guidelines, EPA, food stamps, Medicaid, worker's compensation, minimum wage, etc., etc. These various mechanisms of the liberal welfare state have the effect of increasing labor costs and reducing incentives for work at the lower end of the wage scale.

If the United States were to implement free-market reforms that had the effect of reducing the anti-competitive impact of tort lawyers and the welfare state, U.S. manufacturing would be in a better position vis a vis China. This would not bring about Utopia ("Alabama fireworks factory explosion kills 14 illegal immigrants") but at least we wouldn't have to listen to Buchanan talking incessantly about imposing protective tariffs.

To the extent that the Chinese government is pursuing protectionist or quasi-protectionist policies (i.e., subsidizing industries for the export of goods at sub-market prices), the primary victims of this policy are the Chinese.

Just as there is no such thing as a "trade deficit," so is there no such thing as "dumping" of sub-market goods. If Beijing wishes to tax its citizens in order to sell us steel at sub-market prices, I say we take all that cheap steel we can get. If the steel lobby and the steelworkers' union cry foul, screw 'em. They can either reduce wages or do without a job, but there is no point in making workers in every steel-dependent industry suffer on their behalf by imposing steel tariffs.

Now, I have recently scolded my friend David Frum over his 2003 attack on Buchanan (and Buchanan's friends, including the late Robert Novak) in regard to the Iraq War. I dare risk Frum's enmity on this score because (a) Buchanan's criticism of the Bush administration's Iraq policy has been amply vindicated, and (b) Frum resurrected the accusation of anti-Semitism against Buchanan & Co.

It is irrelevant (or, at least, should be irrelevant) to a discussion of U.S. foreign policy whether Buchanan is or is not an anti-Semite. It's a free country, and Buchanan's personal hatreds are his own business. But if the invasion of Iraq was a bad policy, undertaken without honest debate and in the absence of accurate intelligence or adequate planning for the post-invasion phase, then criticism of that policy ought to be respected, whether the criticism comes from Buchanan or John Kerry or Louis Farrakhan.

Tangling up Iraq policy discussion with the toxic charge of anti-Semitism isn't helpful. A thing can be true even if a bad person says it. Trying to pre-emptively disqualify an adversary's argument by saying that he is a bad person -- "A notorious former colleague of Michael Gerson!" -- simply won't do.

Moreover, these sorts of accusations of mala fides invite the question of whether the irrational prejudice alleged -- e.g., that Buchanan hates Jews -- actually causes harm.

Suppose that it is alleged that David Frum hates fat women. Evidence of this hatred is adduced in that Frum's wife Danielle Crittenden is thin and, even when he was single, Frum was never known to date fat girls, nor even girls who might be described as "pleasantly plump." Furthermore, it is remembered that Frum once harshly criticized Hillary Clinton (who isn't exactly Olive Oyl, if you get my drift).

Ah, so Frum now stands credibly accused of hating fat women. And Frum's defense is, "So what? Lots of people hate fat women. What's your point?"

Exactly right. And while it may be shown that, in terms of group averages, fat women have lower income than thin women, that they have less education, fewer social advantages, higher crime rates -- the usual sorts of evidences of "victimhood" -- you still haven't proven that David Frum's irrational fatchickaphobia has resulted in any particular harm to any particular fat woman.

Now, this probably sounds silly as an analogy for anti-Semitism, but on the other hand, so far as I am aware, the evidence that Pat Buchanan has ever done actual harm to any particular Jewish person is non-existent. It's one thing to say that, vis a vis U.S. Middle East policy, Buchanan's positions are as wrong as that thick-thighed Hillary Clinton's, but . . .

Having personally felt the sting of irrational prejudice against Appalachian-Americans -- no, I've never cooked moonshine, my parents weren't first cousins, and I don't even own a banjo -- I understand the sensitivity about such crude bigotry. But how can anyone claim to be doing good for the conservative cause by indicting Buchanana for bigotry so subtle as to be indistinguishable from the sentiments of most liberals, including pudgy-bottomed Hillary Clinton?

I guess what I'm I trying to say is, can't we all just get along? Jews and Jew-haters, David Frum and fat chicks like Hillary Clinton, protectionist fanatics and soon-to-be-exploded Chinese fireworks factory employees? Everybody hold hands and sing along.

Kumbayah, my Lord, kumbayah . . .

Maverick: Hey, you know those 'death panels' Sarah Palin was talking about . . .?

"There was a provision in the bill that talks about a board that would decide 'most effective measures' to provide health care for people, OK?"
-- John McCain, ABC "This Week"

And if the "most effective measures" means Grandma gets a Brompton cocktail . . .

All Girls Named TonyaThe Disturbing Case of David Copperfield

Several aspects of this case are disturbing:

A Seattle woman has filed a federal lawsuit against magician and entertainer David Copperfield, claiming he sexually assaulted and threatened her while she was a guest on his private island in the Bahamas two years ago. The lawsuit was filed even as the U.S. Attorney's Office is considering whether to file criminal charges in the case.

In the first paragraph, this story has already destroyed the fantasies of millions of 14-year-old geeks around the world. "You mean, even if I become so rich that I've got my own private tropical island, I don't get to have sex with any 22-year-old woman I desire?" Disturbing.

The woman, a 22-year-old fashion model and former Miss Washington USA contestant, filed the lawsuit on July 29 in U.S. District Court in Seattle against David Seth Kotkin, Copperfield's given name. That date was the deadline for a two-year statute of limitations in the case.

His name is "David Kotkin"? Disturbing.

The Seattle Times is not naming her because she is an alleged victim of sexual assault.

Whoa! Sweetheart, at the moment you file a lawsuit against a guy who flew you to his own private tropical island, I become deeply suspicious of your status as "victim." I'm just guessing your name is Tonya. Disturbing.

The woman is seeking unspecified damages for infliction of emotional distress, false misrepresentation and false imprisonment.

"Unspecified damages"? Disturbing.

On Wednesday, [Copperfield] issued a bare-knuckled response to the lawsuit. . . . He accused the woman of "extortion for money, plain and simple." The woman, according to Copperfield's attorneys, Angelo Calfo and Patty Eakes, "has a history of lying ... which continues in this lawsuit."

Worse than "a history of lying," she now has a history of not putting out for guys who fly her to their own private tropical island. Disturbing.

The woman alleges she met Copperfield during a January 2007 performance in Kennewick, when he called her on stage to perform in his act. After the show, the lawsuit alleges, an assistant took her personal information, snapped her photograph and said Copperfield might be interested in helping her career.
In July 2007, the woman alleges, she was invited to Musha Cay, Copperfield's $50 million private island in the Bahamas. The woman was assured, the lawsuit said, that others would be on the island and that she would have her own room.
The lawsuit alleges Copperfield and his assistant misled the woman and knew that she would be alone with him. The woman claims that she wouldn't have gone had she known she'd be alone with the magician.

Right. The guy offers to fly you to his own tropical island, and you accept, but you're afraid to be alone with him. Disturbing.

She said the 52-year-old magician drove her to the beach her first night on the island, and then returned to her room and removed her passport from her purse.
After dinner and watching a movie in Copperfield's room, the woman claims, he "attacked [her] and sexually assaulted her" on the bed, threatening to kill her if she didn't perform certain sex acts.

OK, you're a show business superstar with your own private tropical island, yet you can only score with chicks by threatening to kill them? Disturbing.

Throughout the assault (the woman) physically and verbally resisted Defendant Copperfield and struggled to get away from him," the lawsuit claims.
The next day, she said, she tried to hide but Copperfield found her and took her back to the private beach outside his bedroom. She said the magician held her head underwater until she thought she would drown after she refused his demand to "get naked."
"He then told her, 'this is an example of what you will get if you tell anyone.' " The lawsuit alleges he took off her swimsuit top and forced her to perform another sex act.
She claims a third assault took place when Copperfield dragged her from the shower in her room a short time later.

At this point, I'm thinking that David Kotkin, a/k/a "Copperfield," needs to spend a little less time working on his magic act and a little more time working on his romantic act.

The business about demanding that the chick "get naked"? That's never worked for me. I've been married for 20 years, and if I demanded that my wife "get naked," she'd laugh in my face. On the other hand, maybe if I had my own private tropical island . . . Disturbing.

Copperfield has disputed the allegations from the outset. His attorneys say that there were more than 40 people on the island during the woman's three-night, four-day visit.
"Her allegation that there was no one on the island to help her — even if she needed help — is preposterous," his statement says. The woman met and talked with other guests, sunbathed "and swam on island beaches, day after day. She even had dinner with a group of island guests," according to the statement.

Regardless of the truth or falsehood of the claims in this case, this "victim" has already exposed a disturbing pattern. Whenever a 52-year-old show-business superstar invites a 22-year-old ex-beauty queen to his own private tropical island, she might have reason to think he's going to expect her to "perform certain sex acts" with him. (You've been warned, ladies.)

This disturbing pattern is not limited to 52-year-old show-business superstars and 22-year-old ex-beauty queens. Generally speaking, if you're a chick and a guy says, "Hey, wanna come over to my place?" you should be suspicious. Whether it's his college dorm room, his apartment or his private tropical island, a lot of guys seem to have this misguided expectation that a chick who comes over to their place is just beggin' for some action.

This expectation -- "If she comes over to my place, she's ready to put out" -- is disturbing, especially when stated in such blunt terms. What's more disturbing is that any woman, even a 22-year-old ex-beauty queen, could be so stupid as to be unaware of the existence of such expectations.

Even if David Kotkin a/k/a "Copperfield" didn't forcibly rape the 22-year-old ex-beauty queen, you've got to figure any guy would have had his feelings hurt if, after flying her to his own tropical island -- four days and three nights in the Bahamas -- she were less than enthusiastic about his (surprise!) erotic interest in her.

This is why you find a lot of guys who are resentful toward the entire notion of "date rape." Having swept away all the norms and rules of traditional society, the sexual revolution and feminism have created a world in which the rules appear to be contingent, improvised and whimsical.

However, whereas the old rules were widely recognized and thus easily enforced by informal means -- slap his face, "unhand me, you cad!" and then ostracize the creep henceforth -- the new rules seem routinely to require federal lawsuits and grand jury inquisitions to sort them out. We've abandoned rules enforceable by individual action in favor of rules requiring enforcement by trial lawyers.

We await legal disposition of the disturbing case of Doe v. Kotkin, but the verdict is already in on the sexual revolution: It's been a complete catastrophe.

For the benefit of any young people (or 52-year-old show-business superstars) forced to sort out the new rules for themselves in this disturbing environment, allow me to offer a few suggestions by way of etiquette:

• In general, be careful about situations where you are alone with a person of the opposite sex.

This is especially true in terms of someone you don't know very well. Even if nothing happens, people talk.

• Ladies, if you're going to turn a guy down, turn him down up front, and be clear about it.

Apparently, some women use ambiguity in an effort to avoid hurting a guy's feelings. They don't like a guy "that way," but don't want to say so, and therefore allow the guy to waste his time in futile pursuit of a romance that is never going to happen.

This kind of ambiguity seems to be implicated in most college "date rape" scenarios. The guy asks the girl to come to his dorm room or apartment, she agrees, he interprets her agreement as de facto sexual consent, she resists and, next thing you know, there's a girl crying at the campus clinic and the Womyn's Studies department is organizing candlelight vigils for a "Take Back the Night" rally.

The fact that these "date rapes" tend to occur after the consumption of massive quantities of alcohol only adds to the disturbing stupidity of it all. To put it in the bluntest possible terms, any drunk 19-year-old guy is a potential sexual predator. A drunk 19-year-old guy will screw anything with a pulse. Any girl who doesn't understand that is probably too stupid to be attending college.

• Guys, a selfish attitude about sex is self-defeating.

What is so stupidly disturbing about this case against David Kotkin a/k/a "Copperfield" is the evidence that he has a stunted, puerile notion of sexual entitlement. Whatever it was that actually happened on his private island resort -- and we'll leave that determination to the legal authorities -- it appears that Copperfield more or less expected this 22-year-old ex-beauty queen to deliver the goods.

However reasonable that expectation must have seemed to Copperfield -- "For crying out loud, I'm a show-business superstar with my own private tropical island!" -- it was decidedly not an expectation in accord with chivalrous customs of generous hospitality.

While I've never owned a tropical island in the Bahamas, I think that the principles I learned back in the day of inviting girls to visit Room 215 Patterson Hall would apply equally well in Copperfield's situation:

• OK, the girl's accepted your invitation. You might be in luck. But you've got to play it cool. She shows up, and you greet her with courtesy and hospitality. ("Would you like a delicious cold beverage? I've got some wine coolers here in the fridge . . .")
• Don't move too fast. Unless she's totally making the moves on you, chill out and read her signals. If she just wants to talk, just talk. No pressure, see? This girl's got friends, and you don't want her telling her friends that you're such a desperate loser that you started making the moves on her and she turned you down. The key to developing a reputation as irresistible is to avoid provoking resistance.
• If you're going to make a move, make a move. Forget that slowly-work-your-way-up-to-it approach. Assuming you're reading the signals correctly, a green light means "go." Chicks dig the bold proposition. Take her in your arms and tell her you've been burning with desire for her ever since the first time you saw her. Gently kiss her neck and whisper your passionate intention to ravish every inch of her glorious naked body.
• Be willing to take no for an answer and to apologize for any unintended offense. Hey, even an ace pilot sometimes accidentally locks onto the wrong target, OK? This girl came over to your dorm room to study for the art history exam and when she started talking suggestively about Michelangelo's David, you took it the wrong way. It happens.

Chicks sometimes aren't so clear about the signals they send. My senior year in college, on the afternoon of a big concert on the quad, a girlfriend of my girlfriend came over to my dorm room. Lucy kissed me, got completely naked and still ended up saying, "no," an answer I was obliged to accept.

I never forgave Lucy for that -- which is why I feel no compunction about naming her -- but I had to accept it. (Even though I had been burning with desire for Lucy since the first time I saw her.)

When you get to be a senior in college, you ought to understand stuff like that. Certainly, by the time you're a 52-year-old show-business superstar with your own private tropical island, you ought to understand that stuff. And if you don't understand it . . .

Disturbing.

* * * * *

All Girls Names Tonya (And Other Lessons of a Misspent Youth) is one of those books that no publisher in their right mind would ever pay me to write. But if you don't think these stories are completely worthless, please hit the tip jar.

• Part I: Lessons of a Misspent Youth
• Part II: Don't Start Me Talking . . .

Rule 5 Sunday

by Smitty

Ah, Rule 5. Fine blend of bikinis, starlets and what have you. Enjoy!

• Shilpa Shetty. I've never seen her movies, but I love them already.
• Stephen Green uses Lani Anderson as blogbait for something. Literacy diminishes to zero in the vicinity of that URL.
• Fausta floats the question of whether Don Draper is the new Jack Bauer. I liked the one SNL episode the actor hosted, but I confess to having never seen Mad Men. She also has a game of 'spot the hottie' in a burst of Latin color.
• Rightofcourse reveals itself a serious Anglosphere booster Hmmm. Angloshpere as double-entendre?
• Nation of Cowards carries the theme forward nicely.
• HotMES returns to the Rule 5, recommending Kourtney Kardashian. Looks like she could use some wardrobe assistance. The failures of the American education system are a source of woe.
• Troglopundit features Erin Andrews. Now, we've cautioned Troglopundit about dirty pictures of Erin Andrews, but he still appears to require calibration. And he follows up with some ladies who can deliver that calibration. Ow.
• Fishersville Mike posted Shania Twain.
• ViralFootage, just in time for Inglourious Basterds, has Bikini Cinema doing, in all its vulgar NSFW 'glory', Pulp Fiction.
• Telegraph.co.uk has a roundup of 10 bikini goddesses.
• That methodical Morgan Freeberg fellow features Beyonce Knowles and Carly Zucker as part of his alphabetic guide to loveliness. Ever the science geek, he also reports on the water-soluble bikini.
  
• Paco, the Rule 5 Culture Czar, locates Dorothy Dandridge and Jane Russell for us.
• Superpowers That Be offers a conservative celebrity roundup. Fine mix of ladies, gentlemen, and ideas that don't suck.
• Jeffords gives us a look at Hollywood remakes, citing crucial Rule 5 concerns. It sounds like he can support a Werewolf remake on Emily Blunt grounds, but has misgivings about a rehash of Excalibur.
• PowerLine is holding down the fort on the Miss Universe reporting. Nerves of steel, those lads, bearing up under the pressure. Phenomenal.
• The Classic Liberal takes Rule 5 as a serious character study opportunity. It's offbeat, but TCL has our full support. This week, it's Mila Kunis.
• When I use the term 'tool' to refer to my Congressman, it's pejorative. That famous craftsman at the WyBlog demonstrates that the traditional meaning has Rule 5 application.
• The sad decay of Bob Belvedere into a Rule 5 junkie saddens us all. He can't decide between Jacqueline Bisset, or Dawn Wells, or an unnamed belly dancer

Here is Joe Satriani holding forth on the subject of belly dancers:

• Three Beers Later introduces Barbara Bouchet, and five seconds of spandex delight.
• Knowledge is Power has a couple of lovelies.
  

That's your Rule 5 Sunday. Send your cheesecake to Smitty for inclusion. And hit the tip jar for 'ol Stacy's sake. And I don't mean 'rice wine'.

Update:
Blog name of the day is "Caught Him With a Corndog", and Red has apparently, married Hellboy. So I guess all the fathers can breath easily with respect to the safety of their daughters.

What does Janeane Garofalo know about Uganda?

I'll pass over her "functionally retarded adults" slur against Tea Party protesters, and focus instead on this:

"Our media is quite happy to report on any stolen election around the world, any stolen election around the world except ours. And it's just unexamined narcissism. It's just, if you were to say this to the average American, ‘You know they steal elections in Uganda.' ‘Yeah.' ‘You know they steal elections in America.' ‘Why do you hate America?' ‘Why didn't you ask me why do you hate Uganda?'"

Having been to Uganda, having spent some time studying the history and politics of Uganda, I cannot help but wonder why Garofalo decided to pull the name "Uganda" out of a hat in this manner.

The president of Uganda, Yoweri Museveni, has done a remarkable job of establishing peace and stability for his nation in a region where peace and stability cannot be taken for granted. Museveni fought to overthrow Idi Amin and then, in the brilliant political-military campaign of 1981-86, overthrew Amin's corrupt successors. For more than two decades, Museveni's national government has sought to overcome the dangerous legacy of ethnic rivalry among Uganda's tribes, and to establish a modern economic system.

Museveni has, at times, been accused of a highhanded approach toward opponents, but when one considers the horrors of civil strife that have afflicted so many of Uganda's neighbors -- including Sudan to the north -- the overall prudence of his leadership tends rather to excuse whatever his faults or errors may be.

Given that Museveni was most recently re-elected in 2006 with 59% of the vote, I have no idea why Janeane Garofalo would pick Uganda, of all the countries in the world, as an example of stolen elections. However, if Janeane or anyone else wants to go to Uganda, my recommendation would be:

• Take British Airways -- you don't want to bother with other airlines
• Make sure you have sufficient clothing, etc., in your carry-on, as checked luggage can be delayed in delivery;
• When you get to Entebbe Airport, tell your cab driver to take you directly to the Kampala Serena Hotel, a truly world-class resort; and
• Drink only bottled water.

Or, better yet, try Uganda's excellent Bell Lager beer.