littlemissattila.new.mu.nu

November 30, 2005

Second-Guessing God

The female body should have a little indicator light on it—on one of the wrists, I believe—that glows green when she's pregnant. And maybe it should glow red when she's out of eggs.

Will someone work on this? Thanks.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 11:31 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

So . . .

Is Goldstein a perv? Discuss.

(Extra credit: If he is, is that a bad thing?)

Posted by: Attila Girl at 03:25 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.

Charmaine on Paula Zahn Tonight

Charmaine will be on Paula Zahn's show tonight; she's taping at 6:00, and I guess it airs a few hours afterward. (The best guess is "around 8:30.")

Husband Jack has details on her altercation at the Supreme Court building, which as I understand it Rush discussed on his show this morning. Why can't he call me on my bat-phone before he discusses important blogging issues?

Charmaine has protest/counter-protest pics here.

[Explanation: as most of you know, I don't support parental-notification laws, though I do support most measures that break the momentum of abortion as a cultural imperative. Does that mean I think SCOTUS should reverse these laws, which are—after all—enacted because parents have natural concerns about their daughters seeking medical help behind their backs? Not just "no," but "hell, no."]

Posted by: Attila Girl at 02:43 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.

Western Civilization Ends

. . . in Britain.

Oh, well. Back to the old drawing board, then.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:50 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

Okay, One More Link

. . . before I publicly de-link and denounce Beautiful Atrocities forever and ever.

And it's only because he has the scoop: an interview with one of the 72 virgins. This is the first documented description of what conditions are like in Jihadi Heaven. (Apparently, it's bad, but it would be worse if so many Islamofascists weren't a bit light on their loafers.)

Okay. We now return you to your regularly scheduled hate.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 11:14 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

That's It.

I'm never going to Beautiful Atrocities again. How dare he nominate me in Beth's BadBlog Awards for the "Picks the Most Fights with Other Bloggers" Category?

Fuck you, Jeff. And don't you ever drop my site again, you fucking whore.

P.S. Fuck! Fuck! I hate Jeff!

Posted by: Attila Girl at 09:41 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.

Ah, Yes.

There are cultural minefields around the issue of GLBT blogs, aren't there? Take the Weblog Award Nominations: There are the straight guys who will nominate others for fun, and the ~~gay~~ homo guys who will do the same.

I should nominate myself. After all, I'm bisexual. The fact that I haven't acted on it since the mid 1980s is irrelevant. I'm sure I'd just kick the asses of Gay Patriot, Gay Orbit, BoiFromTroy, and Tammy Bruce.

So I'd better not enter; it just wouldn't be fair to the others.

It would be cool to find a nice TS/TV blog. After all, the bisexuals and transgendered individuals are just thrown into "LGBT" as a sort of afterthought. But I think there are stories to be told from the TS/TV crowd, and they should be heard.

Note to my SoCon readers: Please try not to freak out. Thanks.

Hat tip to Mr. Category All My Own.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 08:47 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.

Timetables vs. Checklists

Well, one of those telegraphs our intentions to the enemy, and encourages the insurgency to keep going because "help is on the way."

The other is a realistic, hardheaded way to foster Iraqi independence. Rightwing Nuthouse parses out an AP report that discusses a recent "shift" in administration rhetoric. The shift, of course, has to do with the fact that we'll be scaling back our presence in Iraq.

The reason is not Democratic pressure. The reason is that we've been successful.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 07:26 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

Bruce Willis' New Project

As you've no doubt heard, Bruce Willis has been following Michael Yon's accounts of the fighting in Iraq—most especially the work of Deuce Four. He even attended an event in their honor recently in Seattle. And Willis would like to make a . . . um. That is, he'd like to make a commercial movie that would premiere in actual theatres, and . . .

Let's start again, shall we? The movie would be about the war in Iraq. And—

Who's reading this, by the way? Are you my friend? Do you know the secret handshake?

The movie will be pro-war. I mean, it will support the troops as in, supporting the troops, rather than supporting the troops by undercutting their mission "for their own good." (The "bring them home and fuck the Iraqis" option.)

Bloggers and blog-commenters are abuzz with the possibilities. There's some concern that the traditional studio system may be reluctant to finance a movie that is pro-war (other than the "kosher" ones such as the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, and WWII). This, of course, leads to speculation that Willis may have to find his own financing, like Mel Gibson did. (Some think Mel might go in with Willis on this venture, but I'm not sure as devout a Catholic as Mel is going to want to take part in a project that could be seen as advocating violence. At least, now that the Lethal Weapon series is over and he never has to make one of those again.)

Apparently when Willis went to the Deuce Four homecoming ball he took Stephen Eads with him; Eads did some work with him on Armageddon, The Sixth Sense, and other movies. If they're smart they'll talk to Lionel Chetwynd, who has plenty of experience going against Hollywood's grain.

And suddenly, of course, Chris Muir has something to say about all this.

Hat tips: Malkin, Dave Price of Dean's World, and the blog of the Liberty Film Festival (right here in the heart of L.A.), Libertas. Also: Insty refers us back to PJM, where there are links galore (including Roger L. Simon's take, natch).

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:22 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 363 words, total size 3 kb.

November 29, 2005

Darleen's Hostess This Week!

She's got the new short-and-snappy version of the Cotillion Ball!

Go see what the smartest chicks in the 'sphere are writing these days.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 08:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.

The Fair Construction Amendment

It's an interesting notion: requiring that the Constitution be "interpreted" as it was written, without finding things in it that aren't there. It would essentially make judicial activism unconstitutional. One wonders whether such an amendment would even be enforceable, but it's certainly intriguing.

Karl Spence is a proponent, and his latest book focuses on the crime wave of the 1990s, explaining how the Fair Construction Amendment would augment the rule of law. If nothing else, his title is gutsy: Yo, Liberals! You Call This Progress?

This book, other books, and some background on the Fair Construction idea are available here.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:20 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Given the willingness of the SCOTUS to decide the Constitution means whatever they hell they want it to mean i don't see such an amendment having much of an effect.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at November 29, 2005 03:16 PM (ics4u)

2 Crime rates have been declining since the early nineties in most categories: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm I get the feeling you don't read newspapers, but just take it on faith that crime must have gone up because Clinton was president. Incidently do you understand the position of Justice Marshall or do you know from faith based reasoning that we've been on the wrong course for nearly 2 centuries? Do you perhaps hold seances with President Diem to guide you so you can lecture the people of this country on what to do without actually reading their history or studying their laws?

Posted by: angela at November 29, 2005 04:42 PM (qM5u/)

3 angela: What part of the word "constitution" do you not understand? It isn't something to be "interpreted." It is what it is. You do not discover something with it that was never seen before. It's there, in black and white, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what it says. On the other hand, it can take an imbacile to competely screw it up. The US Constitution was composed by pure genius, but it is being bastardized by morons.

Posted by: John at November 29, 2005 04:53 PM (TCZW/)

4 I will apologize for the Diem remark, but do you know that the campaign against judical activism was part of the "southern strategy" and one of the reason it was so reviled was that the courts outlawed segregation and Jim Crow? Not technically dealt with by the constitution. The debate goes back and forth, there are good arguments that the "right to privacy" used in Roe is questionable, but is a debate within a living constitution. Most scholars both conservative and liberal argue that the third branch of government is there to act as check on the passions of politics that drives the other branches. Development of the law is a complex process, but the position you take argues that Internet expression can be censored because it's not literally produced by a press. I understand at least to a degree the Constitution and the complex history around it. I believe the judges were right to assure the right of people like Ms. Rice to vote. Previous to the court's rulings the states were free to erect various blockages. Undermining this was one reason why so many condemned "judical activism."

Posted by: angela at November 29, 2005 05:33 PM (niKlm)

5 Yes, Angela. But that was then, and this is now. To say that a racist made a particular argument in the 50s as a rationale for continuing with segregation does not mean that the argument has no validity. I get the feeling you don't read newspapers, but just take it on faith that crime must have gone up because Clinton was president. Must be your first visit here. Howdy.

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 29, 2005 06:35 PM (zZMVu)

6 BTW: The "crime wave of the 90's" referred to in the piece must have been the Clinton administration. Of course it wasn't part of decline in the rate of crime because Clinton had his mits on the Justice Department. I mean, wasn't this the bunch that produced a Surgeon General who thought that if we legalize illegal drugs, that crime rates would drop? Well, duh! If we legalize EVERYTHING that is currently illegal, then crime rates will DISAPPEAR! Clinton was a banana republic thug.

Posted by: John at November 29, 2005 06:51 PM (TCZW/)

7 I personally think that it had a lot less to do with Clinton and a lot more to do with the boom in crack cocaine. But, hey—that's just me.

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 29, 2005 07:42 PM (zZMVu)

8 Re the crime rates, I assume we've all read Freakonomics. If not, drop everything and do so. It isn't something to be "interpreted." The problem with these kind of things is that the Constitution is always open to interpretation, by its very nature. It was open to interpretation the day it was written. It was a fudge at the time, even as the Founders stood up from the table. The first arguments about what the document meant broke out in no time at all, among people who drafted it. Let's just take one example: The Constitution does not provide the Supreme Court with the power to strike down laws that conflict with the Constitution. That power is not enumerated anywhere. It's case law: Marbury v Madison. If one is a original-intent type, one must explain how one wishes the Supreme Court from making sure that the only laws that are enacted are ones that agree with the Constitution at the time it was written, while removing the ability from the Surpreme Court to do so. And one more: The First Amendment provides that Congress shall make no law "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." Congress makes a law making it to post political commentary on a blog. Does the First Amendment prohibit this? If so, how do you come to that conclusion without interpreting the First Amendment in terms of intent and logical entailments?

Posted by: Christophe at November 30, 2005 01:19 PM (2rBIo)

9 Christophe - Clarification please? it looks like a couple of your words got dropped: ...how one wishes the [SC] from making sure... ...Congress makes a law making it to post political commentary on a blog... thanks

Posted by: K at November 30, 2005 03:23 PM (M7kiy)

10 Christophe's a fast typist; you know how those people get. Try these: "how one wishes to have the Supreme Court make sure" "law making it illegal to post political commentary"

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 30, 2005 03:32 PM (zZMVu)

11 What LMA said. Fast typing and lots of coffee are a dangerous combination.

Posted by: Christophe at November 30, 2005 05:03 PM (2rBIo)

12 I personally think that it had a lot less to do with Clinton and a lot more to do with the boom in crack cocaine. And what caused the cocaine boom in the 90's? Could it have had something to do with the heavy-handed crackdown on Marijuana in the 80's? Sadly, I have to lay that one at the feet of Ronaldus Magnus.

Posted by: Desert Cat at November 30, 2005 07:01 PM (xdX36)

13 Well, there's the fact that crack was developed during that time period. But you could be right, if overzealous enforcement of laws that are kooky to begin with caused a market aberration, which was exploited by the purveyors of crack. It wasn't just Reagan: admitting the irrationality of drug laws is still this strange taboo among politicians.

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 30, 2005 08:13 PM (zZMVu)

14 Christophe - Here we see LMA's editor talent shining out like a beacon on a hill. Probably the only reason it took her nine whole minutes is because she'd wandered off to brew up some tea. But the "strange taboo" thing? To me it's the only predictable, logical behavior. Other behavior is what would look strange.

Posted by: K at December 01, 2005 07:27 PM (M7kiy)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Update on Hostages

Rusty has an exclusive: pictures of the peace hostages, a snippet of transcript, and the hostages' names.

I'd skip his comments section, but that's me: it's too early in the day for black humor. Personal thing.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

Scandal in the Golden State

Some things, of course, aren't so much shocking as just sad.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 04:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

Oh, Canada.

The Canadian government just collapsed; there will be new elections in January. I guess they'd like non-corrupt leaders for the new year, and who can blame them?

But it still feels shocking. Thank goodness, though, that there are ways to unseat corrupt leaders in Western democracies.

Here's an MSM summary; Insty has a few more links. And Kate McMillan live-blogged the live-blogging of the "no confidence" vote. I'll be checking in on her and Captain Ed a lot more in the coming weeks.

Wow.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 03:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 88 words, total size 1 kb.

November 28, 2005

It Does Sound Rather Like a Monty Python Skit

Pixy's covering my blogwar with Hugh Hewitt. Admittedly, my blog war with Hugh Hewitt has been less dramatic than many such conflicts, due to a few unavoidable facts: 1) Hugh doesn't know my blog exists, and 2) Hugh doesn't know I exist.

But, you know: I've been carrying on despite these minor obstacles.

On the other hand, at some point he will be forced to concede that Condi Rice exists, and that she's a stronger candidate for President than most of the boring white guys Hewitt seems interested in pushing (e.g., Frist).

Posted by: Attila Girl at 08:09 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I say it should be a Condi/Powel ticket. Let's see if the liberals can come up with something to demonize that ticket.

Posted by: Jack at November 28, 2005 08:16 PM (gozqn)

2 I'm thinking Rice/Giuliani. Very tough to beat.

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 28, 2005 08:27 PM (JZqY7)

3 I like that you're having a blogwar that's so civilized one of the parties doesn't know it's going on. Refreshing

Posted by: beautifulatrocities at November 28, 2005 08:56 PM (lwnDt)

4 Rather like the L.A.-Bay Area rivalry, no? (Okay. We know it's going on, but we just can't get exercised about it.)

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 29, 2005 01:33 AM (JZqY7)

5 Yep, Rice/Giuliani or vice versa looks by far the best ticket the Republicans could come up with - though they do have a couple of years to work on that. What else do they have? Okay, Jeb Bush would drive the moonbats crazy; the prospect of another four years of Bush presidency would have them popping blood vessels. But I don't know if he'd make that strong a showing otherwise. Senators? Forget it. Arnold? Not eligible. The other governors? Do any of them really stand out?

Posted by: Pixy Misa at November 29, 2005 03:29 AM (QriEg)

6 Nobody does. And Arnold's star has fallen a bit lately. But he is, of course, foreign-born. (We've got to get rid of that, of course. It's silly.) Jeb Bush is interesting, in that his family is half-Latin (he married a Latina) and he converted to Roman Catholicism, so he might galvanize Latinos and Catholics. But Americans don't like too much "dynasty," so even if he runs someday I don't think 2008 is the time.

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 29, 2005 04:11 AM (PnALQ)

7 Flap handicaps a Giuliani/Allen ticket unless Cheney resigns/dies and Condi then is appointed VP. Then Giuliani/Rice. If not in 2008, Condi runs against Mayor AV for California Governor. Flap

Posted by: Flap at November 29, 2005 12:46 PM (3K2Mh)

8 Not surprising, but remains amusing, that RNC Radio Hugh has turned to Frist, probably at the behest of Ken Mehlman. Hewitt was dismissing Frist's chances as recently as a couple of weeks ago over the "updates on the war" vote. I agree that a Giuliani/Rice ticket looks like the best bet going, but Rudy's going to have to have a road-to-Damascus moment on the Second Amendment to get the RKBA folks to turn out.

Posted by: Ken at November 29, 2005 01:22 PM (6W2zl)

9 Sorry. Rice at the top of the ticket. That's my final offer

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 29, 2005 06:37 PM (zZMVu)

10 But if she runs as veep, we can get sixteen years of Rice in the White House!!!

Posted by: Pixy Misa at November 29, 2005 06:41 PM (RbYVY)

11 Ken, your comment and mine crossed in the mail. The Second Amendment is one of the chief reasons Rice needs to be at the top of the ticket: in this area (and several others) Giuliani is not conservative enough to get the nomination. Rice is adamant about the importance of gun rights—absolutely rock-solid. And because of her heavy-duty Christian background (daughter of a minister, etc.) she may squeak by on the abortion issue (technically pro-choice, but very disapproving of abortion, and likely to favor limitations/a return to the states—which is where the progress is to be made these days). One more time: Giuliani can't get the nomination (at least, not at the top of the ticket). Rice can.

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 29, 2005 07:49 PM (zZMVu)

12 Attila Girl is right, Condi stands up for the Second Amendment and that is a huge problem for Guiliani. Likewise, Frist might be a fine person, but he is not dynamic. He and Kerry suffer from SenatorDRONE-itis, and anyone who ever tried to listen to any of their speeches understands what I mean. It is also one of the key reasons Gore lost in 2000, drone drone drone, and it is no wonder people referred to that Democrat as Al BORE. With Condoleezza Rice and each of her appearances at the podium during her world visits in the past 11 months, she is dynamic, understands the issues she is speaking about, and treats people with respect. Her diplomatic skills have been sharpened in the past year as well, and even Grover Norquist has suggested her as Time magazine's Person of the Year. The most ironic thing is that Donna Brazille, the Democrat mouthpiece, also agrees for Condi to be Person of the Year. Did you all see the ABC interview last night? What did you think of the TV ad by Americans for Dr. Rice? Any comments? Thanks Miss Attila, always a JOY to visit your site.

Posted by: Crystal Dueker at November 30, 2005 09:42 AM (4/Ur1)

13 Attila Girl is right, Condi stands up for the Second Amendment and that is a huge problem for Guiliani. Likewise, Frist might be a fine person, but he is not dynamic. He and Kerry suffer from SenatorDRONE-itis, and anyone who ever tried to listen to any of their speeches understands what I mean. It is also one of the key reasons Gore lost in 2000, drone drone drone, and it is no wonder people referred to that Democrat as Al BORE. With Condoleezza Rice and each of her appearances at the podium during her world visits in the past 11 months, she is dynamic, understands the issues she is speaking about, and treats people with respect. Her diplomatic skills have been sharpened in the past year as well, and even Grover Norquist has suggested her as Time magazine's Person of the Year. The most ironic thing is that Donna Brazille, the Democrat mouthpiece, also agrees for Condi to be Person of the Year. Did you all see the ABC interview last night? What did you think of the TV ad by Americans for Dr. Rice? Any comments? Thanks Miss Attila, always a JOY to visit your site.

Posted by: Crystal Dueker at November 30, 2005 09:42 AM (4/Ur1)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Back to Plan A

Hang him upside down. Then file past him and spit on him. What's so hard about that? Jeez.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 02:39 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.

Why Is It So Important That the Child Die?

This is what I've never understood: women who not only want the child out of their bodies, but insist that something has gone terribly awry if he or she goes on to live.

Of course, this is not the kind of situation I dealt with when I had my abortion, which occurred at 10-12 weeks. But when it comes to late-term abortions, it remains difficult to understand why these babies cannot simply be adopted as "premies" and allowed to live.

Charmaine tells the story of one woman who slipped through the cracks: The Girl Who Lived.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:54 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

I'll Be at 150,000 Within Days.

Which isn't bad for a boutique blog.

Feel free to congratulate me by buying an ad (or sending me a tip). After all, my gobsmackingly vile bandwidth costs keep going up, and I need to keep bringing you money quotes. (And some of us don't even have beach houses: that's how oppressed we are.)

Seriously: I'm flying to D.C. in February, and you guys need to send me the money to do it. Rest assured that I'll be living on protein bars while I'm there. World's cheapest traveller, cross my heart and hope to die.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 11:39 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.

I Have to Admit It—

the idea of a few liberal "Rebublican" legislators in the Northeast undermining a project that will provide jobs in the West—and enhance U.S. energy supplies at the same time—really grinds my gears.

Particularly if they're being financed, in part, by the charming George Soros.

Something's rotten on Main Street.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 11:21 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

November 27, 2005

Nominate Patterico!

Patterico would like to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. I'd go further: go ahead and give him one. After all, he's killed fewer people than Yassir and Tookie put together! (Wait . . .)

We need a slogan: "give non-murderers a chance." Or something.

Also: we might want to Google-bait: let's have "Patterico" lead back to the "Peace" page at the Nobel Foundation. Like this: Patterico.) There we go.

Via Protein Wisdom.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 02:02 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.

92kb generated in CPU 0.0323, elapsed 0.1526 seconds.
221 queries taking 0.133 seconds, 585 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

November 30, 2005

November 29, 2005

November 28, 2005

November 27, 2005

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds