Search Results

BOB OWENS: When Entitlement Socialism Fails.

BOB OWENS: Another Clark County Cop Kills And Walks. “An off-duty cop kills a man who finds the cop sleeping with his wife. Again, the force exonerates its own without charges being filed.”

BOB OWENS: Felons Can’t Own Guns. So How Did This Guy Acquire Three … Gun Companies?

COMING SOON: Darpa’s Self-Aiming “One Shot” Sniper Rifle.

Meanwhile, Bob Owens shoots the Beowulf .50.

BARELY LEGAL Sea Bass? Shockingly, not a niche porn-market.

UPDATE: Bob Owens emails: “Hey, some fisherman just want a little tail.” I’m sure there’s a jail-bait joke in there somewhere, too.

BOB OWENS: Gunned Down in Vegas: What Really Happened to Erik Scott? “An accomplished young man is killed by police outside a Vegas Costco, and bystander accounts starkly contrast with official reports. . . . For the record, the Costco did not have signs posted prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons. Scott did not violate any laws in carrying his weapon in the store. It is quite possible that Erik Scott was gunned down without having committed so much as a misdemeanor crime, and that the officers who shot him will be merely the latest exonerated in a long line from an apparently unaccountable police force.”

Here’s a statement from Scott’s father in the West Point Alumni class notes. (Bumped).

BOB OWENS: Violent crime continues to plummet as gun ownership skyrockets.

BOB OWENS: Relax: Senate Gun Hearing Isn’t What You Think. “That cryptic notice of an upcoming Senate hearing on firearms is not the start of another gun control effort. It’s to discuss a bill that would protect gun dealers.” Ah, how times have changed.

BOB OWENS: No, Texas hasn’t been invaded. There are some sections of Texas I would not advise you to invade. Like, you know, all of it. . .

BOB OWENS: Think Progress Ripped Content From Tea Party Video To Create Fraudulent Racism Claim.

BOB OWENS: “Think Progress” And The Eighth Circle Of Hell.

BOB OWENS slaps ThinkProgress for fakery. Remember, it’s not meant to convince anybody — just to keep the faithful from weakening between now and November.

BOB OWENS: Calderon Fibbed About Assault Weapons.

BOB OWENS: High School Where Flag Flap Occurred Hides A Racist Secret. “What’s more divisive: students wearing American flag shirts or administrators sanctioning a racial supremacist group?”

Related: Roger Simon: Identity Politics is for idiot sheep and the LA Unified School District.

BOB OWENS: The Appalling Media Double Standard on Reporting Political Violence. “When it comes to leftist violence, the media sees no evil, hears no evil, and especially speaks no evil.”

BOB OWENS: Agents of Incompetence: ATF Dodges FOIA, Still Has Seized BB Guns. “PJM asked for documents related to the bureau’s seizure of $20,000 worth of BB guns, but was given documents that had nothing to do with the case.”

BOB OWENS: Astroturf: On Heels of Failed ‘Coffee Party,’ It’s ‘The Other 95%’. How many tries is that? There was “A New Way Forward,” with its flopped bank protests, there was the “brown-bagger” movement, then the Coffee Party, and now this. Have I missed any?

BOB OWENS: ‘Left’ Behind: Tolerance and the Tea Party.

Plus, Zombie reflections from Orit Sklar.

BOB OWENS: A look at who’s behind the “Crash The Tea Party” website.

Plus, Charlie Martin on what to do: “Turn the tables on them: get pictures of the signs and the people holding them, and we’ll expose them here on PJM.”

BOB OWENS: Shame on WikiLeaks: Framing Lawful Engagement as Anti-American Propaganda (Part Two).

BOB OWENS: Shame on WikiLeaks: Framing Lawful Engagement as Anti-American Propaganda. “The video plainly shows U.S. forces identifying and killing armed Mahdi Army soldiers, following rules of engagement.”

UPDATE: Related item here. “If anything the video demonstrates the extremes to which the pilots went to follow the rules of engagement. (Go to 7:40 and watch until about 8:50.)”

ANOTHER UPDATE: More from Blackfive.

And this from a blogger at Firedoglake:

I want to first start by saying that Wikileaks has really misled the public on the details of this video. They made it sound like it was an unprovoked massacre of unarmed civilians, and so it angers me when I wasted my time watching this video to see nothing like that.

Yep, Firedoglake.

BOB OWENS ON FALSE FLAGS AND TEA PARTY KNOCKOFFS: “A possibly fake Tea Party candidate may be looking to help Harry Reid, and a blatantly Astroturfed ‘Coffee Party’ gets a smattering of attention.”

More from Tom Maguire and William Jacobson. “It is very clear from Park’s background, and her own Tweets, that the Coffee Party simply is part of the perpetual Obama campaign, a means by which to subvert the real grassroots Tea Party movement by co-opting part of the message, but in a way which supports keeping Obama in power.”

UPDATE: From Jacobson’s comments: “Smells like the overwhelmingly popular Air America!” Also this: “This strikes me as little more than a construct to enable the media to have a Tea Party counterweight.”

BOB OWENS: Tea Party of Nevada: Real Third Party, or False Flag?

BOB OWENS: Did Abdulmutallab Want to Fail? Eh, No. Another conspiracy theory bites the dust. You know, I thought it was the party out of power that was supposed to go insane. . . .

BOB OWENS: Violence Policy Center Makes It Up as They Go Along — Again. “Would you trust the statistical and factual reporting acumen of an organization that can’t even tell the difference between someone being dead or alive?”

BOB OWENS: Gun Control Advocates Trying to Capitalize on Fort Hood.

BOB OWENS: The unrequited dream of smart guns. “They look wonderful in theory but fail miserably in practice.”

IS JUSTICE SERVED FASTER FOR DEMOCRATS IN MISSOURI? “Three months after Kenneth Gladney and Kelly Owens were assaulted in the Bernard school parking lot following Russ Carnahan’s town hall the charges still remain in hibernation at the County Counselor’s office. Upon contacting Bob McCullough, I was told that Gladney’s charges fall into Patricia Redington’s jurisdiction.”

MORE ON BOGUS “COP KILLER” WEAPONS, from Bob Owens. “Ironically, more of the wounded soldiers are possibly alive today because of Hasan’s media-hyped choice of weapons.”

RALPH PETERS: Fort Hood’s 9/11.

UPDATE: More from Bob Owens.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Ann Althouse: “There are a lot of questions here, and we need to be brave about asking them.”

MORE: Thomas Kenniff at the Washington Post.

Plus, in praise of decisiveness.

OH NO: Crazies with guns everywhere!

I love this bit: “And that’s not all. A man brought a gun to a town hall with Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) last week, without incident.” Stop the presses! A man brought a gun without incident!

This, on the other hand, is mostly incoherent: “At Obama’s town hall last week in Portsmouth, N.H., a man was arrested for having a gun hidden in his car after the Secret Service found him at Portsmouth High School hours before Obama arrived carrying a pocketknife. He didn’t have a license for a concealed weapon.”

Does Obama need a license for a concealed weapon to carry a pocketknife? . . . . And if so, why didn’t they arrest him, too?

Okay, that’s just snark. But really, if you’re going to sell the image of crazy armed mobs everywhere!!!! you’re going to need better anecdotes than this. And, you know, a mastery of 8th grade grammar.

But one of my regular correspondents thinks these incidents are all a ruse by the authorities: “Here’s the set up for that Boston Massacre type of event I keep goin’ on about…”

I’m not seeing it, but then I’m well-known to be Polyannaish in outlook. However, assuming that these aren’t agents provocateurs but rather militant gun-rights activists trying to counter “denormalization,” well, I think this is a bad idea and I’d urge them to reconsider. Barbecue joints are one thing, Presidential appearances another.

Matt Welch has related thoughts. Plus, if people had showed up with guns at Bush events, do you think the press would have spun it as evidence of Bush’s unpopularity?

UPDATE: Reader Nathaniel Ferguson writes:

This is not just a poorly written statement, it also brings up a couple of questions.

1. Is it illegal to carry a pocket knife?

2. Is it illegal to carry a pocket knife in a location where the President is going to be in the near future?

3. Is being found with a pocket knife (oh the horror of it!) grounds for the police to search your car? Did the police have to get a warrant for that?

4. Does a person need to have a concealed carry permit to have a firearm in their car? It doesn’t seem that he was carrying the gun on his person.

5. What’s next, police will visit gunowners’ homes in towns the President will visit at some point in the future and take their guns away before he arrives?

I could be wrong, but I think the Secret Service offers adequate protection for the President in the event of a potential Swiss Army Knife wielding maniac.

If not, our tax dollars are going to waste. Meanwhile, I’ll note that the worst actual violence at any Town Hall event was the Ken Gladney beating. But when a black guy is beaten by white union supporters of Obama’s healthcare plan, it’s not news.

Plus, eliminationist rhetoric from the Green Party? Well, Ken Gladney certainly experienced that “smash critics” talk firsthand.

MORE: SayUncle: “Black man with a gun not breaking the law. Press panics.” Well, it does kind of blow their preferred racial narrative.

STILL MORE: Bob Owens deflates lefty shock:

The armed protesters at events in Arizona and New Hampshire were never “at” Obama’s meetings. They were never inside of the security perimeter that the Secret Service establishes for Presidential appearances. They weren’t ever close.

The protester in New Hampshire who had a gun in a tactical drop-leg rig was on private property well away from the Obama appearance (I’ve heard estimates of ½ to ¾ mile away) and was never in direct line of sight of either the venue or the motorcade. He never remotely a threat to the President, nor did he intend to be.

Likewise, those open carry advocates at yesterday’s event in Arizona arranged for a police liaison the day before the event, and were constantly afforded security by the Phoenix Police Department and had at least one known Secret Service agent shadowing them to assure they were following the law. These citizens were never anywhere near the President, nor did they attempt to go anywhere near the Secret Service’s security perimeter that cordoned off the event and the building in which it was held.

As for the citizens ejected by the Secret Service during President Bush’s meetings in the past, I can’t claim to know much about the specific instances they refer to, but they do make clear these were citizens inside the event location when they were ejected.

Read the whole thing.

FINALLY: The White House and Secret Service are fine with armed protesters. Go figure. Tempest, meet teapot! Er, and somebody tell the folks at Talking Points Memo that they’re diverging from the, er, talking points . . . .

BOB OWENS says the Marines’ social-media ban may not go far enough.

“PEAGATE?” Bob Owens managed to debunk an Obama faux-scandal before I even heard of it.

BOB OWENS: Sotomayor: Obama’s End Run on the Second Amendment.

BOB OWENS: Is That An Anti-Aircraft Gun in Your Pocket? “Mexican authorities misrepresent the weapons they are confiscating from drug cartels.”

BOB OWENS ON BLOOD LIBEL FROM THE LEFT: “The best minds progressive politics has to offer have apparently met on their little list and determined that—eureka!—it is the fault of the evil right wing neocon media that an unemployed sociopath ambushed and killed three police officers in Pittsburgh that were responding to a domestic violence call placed by his mother.” I’m sure the subject was analyzed with JournoList’s usual compassion and analytic objectivity.

I love the reference to “his Klannish (nearly progressive) hatred of Zionism.” Yeah, it fits.

UPDATE: Kos going “full-metal moonbat?”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Standing up against hate speech.

MORE: “Don’t forget who Kos is.”

Plus, more echo-chamber hate speech from Media Matters shill Oliver Willis. Why not just paste the talking points directly from JournoList? Oh, wait . . .

STILL MORE: Ouch. Kos Finally Finds A Cop Killing Revolutionary He’ll Criticize.

FINALLY: Jim Treacher emails: “Oliver Willis is for banning violent video games, presumably. And I’m sure he thinks the Beatles should’ve been locked up along with Charles Manson. Just kidding, that would only be if he actually had principles and wasn’t just trying to score cheap political points from the murder of police officers.” I was an early booster of Oliver Willis’s blogging career, but the move to Media Matters seemed to undercut his promise. Or perhaps my judgment was simply wrong from the beginning.

BOB OWENS: Mexico’s spike in violence can be rectified by taking a leaf out of Iraq’s book.

BOB OWENS LOOKS AT why the U.S. is facing an ammunition shortage.

BOB OWENS: Skyrocketing demand has been emptying the shelves of America’s gun stores. Here’s why.

BOB OWENS: Second Amendment Under Fire: Gun Ownership in the Obama Era.

YEAH, the PJM ad-network model isn’t working. I don’t have much to do with the PJM business side, but online ads just aren’t producing revenue like they were a few years ago, and the blog-network thing was apparently a tough sell. Hence the emphasis on PJTV. How will that work out? Stay tuned.

UPDATE: Thoughts from longtime PJM critic Ann Althouse.

MORE: Further thoughts from The Anchoress. And more at Protein Wisdom.

STILL MORE: Roger Simon: “We disbanded the ad network part of our business for a simple reason: it was losing money and we couldn’t see how in the reasonable future that would change.”

MORE STILL: Some business points from Tim Oren, including this one: “Anyone who’s paid attention knows that the effective CPM for both click-through and exposure ads on blogs s***s. I mean really s***s – like up to an order of magnitude less than run-of-site ads on big, topically diffuse web properties.”

FINALLY: Bob Owens reminds people that it’s just the ad network that’s ending in April, not PJ Media.

BOB OWENS: Bill Ayers Hits the Road Post-Election, Whitewashing His Past.


It’s important that things go smoothly.

UPDATE: Bob Owens emails that he was ahead of the curve on the Milli Vanilli comparisons.

FROM BOB OWENS: A comprehensive debunking of arguments that Obama is ineligible for the presidency.

FROM BOB OWENS, reflections on six months of carrying concealed.

THE SPIN BEGINS! New York Times trying to credit Obama with Iraq win. Bob Owens deconstructs.

Compare with this assessment in the Kansas City Star: Bush leaves Iraq in good shape for Obama.

HMM: “First time I’ve seen Obama blushing and looking frustrated in a debate. McCain is getting under his skin.”

UPDATE: Ann Althouse comments: “On the split screen, Obama has that look that I saw him aim at Hillary Clinton months ago. I think McCain is getting to him.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: A reader from the McCain campaign emails: “Obama looks bored and annoyed. Can’t he just be president already?”

Meanwhile, reader Rich Willis wonders if Obama just called Joe Biden a racist: “Did I just hear Senator Obama say that Joe Biden has never forgotten where he came from? Scranton Penn? Isn’t that the state John Murtha says is full of Racists? Hmmmm…..”

McCain hits Obama for never having travelled south of our border — kind of a nice subtle response to some of the anti-Palin remarks.

Another reader emails: “Obama comes off smirking nonstop or laughing and nodding to Schieffer while McCain is talking, but since only Fox is showing the split screen, most people aren’t going to pick up on that. His behavior reminds me of Al Gore in 2000. And not for nothing, but we’re near the end of the third debate, and not a single Second Amendment question or a Fairness Doctrine question in any debate.”

McCain calls Obama “Senator Government.” Was that a slip, or intentional?

Big winner so far: Joe the Plumber. And reader Daniel Moore emails: “Your reader emailed that only Fox is showing the split screen. CNN has been showing the split screen the whole time as well. And, yes, Sen. Obama is smirking nonstop.” Reader Selina Wren says they’ve got the split screen on ABC, too.

Okay, when it comes to judges, I think they’re both lying.

A reader emails: “I’m curious about Sen. Obama. If he truly does not believe in litmus tests for Supreme Court Judges, on what grounds did he oppose Justice Alito and Chief Justice Roberts?” Like I said, they’re both lying.

What’s interesting to me is how much Obama is stressing his agreement with McCain on many issues. I think his polls must show a lot of undecided voters in need of reassurance that Obama isn’t too radically leftist.

Bob Owens summarizes the debate in two sentences.

Meanwhile, I note two insider-Senators spending most of their time running against “Washington.”

BOB OWENS: Obama, Ayers, and Dohrn, Oh My. “The ties between Barack Obama and terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn go back over 21 years.”

DEMANDING A SARAH PALIN PRESS CONFERENCE: Sure, bring it on — right after Obama takes questions from Bob Owens, Stanley Kurtz, David Freddoso, the Powerline guys, and Hugh Hewitt on the Bill Ayers/Annenberg business.

Oh, and maybe a discussion of his Columbia and Harvard transcripts. Only one candidate is being sheltered from tough press questions with the active complicity of the press.

BOB OWENS: “Just some guy in the neighborhood” who almost blew up the Fort Dix NCO Club.


Also, Stephen Green is drunkblogging, and the back-injured Bruce Carroll is Vicodin-blogging.

UPDATE: Oh, what the hell. You liveblog too. I’m opening comments. Please try to wait a minute or two in between refreshing.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Hmm. Doesn’t seem to be working. Something in the site move seems to have screwed things up.

MORE: Extreme Mortman isn’t impressed with the debate so far: “Drunk blogging? Vicodin blogging? Heck, any instapundit readers up for Ambien blogging?”

And can we get rid of that lame Main Street / Wall Street dichotomy now that both of them have used it more than once? Please?

TigerHawk is liveblogging, too.

Speaking on behalf of PorkBusters, I’m glad to see the earmark issue getting so much attention.

But neither Obama nor McCain is on top of their game — they kind of sound like an SNL parody of themselves.

Jeff Garzik emails: “Both are floundering. The debate format is brilliant, primarily at drawing out the
soundbite-driven nature of both candidates.”

Heh: “I can’t stand this ‘main street’ rhetoric. I thought that there was no main street any more since Walmart spelled the death of it . . .”

More liveblogging from Jules Crittenden.

So is John Althouse Cohen, and it’s hard to argue with this observation:

“I’ve got a bracelet.” “I’ve got a bracelet too!” Are these serious adults running for president, or is this summer camp?

Yeah, McCain and Obama aren’t bad guys, but it’s hard to believe that these two are the best that a country of 300 million can produce.

More liveblogging at Gateway Pundit.

Wow, the debate isn’t even over and the McCain folks already have this video out.

Bob Owens: “Frankly, I think everyone, right and left, was expecting something far different than we saw here tonight.”

And reader Peter Sibley emails: “Strangest line of the night: From Obama: ‘I never objected to nuclear waste.'”


WON’T BACK DOWN: Taheri responds to Obama.

Obama also told NBC: “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made, but I think the only way to assure that is to make sure that there is strong bipartisan support, that Congress is involved, that the American people know the outlines of this agreement.

“And my concern is that if the Bush administration negotiates, as it currently has, and given that we’re entering into the heat of political season, that we’re probably better off not trying to complete a hard-and-fast agreement before the next administration takes office, but I think obviously these conversations have to continue.

“As I said, my No. 1 priority is making sure that we don’ t have a situation in which US troops on the ground are somehow vulnerable to, are made more vulnerable, because there is a lack of a clear mandate.”

This confirms precisely what I suggested in my article: Obama preferred to have no agreement on US troop withdrawals until a new administration took office in Washington.

Obama has changed position on another key issue. In the NBC report, he pretends that US troops in Iraq do not have a “clear mandate.” Now, however, he admits that there is a clear mandate from the UN Security Council and that he’d have no objection to extending it pending a bilateral Iraq-US agreement. . . .

Contrary to what Obama and his campaign have said, Iraqi officials insist that at no point in his talks in Washington and Baghdad did Obama make a distinction between SOFA and SFA when he advised them to wait for the next American administration.

The real news I see in the Obama statement is that there may be an encouraging evolution in his position on Iraq: The “rebuttal” shows that the senator no longer shares his party leadership’s belief that the United States has lost the war in Iraq.

Well, that’s good, right?

Earlier posts on this subject here and here. Plus, here’s a piece by Bob Owens. “If this charge is false, the Obama campaign must push forcefully for and get a substantial correction, if not a full retraction of the Taheri article. If they don’t, then longtime accusations of Obama’s naked self-interest may doom an already flailing campaign.” I don’t think the Obama Campaign’s response comes anywhere close to that. In fact, it seems more to confirm Taheri’s account.

UPDATE: Tom Maguire has much more on this, including Obama’s “baffling ‘denial’ which some keen observers noted did not seem to deny much.” Plus this: “I think Obama has been caught reading his campaign literature to foreign negotiators.”

BOB OWENS is blogging Hanna.


Bristol Palin has single-handedly dealt the Republican Party its winning hand. With an economy in decline and an unpopular war started by Republicans, Bristol Palin’s unborn baby has now made the Culture War the focal point of this election. This is one ground and, in fact, the only ground on which Republicans can win this election.

Hmm. Read the whole thing. McCain fans should hope he’s right.

UPDATE: On the other hand, Jeralyn Merritt is running a pool on when Palin will drop out. Ann Althouse has some thoughts on that.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Michael Silence agrees with A.C.:

My reaction to the Bristol Palin “controversy”


The more liberals pound this drum, the more votes they garner for McCain/Palin. It’s a non-issue. From a political standpoint the Dems would do well to drop it and move on. I mean, really, how long can one harp on the fact there’s not a perfect family in the world?

We’ll find out who’s right, won’t we?

MORE: Byron York has been interviewing evangelicals at the RNC.

STILL MORE: Bob Owens responds to Jeralyn Merritt with a pool on when Barack Obama will drop out: “We now know far more about Sarah Palin in just four days than we’ve learned about Barack Obama in 17 months. That is just sad. It’s a pathetic reflection of the mainstream media’s unwillingness to do their jobs for fear of finding stories that would hurt the candidate so many of them openly desire to win. But periodically appearing to read teleprompters isn’t vetting, not matter how many months a candidate has done it, and Obama’s ability to perform in set-piece debates is both dubious—Hillary once famously took him apart—and irrelevant. Barack Obama really has never been fully vetted. He hasn’t even come close.”

FINALLY: Reader Paul Jackson writes: “Is it just me or has Bristol Palin gotten more ‘ink’ than Joe Biden’s lobbyist son? Imagine if the roles were reversed. I think we all know how that would be perceived.”

ALSO, BIGFOOT IS REAL: New Republic’s Winter Soldier Scott Beauchamp Is Back and He Swears It’s All True.

UPDATE: Bob Owens has much, much more. “Spencer Ackerman does a great job of parroting what Beauchamp has been saying all along, and manages to get a few digs in at the man who fired him as well. What he doesn’t do is prove his case. All in all, perhaps his greatest accomplishment was getting this four-page non-revelation published.”

BOB OWENS: “I’ve found myself in the rather unlikely role of defending Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama during the past few days. I’ve done so not out of any sense of loyalty to Obama — as anyone familiar with my blog or my work at PJ Media or the New York Post will attest — but out of pure curiosity about the many rumors swirling around the man who would be president.”

GATEWAY PUNDIT HAS A ROUNDUP on the Arkansas Democratic HQ shooting. And Bob Owens has more.


Not enough people are listening to Christian Grantham’s advice, I guess.

BOB OWENS: “While the Media Slept… …another province, Diwaniyah, was handed over to Iraqi government control.”

Old media line — “Of course we’re losing — that’s why we have to talk about it all the time.” New line: “Of course we’re winning — so it isn’t news!”


BOB OWENS: Don’t Hammer Obama for ‘Refining’ Iraq Stance. “Republicans should welcome any change of heart from Obama, as recognizing American progress in Iraq could only benefit both countries.”

I don’t think it’s Republicans who are hammering him the hardest, though; I think it’s disappointed Netroots types.

WASHINGTON POST: Obama Got Discount on Home Loan.

“The real question is: Were congressmen getting unique treatment that others weren’t getting?” associate law professor Adam J. Levitin, a credit specialist at Georgetown University Law Center, said about the Countrywide loans. “Do they do business like that for people who are not congressmen? If they don’t, that’s a problem.”

Yes, that’s the question.

UPDATE: Bob Owens: “Obama had no prior relationship with the lender, was taking out a $1.32 million loan below market rates, without paying the customary fees. So what? . . . Barack Obama did precisely what every other politician does, and nothing more. The only reason this story merits any attention is that Obama’s campaign has created a mythology around him that casts him as a reformer.”

Yeah, “Barack Obama: More of the Same” wouldn’t have been much of a slogan.


Individuals have a constitutional right to possess a basic firearm (the line drawn is unclear, but does not extend to automatic weapons) and to use it in self-defense. The government can prohibit possession of firearms by, for example, felons and the mentally ill. And it can also regulate the sale of firearms, presumably through background checks.

The opinion leaves open the question whether the Second Amendment is incorporated against the States, but strongly suggests it is. So today’s ruling likely applies equally to State regulation.

I’m just on a quick break. I’ll read the opinion — all 157 pages — and comment later.

UPDATE: Bob Owens notes some less thoughtful commentary.

BOB OWENS: “Why didn’t the press ask Physicians for Human Rights about how weak most of their evidence of torture by Americans turned out to be?”

ARE SOLDIERS REALLY BEING ASSAULTED ON THE D.C. METRO? Bob Owens looks into it and it seems to be mostly bureaucratic smoke-blowing — or ass-covering — based on a single incident.


Fifty-four shootings in two weekends. Shot-up bodies recovered in groups of three and five. Is this Ramadi? Basra? No.

Welcome to Chicago.

Note the fruits of gun control. Plus this on the Chicago P.D.’s up-armament: “If the department arms 10,000 of their officers with M4s, the police will have 9,900 more assault rifles in Chicago than the U.S. Marines presently have in Fallujah, Iraq.”

BOB OWENS: For Obama, Not All Hateful Rhetoric Is Equal.

That’s clearly true.

THOUGHTS ON THAT TIMES SQUARE BOMB ATTACK, from Bob Owens. “This was an act of domestic terrorism.”

UPDATE: Rand Simberg emails: “Does Bill Ayers have an alibi? Was he having breakfast with Obama at the time?” It is feeling a bit like 1968. But where was our Summer Of Love? Britney’s flings don’t count . . . .

ANOTHER UPDATE: Oh, jeez. I was just kidding, but . . . .

BOB OWENS NOTES something smelly in Iraq.

BOB OWENS ISSUES A ringing endorsement of John McCain. Plus, at the end, a slogan that belongs on bumper stickers everywhere!

“BE NICE. BE POLITE. HAVE A PLAN TO KILL EVERYONE YOU SEE.” Bob Owens reports on weapons training.

BOB OWENS HAS THOUGHTS on today’s female suicide bombings in Baghdad:

Both bombs appear to have been remote detonated. These women probably did not know they were carrying explosives at all, and it would probably be fair to include them among the victims. . . . This tells us several things.

First, it tells us that al Qaeda in Iraq recognizes that attempts to use male suicide bombers and vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs), their preferred method of suicide attacks for those seeking martyrdom, are no longer effective. These attacks fail because the combination of coalition military forces, Iraqi security forces, and neighborhood militias, known as “concerned local citizens” (CLCs) creating a security system that increasingly works, and makes it very unlikely that these preferred attacks will succeed. There is also some speculation that the influx of would-be foreign suicide bombers into Iraq is drying up.

Today’s attacks also tell us that al Qaeda in Iraq is getting very desperate in seeking the high-casualty attacks that they so value. They were forced to scrape the bottom of the proverbial barrel, and use not only women (which they’d prefer to subjugate), but mentally disabled women at that, suggesting that finding willing volunteers is becoming ever more difficult.

Good suicide-bombers are hard to find, and retention is even tougher. Meanwhile, Michael Yon emails from Iraq:

All well in South Baghdad, but sounds like the suicide bombings were pretty bad. I did not hear them detonate so must have been far away. It’s the al Qaeda mode, though. Sounds like the women were mentally disabled.

And Austin Bay emails that this may be the start of the “Terrorist Tet” he’s been predicting. As Bob Owens notes, some people here at home are all-too-eager to help. Just like last time.

THE WAR AND STEALTH FUNDING: Bob Owens has thoughts that go beyond the undisclosed Soros influence. I have to say, though, that if the NRA funded a study on gun violence, the news media would tend to stress that aspect, along with pointing out obvious flaws in the study. They might even point out if it was designed to give political cover to the candidates of one political party in an election year . . . .

THANKS TO BOB OWENS’ FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST, Scott Beauchamp’s statements about his bogus TNR piece are now online. Will TNR respond? Doubtful . . . .

STILL MORE Scott Beauchamp documents posted by Bob Owens.


BOB OWENS: HARPER’S DEFAULTS on Scott Horton’s credibility.

VIDEO: Fred Thompson responds to The Politico on the hat story. “Just remember…we don’t raise our hands when we’re told to, and we don’t wear any hats, unless they’re our own.” Bob Owens observes that Thompson’s video is funny, but The Politico‘s stonewalling is not. The story’s also leaking out into the journalism press.

WATCH OUT, POLITICO: Bob Owens is on the case.


The TNR saga is slowly seeping into the media, with posts this morning at the Washington Post and the New York Times, in addition to last night’s mention in the New York Observer.

Not a single one of these outlets discusses the fact that Franklin Foer spent the better part of 13 pages alleging a military conspiracy spanning four bases in three countries involving dozens of soldiers, from privates to colonels.

I guess they didn’t want to discuss how nutty that explanation sounds.

Nor did they mention that Foer and The New Republic refused to apologize to those soldiers in Iraq and Kuwait they accused of atrocities.

Read the whole thing.

BOB OWENS RESPONDS TO THE NEW REPUBLIC’S LATEST. Excerpt: “The bottom line is that the Scott Beauchamp debacle was a test of editorial character for The New Republic under Franklin Foer’s leadership. For over four months, the magazine has answered that challenge by hiding behind anonymous sources, making personal attacks against critics, asserting a massive conspiracy against them, while covering up conflicting testimony and refusing to answer the hard questions.”

AMIDST A CLOUD OF INK, TNR RETRACTS AND FLEES THE SCENE. Bob Owens comments: “Stay tuned. I’ll have much more later, including why Franklin Foer said nothing to justify keeping his job.”

UPDATE: Further thoughts from Patterico.

My take? Push the button, Frank.

MORE: Ouch: “pathetic, evasive, self-justifying, self-pitying, and deeply dishonest.”

Plus, a gratuitous en passant smear from Foer. It is, alas, consistent with the classless way that he and TNR have behaved throughout.

STILL MORE: The Fog of Foer.

FOER’S LAST STAND? Bob Owens notes new developments in the New Republic /Beauchamp affair.

A QUIET CLEANUP? Bob Owens reports that TNR seems to have canned its chief fact-checker.

VIDEO: Bob Owens and Roger Simon interview Fred Thompson on the war on terror. Very interesting, and I think it’s one of Thompson’s best appearances to date.

BOB OWENS says that the media is missing the point of Fred Thompson’s speech at the Citadel.

BOB OWENS: Media Terminator. And that’s from Michael Yon.

THE NEW REPUBLIC’S PUBLISHER, Elisabeth Sheldon, responds to critics. Bob Owens is incompletely satisfied.

A POINT OF HONOR: Bob Owens gets serious about The New Republic.

MORE ON The New Republic, Beauchamp, and the Army, from Bob Owens. Including this observation: “As far as this story is concerned, it seems that only bloggers are doing the job that most journalists won’t do, such as sending emails, asking questions, and making phone calls to those involved in the still-developing story.”

MORE ON THE NEW REPUBLIC / BEAUCHAMP AFFAIR, in this column from Bob Owens.

BOB OWENS: “I value the writers’ service and their opinions as soldiers who have served in Iraq, but wouldn’t this editorial have meant more if the Washington Post had managed to find soldiers to write it who had actually been in in Iraq in the last year?” Yeah, things change fast. In 2006, Anbar was written off.

Just remember, Michael Yon is in Iraq right now. Why doesn’t the Post ask him for an oped? Drop me a line, Post editors, if you’re having trouble reaching him. I’ll give you his satellite phone number.

UPDATE: Related thoughts here, including this: “Petraeus’ erstwhile counter-insurgency advisor, Australian LTC David Kilcullen, said an interesting thing recently. When you served in Iraq tends to color how you view Iraq.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Murdoc is suspicious.

MORE: From Iraq, Greyhawk writes: “We’ve won the war.”

Well, that’s a relief, though some will find it disturbing.

STILL MORE: Michael Yon emails:

It’s amazing that a dozen ex-captains who apparently served in Iraq — only one of them recently — are so out of touch with the situation.

They’ve shamefully added their names to what amounts to a petition published in the Washington Post. Big questions: Who actually authored this Op-ed? How did these dozen captains get their names tied to it?

If people like Bob Owens and the “Army of Davids” get interested in this, we’ll likely get some answers.

Would be very interesting to know what specifically each of these captains did in Iraq, how they were viewed by their peers, and what they are doing today. Did they come up with the idea for this article themselves, or did someone write it, perhaps, then round up a posse of disgruntled ex-officers who would put their name to it?

It would be interesting to know the backstory.

BOB OWENS: The New Republic Re-Interviewed Beauchamp… Over a Month Ago.

BEAUCHAMP UPDATE: Bob Owens notices the dogs not barking at TNR.

BEAUCHAMP UPDATE: Apparently heads are rolling at TNR, just quietly. (Via Bob Owens).

BOB OWENS: “Today is the two-month anniversary of Franklin Foer claiming that he and The New Republic would run an honest investigation into the claims made in a story written by Scott Thomas Beauchamp. . . . Since that time, a few things have happened.” Yeah, but not that honest investigation.

“BETRAY US” at a discount!

UPDATE: Giuliani wants equal time.

Meanwhile, Uncle Jimbo files a complaint with the FEC. I disapprove of McCain-Feingold, etc., but the New York Times really wanted these laws, so I say let them get what they want, good and hard.

And Bob Owens, who noticed this first, does some well-modulated gloating.