The epitome of rugged, authentic cool. Founded in 1924 in Staffordshire, England, Belstaff’s exceptionally designed, hard-working and waterproof outerwear is as famous amongst serious motorcyclists as it is with fashion aficionados. Their durable classics include this heavyweight waxed-cotton jacket, a perfect replica of the one so famously worn by Ernesto Che Guevara on his legendary motorcycle journey across Latin America in the 1950s. Standing collar with buckle closure. Zip front with snap closure. Belstaff logo on right chest and left sleeve. Chest pockets, flap pockets. Removable self-belt. A Collector’s Item. Made in Italy. Spot clean. Available in select stores.
This is, of course, yet another fine example of life imitating art, albeit after a gap of about ten years:
BTW, I hadn’t seen that commercial since it aired. God, I love the internet.
The man arrested last month for allegedly plotting to blow up targets in New York contacted one of Osama bin Laden’s right-hand men, U.S. intelligence officials say.
Officials say Denver shuttle bus driver Najibullah Zazi used an intermediary to contact Mustafa al-Yazid, the head of al-Qaida’s operations in Afghanistan. Yazid is perhaps best known for saying earlier this year that he would use nuclear weapons against the U.S. if only he could get his hands on them. The Zazi connection to Yazid was first reported by The Associated Press.
While officials would not characterize the nature of their contact, the fact that Zazi could actually reach out and get hold of a top al-Qaida operative in Afghanistan is significant. This is the third time in the past few years that al-Qaida’s top leadership appears to have given recruits with U.S. ties some sort of special consideration or attention.
The question I have, is how did we get this information from him? I mean, we don’t torture any more, and torture is the only known way to extract timely information from recalcitrant terror suspects. Right? I mean, I can’t even begin to imagine how else one might entice a criminal — let alone a terrorist! — to give up information that would aid our efforts at the expense of his organization’s.
The most meaningless and misleading euphemism in English-speaking politics – and that’s a difficult list to top – is how abortion advocates have turned “choice” into a synonym for abortion.
Read this story. And count how many choices that this woman made that led up to her abortions. Opposing abortion has nothing to do with opposing “choice,” no more than opposing theft or vandalism or slavery involves opposing “choice.” That is, surely all things we ban restrict “choice” in some way, but the relevant question is whether that is a choice we believe should be closed off to our fellow citizens. Monopolizing the word “choice” for the pro-abortion cause is perhaps the single most audacious maneuver in the lengthy American history of twisting language for political purposes. What’s galling – utterly galling – is how the entire media goes along with it.
E.J. Dionne, who advises left-wingers that it’s better to condesend to racist anti-Obama wingnuts based on the fact that said wingnuts are poor and helpless rather than on the fact that said wingnuts are insecure white trash. “There there, Angry White Man,” says E.J. “Things will be better once we get you a factory job involving simple repetitive motions. In the mean-time, try not to go putsching any beer halls.”
Apollo posted this at 1:18 AM HKT on Tuesday, October 13th, 2009 as CHANGE!, Snobbery
For those of us who remember when FoxNews was an upstart channel that was having a hard time getting on some cable providers’ lists of channels, this chart is amazing. The headline regards how poorly CNN is doing, even against its sister channel HLN, but I don’t know how anyone can look at it and not be floored by Fox’s dominance.
Almost every show on Fox has a larger audience than the other three channels combined. During primetime, 57% of people watching a cable news network are watching Fox. The 11pm rerun of O’Reilly has 40% more viewers than the highest rated non-Fox show.
Apollo posted this at 8:28 AM HKT on Monday, October 12th, 2009 as Journalism
Some people are at their best when they’re furious. Victor Davis Hanson, for example, was painful to read when he was twisting himself into pretzels defending everything Bush did from 2004-2006, but was much better when ripping Dinish D’Souza apart. After two centuries of praising Obama, Andrew Sullivan finally jolted himself (at least temporarily) back into sanity.
Obama’s speech last night to the HRC was about what anybody who’s watched him over the past few years would have expected: it was many pretty promises and with little substance. But Sullivan finally noticed (H/T):
All I can say is: the president gave a speech he could have given at any point in the last three years. No one in that room could disagree with any of the things he said. I sure don’t (with the exception of the hate crimes hooey). And he said it well and movingly. Like we didn’t know he could do that.
But the point of electing a president who pledged to actually do things is to hold him to account, and to see if he is willing to take any risk of any kind to actually do something. I had a few prior tests of his seriousness or signs that he gets it, a few ways to judge if this speech had anything new or specific or clear. He failed every test.
To wit:
He says he will end Don’t Ask Don’t Tell but he has done nothing, and he offered no time-line, no deadline for action and no verifiable record that he has done anything, despite his claims that he has.
He says he is ending the HIV ban, but it is still in force, a year and a half after it was signed by George W. Bush and passed by massive majorities in both houses.
He says he favors equality for gay couples but said nothing tonight to support the initiatives in Maine or in Washngton State or the struggle in Washington DC for marriage equality. That’s a test of real sincerity on this matter. He failed it.
He says he wants to end discrimination in employment even as he is firing more gay people solely for being gay than any other employer in the country — as commander-in-chief. And if an employer is firing gay people all the time, is it tolerable to accept as a response that he will stop doing it one day — but gives no time-line at all to hold him to?
Look: I didn’t expect these issues to be front and center given his appalling inheritance; I know he has many other things on his plate; I didn’t expect the moon; I didn’t believe he would do any of this immediately; I understand that the real job is for us to do, not him, and that most of the action is in the states. And I remain a strong supporter of him in foreign policy and in the way he is clearly trying to move this country past the ideological divides of the recent past.
But the sad truth is: he is refusing to take any responsibility for his clear refusal to fulfill clear campaign pledges on the core matter of civil rights and has given no substantive, verifiable pledges or deadlines by which he can be held accountable. What that means, I’m afraid, is that this speech was highfalutin bullshit.
Andrew Sullivan has gone sane on us. Will it last?
(CNN) — President Barack Obama made history again Friday, winning the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”
I think the only appropriate reaction is joyful, laughing-at-you scorn, both for the Nobel Foundation and for President Obama for inspiring such foolishness. Honestly, this is funny.
Tom posted this at 6:15 AM HKT on Friday, October 9th, 2009 as Buffoon Watch, CHANGE!
In following Conor Friedersdorf’s criticism of conservative pundits over the last five months — or, more specifically criticism of his criticism — I have deduced the following argument:
Only a Real Conservative™ has the right to criticize Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, or Mark Levin.
The act of criticizing Limbaugh, Beck, or Levin proves that one is not a Real Conservative™.
Therefore, no one may criticize Limbaugh, Beck, or Levin.
Have I missed anything?
Tom posted this at 1:02 PM HKT on Wednesday, October 7th, 2009 as Conservatism
