Ann Coulter on TNR’s War Hoax

Coulter rounds up the story of TNR’s descent into Ratherdom quite nicely:

In their latest demonstration of how much they love the troops, liberals have produced yet another anti-war hoax.

The New Republic has been running “true war” stories from a brave, anonymous liberal penning dispatches from Iraq. The famed “Baghdad Diarist” described his comrades joyfully using Bradley fighting vehicles to crush stray dogs, mocking a female whose face had been blown off by an IED, and defacing Iraqi corpses by wearing skull parts on their own heads.

Various conservatives began questioning the plausibility of the anonymous diarist’s account — noting, for example, that Bradley vehicles don’t “swerve,” as the diarist claimed. The editor of The New Republic responded by attacking the skeptics’ motives, complaining that some conservatives make “a living denying any bad news that emanates from Iraq.”

But when that clever retort failed to quiet rumblings from the right wing, The New Republic finally revealed the “Baghdad Diarist” to be … John Kerry! Actually it was Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp, Democratic candidate for president circa 2028. (That gives him 20 years to learn to pronounce “Genghis.”)

In revealing himself two weeks ago, Beauchamp lashed out at “people who have never served in Iraq.” He said he was too busy fighting “an actual war” to participate in “an ideological battle that I never wanted to join.”

He had tried to stay out of ideological battles by writing made-up articles in a national magazine claiming soldiers in Iraq had become callous beasts because of George Bush’s war, killing to “secure the riches of the empire.” Alas, this proved an ineffective method of keeping his head low. Beauchamp’s next bid for privacy will be an attempt to host “The Price Is Right.”

In response to Beauchamp’s revelation that he was the “Baghdad Diarist,” the military opened an investigation into his allegations. There was no corroboration for his stories, and Beauchamp promptly signed an affidavit admitting that every single thing he wrote in The New Republic was a lie.

Read the whole piece, it’s magnificent.

Ann gets a bad rap, often enough form her fellow Conservatives, but the fact is she’s one of the best writers in the social con genre. Her site’s always worth a read and no more so than now.

Smoking Ads Cause Smoking! (Plus the Worst Gun Violence Study Ever!)

A double exclamation title for these two nuggets from Ravenswood’s Universe who rightly predicted years ago that anti-Smoking campaigns would in fact cause teens to smoke and now it’s official. Of course you don’t need psychic powers for that one, those ads filled with rejects from Old Navy commercials would make any self-respecting cool kid head for the nearest pack of Djarum. From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Hye-Jin Paek, an assistant professor at UGA, found that many anti-smoking ad campaigns have the opposite effect on teenagers, backfiring because they actually encourage the rebellious nature of youth.

They don’t want to hear what they should do or not do,” Paek said. Instead, she said, ads should focus on convincing teens their friends are heeding the anti-smoking warning because peer pressure has the most direct effect.

Paek and co-author Albert Gunther from the University of Wisconsin-Madison examined surveys from 1,700 middle school students about their exposure to anti-smoking ads and their intention to smoke. The study will be published in the August issue of the journal “Communication Research.”

The study is the latest in a string of research showing that anti-smoking campaigns often have ad little to no impact on teens. In 2002, a study commissioned by an anti-smoking foundation found tobacco manufacturer Philip Morris’ youth anti-smoking campaign was making students more likely to smoke.

Teens don’t care what adults think? Who Knew?

Also at Ravenwood’s is the anatomy of a hoax. The Violence Poverty Center, a gun grabbing group of shiftless hippies, released this report claiming that Florida ranks second in the country for drive by shootings. The problem is that their study looked at a six month period in 2006 (July to December I believe) and worse yet compiled their evidence by having “researchers” Google the term Drive by shooting! They Googeled their research! From their report:

From July 1, 2006, through December 31, 2006, the Violence Policy Center
(VPC) used the Google News search engine to collect every reported news article that contained the term “drive by.” From these results, the VPC removed all results not related to a drive-by shooting incident (for example, extraneous results included news reports of football games detailing a “drive by” one team against another, etc.).Recognizing the limitations of the survey tools used, and taking into account prior studies looking at the number of drive-by shootings in specific jurisdictions, it is likely that the number of shootings is dramatically underreported.

Wow. That’s good science. I’m glad organizations like the VPC are getting the necessary funding to make this sort of intensive research possible. It makes me feel safe.

Bush Kills Zombies (or Maybe Tourists)

Even when a skit like this is making fun of W., it’s hard not to like the guy. And let’s be honest, if a full fledged Zombie outbreak ever occurs, who do you want helping you barricade the mall you’re holing up in? Bush or Edwards?

I’d prefer Fred myself, but since Romney looks eerily like Zombie killing machine Bruce Campbell it’d be hard not to feel safe with him working the chainsaw.

[youtube]IoXgRtDysLY[/youtube]

h/t ZNN who have a great site despite being lousy sissified Democrat supporters.

The High Cost of “Anti-Zionism”

“Anti-Zionism” legitimizes the hatred of Jewish people. European countries have embraced Islamic “anti-Zionism” whole heartedly and have the spike in crimes against Jewish citizens to prove it.

Smooth Stone reports that yet another European country has become a nightmarish hell hole for Jews as a new study finds them more likely than any other group to face “discrimination.” The study also find that only 12% of the perpetrators were “right wing” leaving us to guess the demographic of the other 88%.

I have a theory myself, but I’ll let everyone decide for themselves. I know what the (somewhat hysterical) JTF will say:

[youtube]SzQFyhFNUtE[/youtube]

Over the top? Definitely. But does he have a point?