Ken Layne has announced that Wonkette has been cast out of the Nick Denton media empire and gone solo, along with a couple of other Denton sites you’ve never heard of. The rationale is complicated but, essentially, Gawker Media was having trouble selling ads on those sites and thinks there’s going to be another bursting of the Internet bubble.

Could be. The irony is that Wonkette will now be joining the BlogAds network, which OTB has been a part of since 2004, and sales there have been painfully slow. Henry Copeland and his team are the best in the business — hell, they invented the business — but it’s a down market despite the heat of the political season.

New York has retroactively decided that a man’s GET OSAMA vanity tags are offensive and can not be displayed on his vehicle.

The federal government may have a $25 million reward for fugitive terrorist Osama bin Laden, but a retired city cop says the Department of Motor Vehicles has banned his “GETOSAMA” vanity license plates as offensive.

Arno Herwerth, 42, a retired NYPD sergeant from Hauppauge, in Suffolk County, told The Post he’s flabbergasted by the DMV’s kibosh, terming the agency’s move as “unpatriotic” and political correctness run amok.

“This is unbelievable,” an angry Herwerth told The Post, insisting he’s puzzled at how his support for a US foreign policy goal can be viewed as objectionable. It’s unpatriotic and absolutely disgusts me that anyone would consider that in any way offensive other than if you’re a member of al Qaeda,” Herwerth said. “You look back at Pearl Harbor and WWII and you wonder, would they be offended by, ‘Get Hitler’?” he lamented.

DMV spokesman Nick Cantiello insisted the “GETOSAMA” plates violate a regulation that bans any tag that is “obscene, lewd, lascivious, derogatory to a particular ethnic or other group or patently offensive.”

This is certainly a baffling decision. Who exactly is offended by the idea that we should “Get Osama”?

Then again, this sort of nonsense is what happens when we give bureaucrats the right to unilaterally declare things “offensive.” The rulings will often be arbitrary, inconsistent, and downright silly. The incentives, though, reward CYA rather than maximum free speech.

Given that people can display virtually anything they want on bumper stickers and other displays on their vehicle, it’s far from clear what’s accomplished by policing the statements which may be purchased on a vanity plate. Further, while court rulings have given the government great latitude in these matters, this would seem to obviously violate the letter of the First Amendment.

Elsewhere:

• Pam Gellar finds blowing up buildings and killing thousands more offensive than the plate.

• John Clark notes that this isn’t the first time the license plate police have gone overboard.

via Memeorandum

As might have been expected, last night’s “All-American Presidential Forum” featuring Repubican candidates for president talking to black journalists at a historically black college talking about issues of special interest to black Americans turned into a black comedy. The focus was mostly on the candidates who didn’t show — which is to say, all of them who might conceivably get elected president — and those who did show exemplified Kris Kristopherson’s adage, “Freedom is another word for nothing left to lose.

The Swamp’s Mark Silva recaps the opener:

At the debate for Republicans at a historically black college campus in Maryland tonight — the debate that all of the leading Republican candidates for president snubbed — radio personality Tom Joyner offered a special welcome to the “home viewing audience” from the stage: Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain and Fred Thomspon. “You know I had to call them out,” said Joyner. Empty podiums were left for the party’s front-runners.

“Enough said of the no-shows,” said host Tavis Smiley, a PBS television and public radio talk show host and moderator of the debate at Morgan State University. Here are the shows: Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, and former ambassador Alan Keyes of Maryland, reprising his 2000 campaign.

“I wish all of the candidates had come,” Huckabee said.

“The main reason I’m here is I was invited,” Paul said.

“I apologize for all the candidates who are not here,” said Brownback. “I think it’s a disgrace that they are not here… What they are doing is sending a message of narrowing the base.

“I’m sorry,” Brownback said. “A lot of people on the Republican side say we can’t get votes from the African American community,” he told the audience. “Why don’t you pick one of the primary states, register voters… and then vote for one of the six of us.”

The Media Bloggers Association, of which I’m a board member, credentialed over 40 bloggers to attend the event and cover it live. The chance to see Mike Huckabee and Alan Keyes, however, didn’t provide adequate motivation for fighting rush hour traffic to Baltimore and driving back from Baltimore in the middle of the night when I had to get up early for work the next day. By all indications, I made the right call. Those who stuck it out have their posts on the event aggregated here.

Ken Layne live blogged it for Wonkette, paraphrasing liberally. HuffPo’s Rachel Sklar plays the dialog straight, interjecting liberally.

Ian Schwartz notes that there was a minor bit of actual news: Ron Paul has pledged not to run as a 3rd party candidate when he doesn’t get the nomination.

American Taíno hands out report cards, with Mike Huckabee coming out as valedictorian with an A- and Alan Keyes barely graduating with a D.

Casey Lartigue is amused that Sam Brownback felt the need to announce he’d been to jail as a means of pandering to black people.

LaShawn Barber correctly guesses that the event will be “boring” and seems more interested in the other bloggers than in the candidates. Given they all have essentially the same chances of being elected president and the guys on stage won’t give out any link love, that’s probably a good call.

Eric Scheie attempts to transcribe the event, including audience reactions. His conclusion:

My feeling is that Huckabee did the best job. His sincerity was obvious, and he was very articulate as he spoke from the heart. Brownback came in second, and the rest, well, Hunter was sorta OK (although his pornography remark sounded almost bizarre), as was Tancredo, while Keyes and Paul sounded desperate and shrill. (I thought Keyes would be a little more articulate and reasoned, but he sounded almost defensive, and really seemed to be yelling.)

That Huckabee was the winner appears to be the early consensus. Will this give him an additional boomlet to go along with his strong showing in the meaningless Aimes straw poll? Perhaps. Enough to matter? Methinks not.

Senator Larry Craig apparently likes to make creepy advances on strange men in airport bathrooms. Unfortunately for him, one of his random targets was a Minneapolis airport policeman.

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in June at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men’s public restroom, according to an arrest report obtained by Roll Call Monday afternoon.

Craig’s arrest occurred just after noon on June 11 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. On Aug. 8, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct in the Hennepin County District Court. He paid more than $500 in fines and fees, and a 10-day jail sentence was stayed. He also was given one year of probation with the court that began on Aug. 8.

A spokesman for Craig described the incident as a “he said/he said misunderstanding,” and said the office would release a fuller statement later Monday afternoon.

After he was arrested, Craig, who is married, was taken to the Airport Police Operations Center to be interviewed about the lewd conduct incident, according to the police report. At one point during the interview, Craig handed the plainclothes sergeant who arrested him a business card that identified him as a U.S. Senator and said, “What do you think about that?” the report states.

Craig was detained for approximately 45 minutes, interviewed, photographed, fingerprinted and released, and police prepared a formal complaint for interference with privacy and disorderly conduct.

According to the incident report, Sgt. Dave Karsnia was working as a plainclothes officer on June 11 investigating civilian complaints regarding sexual activity in the men’s public restroom in which Craig was arrested. Airport police previously had made numerous arrests in the men’s restroom of the Northstar Crossing in the Lindbergh Terminal in connection with sexual activity.

Karsnia entered the bathroom at noon that day and about 13 minutes after taking a seat in a stall, he stated he could see “an older white male with grey hair standing outside my stall.” The man, who lingered in front of the stall for two minutes, was later identified as Craig. “I could see Craig look through the crack in the door from his position. Craig would look down at his hands, ‘fidget’ with his fingers, and then look through the crack into my stall again. Craig would repeat this cycle for about two minutes,” the report states.

Craig then entered the stall next to Karsnia’s and placed his roller bag against the front of the stall door. “My experience has shown that individuals engaging in lewd conduct use their bags to block the view from the front of their stall,” Karsnia stated in his report. “From my seated position, I could observe the shoes and ankles of Craig seated to the left of me.” Craig was wearing dress pants with black dress shoes.

“At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot. I moved my foot up and down slowly. While this was occurring, the male in the stall to my right was still present. I could hear several unknown persons in the restroom that appeared to use the restroom for its intended use. The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area,” the report states. Craig then proceeded to swipe his hand under the stall divider several times, and Karsnia noted in his report that “I could … see Craig had a gold ring on his ring finger as his hand was on my side of the stall divider.”

Karsnia then held his police identification down by the floor so that Craig could see it. “With my left hand near the floor, I pointed towards the exit. Craig responded, ‘No!’ I again pointed towards the exit. Craig exited the stall with his roller bags without flushing the toilet. … Craig said he would not go. I told Craig that he was under arrest, he had to go, and that I didn’t want to make a scene. Craig then left the restroom.”

[...]

In October 2006, Craig’s office publicly denied allegations that he was a homosexual made on a gay activist Web site — blogactive.com. Craig’s office told the Spokane Spokesman-Review that the charge was “completely ridiculous,” saying that the allegations had “no basis in fact.”

Next time I fly in to Minneapolis, I’m definitely going to avoid using the restroom if this kind of thing is so common as to require the detailing of police in the stalls. Yikes!

Otherwise, I’m not sure what to say about Craig’s conduct that hasn’t been covered by the 500 or so bloggers already on this one. A sampling:

• Joe Gandelman wins the preliminary Best Headline prize with, “Airport Restroom Arrest Stalls Senator Larry Craig’s Career.”

• Greg Sargent has a statement from Craig claiming he pled guilty without seeking the advice of counsel. If so, then he’s an idiot as well as a creep. He also has a bonus flashback of Craig telling Larry King, “Bill Clinton is a bad boy, a naughty boy.”

• BooMan thinks Craig may be a wee bit hypocritical, having “voted for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.” In his defense, though, Craig’s actions weren’t those of a man looking for a steady relationship.

• Jeff Fecke wonders, “all Craig is really guilty of is signaling quietly that he was interested in engaging in sexual activity. Why in God’s name is that a crime?” I’m thinking this is a “time, place, and manner” issue. It’s not a crime to go up to a stranger in a coffee shop and flirt. Reaching under the stall uninvited . . . crossing a line.[UPDATE: Thoreau agrees but helpfully suggests, "maybe he had been planning to woo guys with some nice gifts, but the TSA had already confiscated his bottles of wine and cologne."]

• Mark Kleiman wonders why this is news, figuring lying, hypocrisy, and the waste of police resources are yawners. He is, however, upset by the abuse of power in handing over his Senate business card. But, actually, lying and hypocrisy — and, oh yeah, criminal conduct — on the part of elected policymakers is newsworthy.

• Jay Tea thinks the media focuses too much on gay criminal Republicans from 2006 while downplaying all the gay criminal Democrats from the 1960s and 1980s.

• Jane Hamsher questions the timing.

• Henry Farrell, too.

• Minneapolis resident Scott Johnson notes it’s only “the men’s room located in the Northstar Crossing” that needs to be avoided, not all of them in the airport.

• Alex Parene wishes the cop had let this play out a little longer.

• Orin Kerr has decided to close the comments thread on this one.

• Michelle Malkin is conducting a poll on whether Craig should resign.

• Hugh Hewitt don’t need no stinkin’ polls.

• Nor does GayPatriotWest.

• Ed Morrissey wonders, “How long before Craig checks himself into rehab or finds Jesus?” His two-sentence summary of the case is pretty funny, too: “Larry Craig, the Republican Senator from Idaho, paid a visit to Minneapolis in June, and apparently wanted the full tour of the Twin Cities. He went from the airport men’s room to the hoosegow by the most direct route after attempting to importune an undercover police office.”

• Thankfully, neither Crooks and Liars nor Hot Air have a video.

Cuban dictator Fidel Castro is dead. Unless he’s not.

Val Prieto had a flurry of updates yesterday reporting Castro’s death, with imminent announcements expected. Half the political blogosphere linked the post and his server couldn’t handle the strain. In a Communist plot, no announcement was forthcoming.

Meanwhile, celebrity blogger Perez Hilton got into the act with one, two, three, four announcements about impending announcements that are, as of this writing, still impending. (Apparently, Miami has a particularly long rush hour.)

The Cuban government has denied that Fidel Castro is dead, which is exactly what you’d expect if Fidel Castro really were dead. Then again, if he’s not dead, they’d likely deny it, too.

Breaking the tension with a rather obvious joke that’s still funny, Wonk reports that Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.

The Miami Herald thinks it’s a false alarm but until we see Castro alive somewhere — or his dead body, for that matter — we won’t know for sure. All we know at this point is that Fidel Castro is either dead or he’s not.

Fellow Jacksonville State alumnus Stacy McCain has noted something odd about The Atlantic’s growing stable of bloggers: Without exception, they have Ivy League degrees. Indeed, until Megan McArdle’s recent hire, they were all Harvard grads. (Megan, with a mere Penn BA and Chicago MBA, broke the glass ceiling.)

For some years now, bloggers have been portrayed (and have portrayed themselves) as grass-roots outsiders, rebels storming the privileged bastions of the journalistic elite. I’m not sure that image was ever accurate, and the hierarchy of the blogosphere is probably becoming more elitist every day, as more establishment organizations seek to carve out a place in the medium.

McCain notes that even the original Wonkette, Ana Marie Cox, has degrees from Chicago and Berkeley.

Almost all the top bloggers have graduate or professional degrees, mostly from elite schools. As I’ve noted many times over the years (see, for example, “Professionalization of the Blogosphere“), it stands to reason that the blogosphere would be dominated by academics and lawyers, who tend to have both the intellectual training and the time available to spend large chunks of their day processing information and churning out interesting commentary on it. The pure hobbyists like John Amato and Ed Morrissey, who have achieved huge readership simply through passion and hard work, are exceptional, indeed.

That the Atlantic, arguably the most elite of the general interest policy magazines, would tend to hire Ivy League graduates shouldn’t be surprising, even if its uniformity in doing so is. And, even as a man with three degrees from decidedly unprestigious state schools, I must admit that they’ve put together quite a talented collection of bloggers. All but Fallows, who didn’t so far as I know have a blog previously, were on my reading list before they were assembled under a single masthead.

Matthew Yglesias, responding to a report by Ben Smith on Pamela Martin’s requirements for employees of her DC “escort” service, observes, “Now how’s that for out-of-control credentialism — two years’ college to be a hooker?”

Now, I’m all for credentialism but even I fail to see how a college education contributes the skill set required for work in the oldest profession. Presumably, though, these women actually were doing some actual escorting in addition to their, ahem, more noteworthy duties and Martin figured that wealthy clients would prefer to be seen in the company of women who could hold a conversation. Then again, many college graduates can’t do that and plenty of non-grads can.

By the way, I somehow missed the announcement that Matt had been hired up by the Atlantic Monthly blogging conglomerate. Congrats to him. The Atlantic is, in my view, the best general interest magazine out there and, now that they’re in DC rather than Boston, there can’t be a better place for an opinion journalist to work.

Illustration via Wonk.

Florida is making a move to escalate the presidential selection process even more by jumping to the head of the primary line.

Hoping to muscle Florida into a pre-eminent role in picking next year’s Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, the state House voted Wednesday to leapfrog almost all the other states and set a Jan. 29 primary, with an option to go even earlier.

The change, championed by House Speaker Marco Rubio, R-West Miami, and approved 115-1, is part of a national rush by states coveting the clout of Iowa and New Hampshire. Those states have enormous sway in choosing presidential candidates, even though they are small and, some say, unrepresentative of the nation’s people and politics. The proposal must still pass the Senate.

“Florida is obviously going to be the big enchilada on the 29th. It will immediately become very, very important,” said Nichol Rae, political science professor at Florida International University.

Florida’s bid for increased influence is being tempered by the other vote-rich giants, California, New York and Texas. California already has moved its primary to Feb. 5, and the others are expected to do the same.

It has been more than three decades since Florida mattered much when it comes to picking presidential candidates. Other states have moved up their primaries in recent years, and more and more attention has been going to earlier states. In the past few presidential races, the parties’ nominees have been effectively decided before Florida primary voters had a chance to participate.

This should be fun. Expect other states to counter this move.

UPDATE: The New Hampshire primary is tentatively scheduled for January 21, followed by South Carolina on the 29th (possibly joined by Florida). Wonk may not be too far off with the headline, “California OKs Feb. 5 Primary; New Hampshire Primary Tomorrow.”

WSJ reports on “BlackBerry Orphans,” a phenomenon so serious that they’re letting non-subscribers read about it.

As hand-held email devices proliferate, they are having an unexpected impact on family dynamics: Parents and their children are swapping roles. Like a bunch of teenagers, some parents are routinely lying to their kids, sneaking around the house to covertly check their emails and disobeying house rules established to minimize compulsive typing. The refusal of parents to follow a few simple rules is pushing some children to the brink. They are fearful that parents will be distracted by emails while driving, concerned about Mom and Dad’s shortening attention spans and exasperated by their parents’ obsession with their gadgets.

This graphic is a classic:

I’m rather dubious that a significant number of parents are sneaking around the house to BlackBerry. I have little doubt, though, that they divert their attention from their children. And trying to type and drive at the same time is just insane.

UPDATE: Some interesting reactions to the story elsewhere:

Patrick Frey and Xlrq may or may not recognize their own behavior in this article.

Joanne Jacobs notes the flip side of this: Virtually free long distance communication makes it easier for parents and kids to connect, especially during their college years, than it was a generation ago.

Wonk focuses on how this phenomenon affects hot teen daughters of Internet celebrities. And then there’s this:

The dude from BlackBerry manufacturers RiM says, “would you rather have your parents 20% not there or 100% not there?” That’s pragmatism.

True that. It’s simultaneously sad and funny but the truth of the matter is that, while constant communication means more people than ever are quite literally “on call” 24/7, that availability also allows people to go home to their families who might otherwise have been stuck at the office waiting for important calls, faxes, and whatnot.

I’ll be blogging from a DC coffee house starting around 4 Eastern as part of a CNN’s “E-lection Nite Blog Party.” (See how they have the clever homage to the kids there with the intentional misspelling of “night” and the pun on E as in electronic? Very hip!) Here’s the lowdown:

On Election Night, Tuesday, November 7th, CNN is hosting prominent bloggers from across the country – and across the ideological spectrum – to Washington, D.C. to watch returns, blog alongside one another, and share political insights during its live election coverage. Parts of the event will be streamed live on CNN Pipeline and from time to time broadcasted live on CNN’s televised Election Night coverage starting at 7 PM E.T. Blogging begins at 4 PM and may continue into the early morning hours.

I can’t imagine I’ll be staying until the early morning hours but I’ll be there until we have a pretty good idea who’ll be running the Senate next year or I get too tired to care.

Others participating that I know of:

• Ann Althouse – Althouse
• John Amato – Crooks and Liars
• Kevin Aylward – Wizbang
• La Shawn Barber – LaShawn Barber’s Corner
• Bob Cesca – Huffington Post
• Lorie Byrd – Wizbang
• Steve Clemons – Washington Note
• The Firedoglake Gang
• Jim Geraghty – TKS
• Scott Johnson of Power Line
• Mary Katharine Ham – TownHall
• Pat Hynes – Ankle Biting Pundits
• Mike Krempasky – RedState
• Jeralyn Merritt – TalkLeft
• Ed Morrissey – Captain’s Quarters
• Betsy Newmark – Betsy’s Page
• Alex Pareene – Wonkette
• Pam Spaulding – Pam’s House Blend
• Stephen Warley – Lost Remote

Not so exclusive when you list them all like that! I doubt we’ll get much air time but it should be an interesting gathering. I’ve met several of these people, since it’s a DC Metro-centric crowd, but haven’t had the pleasure in other cases. (And, frankly, haven’t even heard of a couple others. The blogosphere’s mighty big these days.)

And, no, the CNN banner ad is unrelated to my participation in the event. They followed MSNBC’s lead in buying up lots of blog ad space to tout their election coverage.

A gay prostitute claims he had a three-year pay-for-sex relationship with National Association of Evangelicals president Ted Haggard.

A gay man and admitted male escort claims he has had an ongoing sexual relationship with a well-known Evangelical pastor from Colorado Springs. Mike Jones told 9 Wants to Know Investigative Reporter Paula Woodward he has had a “sexual business” relationship with Pastor Ted Haggard for the past three years.

Haggard is the founder and senior leader of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs. The church has 14,000 members. He is also president of the National Association of Evangelicals, an organization that represents millions of people. Haggard is married with five children and an outspoken critic of gay marriage.

Jones broke his silence Wednesday morning on talk radio.

In an exclusive interview Wednesday night, Haggard denied the claims and told 9NEWS he is prepared for his own church to investigate them. “I did not have a homosexual relationship with a man in Denver,” said Haggard. “I am steady with my wife. I’m faithful to my wife.” “I don’t know if this is election year politics or if this has to do with the marriage amendment or what it is, but I’m not even the guy who will investigate it or question it. I don’t know what the dynamics are, but this independent group will come in and do that.”

Jones started talking to 9 Wants to Know two months ago. He claims Haggard has been paying him for sex over the past three years, even though Haggard preaches that homosexuality is a sin. Jones also claims Haggard used methamphetamine in his presence on several occasions. “People may look at me and think what I’ve done is immoral, but I think I had to do the moral thing in my mind and that is expose someone who is preaching one thing and doing the opposite behind everybody’s back,” said Jones.

Rockie Mountain News reporter Charlie Brennan adds,

During an appearance today on the Peter Boyles show on KHOW 630 AM radio, Jones said “After sitting back and contemplating this issue, the biggest reason (for exposing it) is being a gay man all my life, I have experience with my friends, some great sadness of people that were in a relationship through the years” and were not able to enjoy the same rights and privileges as a married man and woman. “I felt it was my responsibility to my fellow brothers and sisters, that I had to take a stand, and I cannot sit back anymore and hear (what) to me is an anti-gay message.

This is a typical rationale argued for the “outing” of gay conservatives. It may well be, as Haggard pleads, a despicable lie designed to influence the outcome of voting on a ballot initiative.

If true, though, it would be rank hypocrisy of the highest order. John Aravosis points to a Harper’s article from last year asserting that, “The press tends to regard Dobson as the most powerful evangelical Christian in America, but Pastor Ted is at least his equal. Whereas Dobson plays the part of national scold, promising to destroy politicians who defy the Bible, Pastor Ted quietly guides those politicians through the ritual of acquiescence required to save face.”

Haggard’s STATEMENT OF FAITH (”What He Believes“) makes no mention of homosexuality but he has certainly been vocal on the subject. The Statement does, however, say that “The Holy Bible, and only the Bible, is the authoritative Word of God. It alone is the final authority for determining all doctrinal truths. In its original writing, the Bible is inspired, infallible and inerrant.” Most agree that homosexual acts are sinful under biblical teaching. In Haggard’s defense, though, he’s not a Good Works kinda guy: “Salvation is a gift from God, not a result of our good works or of any human effort.”

UPDATE: So far, the blog reaction I’ve found on this story has been exclusively from the Left, most of it pretty much what you’d expect. Some pretty good stuff, too.

PZ Myers observes that “So far, it’s nothing but innuendo and accusation” and fears that proof would have the unfortunate effect of “mov[ing]the debate from the substance of the danger of evangelical nonsense to wailing about hypocrisy and homosexuality.” More amusingly, he notes the uncanny resemblance between Haggard and “that horndog, Steve Stifler.”

Also on the lighter side, Wonk has an amusing cartoon involving Haggard from Robert Lanham’s The Sinner’s Guide to the Evangelical Right, “which is an awesome book.”

UPDATE: Shakespeare’s Sister provides this (presumably unintentionally) funny commentary: “I don’t know what the evidence of this relationship is, although I’m presuming Jones provided something more than his word during the two months he was speaking to the television station. I can’t imagine an NBC affiliate would run the story on hearsay alone. Nonetheless, at this point, it’s an accusation only.” [Emphasis mine]

UPDATE: Haggard has resigned his posts.

The leader of the influential National Association of Evangelicals, a vocal opponent of the drive for same-sex marriage, resigned Thursday after being accused of paying for sex with a man. The Rev. Ted Haggard also stepped aside as head of his 14,000-member New Life Church while a church panel investigates, saying he could “not continue to minister under the cloud created by the accusations.”

Prudent if he’s guilty, truly sad otherwise. The right thing to do, probably, regardless.

UPDATE (11/3): Haggard is admitting some of the claims:

After Pastor Ted Haggard went public Wednesday night denying allegations of a homosexual affair, senior church officials told KKTV 11News Thursday evening, Pastor Ted Haggard has admitted to some of the claims made by a former male escort. The church’s Acting Senior Pastor, Ross Parsley, tells KKTV 11 News that Pastor Haggard has admitted to some of the indiscretions claimed by Mike Jones, but not all of them.

I shot the sheriff — but I didn’t shoot the deputy?

Meanwhile, a voice expert corroborates the cliams:

A nationally known voice recognition expert says he believes voice mails left for a male escort are probably from a pastor in Colorado Springs. Nationally known voice recognition expert, Richard Sanders, compared two similar statements – one made in a voice mail recording and one from an interview of Pastor Ted Haggard conducted by 9NEWS. “Overall, I would say it’s probably the same person, from a scientific standpoint,” said Sanders, after listening to the voice recordings.

Meanwhile, LaShawn Barber reminds us, “Christians can be perverts, too!” So it would seem.

UPDATE (11/3): Haggard’s accuser has failed his polygraph. Having myself “failed” a polygraph despite telling the truth, I frankly don’t put much credence in that one way or another. Still, it’s noteworthy.

Steve Verdon has more. It may well be that Haggard is admitting to the drugs but not the gay pay-per sex.

Radley Balko’s allegiances in the competition for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Bill Frist have shifted due to an unlikely event: the public revelation of a Facebook photo showing Julia Corker, daughter of Republican nominee Bob Corker, apparently making out with another young woman with some dopey looking frat guy kissing air in the background.

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say both candidates in the race are now trying to out-Hef each other.

UNC lawprof Eric Muller posts about Michelle Malkin, a lot, on his blog, Is That Legal?

Yesterday’s installment is a rather inexplicable rant saying that her recent syndicated column criticizing Charlotte Church’s transition from Christian rock teen queen to 20-year-old skank is hypocritical because–brace yourself!–Malkin wore a bikini and went to parties in 1992 and he has photos to prove it.

Aside from being absurdly illogical, Muller’s argument is rather weakened by the fact that the photos of Malkin are rather obvious forgeries.

Malkin is urging Muller’s firing from UNC and AllahPundit suggests a libel suit and/or retaliation in like fashion.

While I’ve defended the likes of Ward Churchill, William Woodward, Juan Cole, Joseph Woolcock, and many other professors and their rights to express views I find objectionable without incurring professional penalties, Muller’s obsessiveness and dishonesty are worrisome. Thinking nutty things is within the bounds of academic freedom; cyber-stalking is not.

UPDATE: Muller posted an update a few minutes ago atop his post:

UPDATE, 3:00 p.m.: It appears that I was mistaken when I linked to the picture on flickr below, which I believed to be a picture of Michelle Malkin. I regret my error, and I apologize to Michelle Malkin for it. She has asked that I leave the post up — indeed, she has reprinted it — and so I will do as she wishes.

A decent gesture but the post itself, on the heels of some other bizarre ones about Malkin’s personal life, is still not what one would expect from someone in Muller’s position.

Carolyn O’Hara notices (via Wonkette) something odd about this week’s editions of Newsweek magazine:

All editions save the U.S. variant (i.e., the primary one) put the story of the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan on the cover. What knocks it off in America? A photo essay profile of Annie Leibovitz entitled “My Life in Pictures.”

Hmmm.

Living as I do very near Fort Belvoir, I read with interest this morning’s A1 piece in WaPo about the Army’s plans to build a giant amusement park and hotel complex in land owned by the base.

Army officials say they are considering allowing a private developer to build a 125-acre entertainment, hotel and conference center complex next to a national Army museum at Fort Belvoir that could draw more than 1 million people a year to traffic-choked southern Fairfax County. The possibility of adding what county officials call a military theme park arises as about 22,000 employees prepare to be transferred to Fort Belvoir in the next five years because of the federal base realignment and closure recommendations, designed to save $49 billion nationwide.

Having little to say about it aside from grumbling about not needing the added traffic–something only readers who live nearby would possibly care about–I decided it wasn’t worth blogging about. Oddly, however, a minor blogswarm is developing on the left side of the blogosphere.

Steve Benen, among the handful of left-bloggers I consider regular must-reads, writes that, in addition to the traffic issue,

[T]here’s also the question of taste. Particularly in a time of war, combat is a serious matter, not an amusement-park simulation. Those who are brave enough to wear the uniform and put their lives on the line aren’t characters in some kind children’s entertainment show.

I’m no expert, but theme-parks are about amusement, leisure, and fantasy. Is it me, or does military service not fit in with this description at all?

First Draft’s scout_prime skips the serious analysis and posits, “In a neo con world of continuous war I guess this will be necessary to capture the minds of our youth as early as possible. But need I even say this is just sick…”

Wonk engages in what one presumes is levity:

Following closely on the heels of the forthcoming upgrade of the Vietnam Memorial (“frag” your parents with authentic wacky paintball rifle!), the Army is pleased to announce that to pay for its somber, Medal of Honor-shaped national museum at Fort Belvoir, it will have to contract some hucksters to build a theme park.

Writing at HuffPo, Robert Weissman takes it several steps further:

This business of making military combat seem fun and a game — no small thing with dying and wounded soldiers coming back from Iraq, but assisted by the Bush administration’s efforts to block media coverage of the caskets — is no small thing.

Of course, the amusement park is unlikely to mention that one in six soldiers seeing combat in Iraq are coming home with serious mental health problems.

It’s not likely to play up the likelihood of getting injured or killed.

Nor is it likely to depict how military service — especially, but not only, in pursuit of unjust objectives — can be dehumanizing, and lead otherwise good people to commit atrocities. (About which, be sure not to miss Sunday’s Los Angeles Times extraordinary story on declassified Pentagon papers showing that U.S. atrocities went far beyond My Lai.)

And I guess it’s fair to assume the theme park wouldn’t plan to have booths from those who might convey an honest assessment of military service, like Citizen Soldier.

The amusement park, if it does get built, will instead help romanticize war. In our class-riven society, that’s a doubly dangerous thing.

Such romanticization fits right into the schemes of deception used by military recruiters as they target minority, working class and rural kids for military service.

Even aside from the fact that military recruits have more education and come from wealthier social backgrounds than their civilian peers and that black and Hispanic soldiers are disproportionately not serving in the Infantry, this argument is rather illogical.

For one thing, we already have plenty of toys, games, and other amusements that glorify warfare. Haven’t these people heard of G.I. Joe? Or video games? Or John Wayne movies? How about air shows? Or, hell, the Hummer (Note to Wonkette readers: I refer here to the sport-utility vehicle.)?

Moreover, the proposed park would be aimed at visitors to the National Army Museum, to which this would be an adjunct. Presumably, the kind of folks who would be inclined to drive out to Fort Belvoir and visit an Army museum would be, well, interested in the Army. Such a museum would, if like any other similar one I’ve visited, have numerous static displays of tanks, weapons, Jeeps, and the like for visitors. It strikes me as perfectly natural that they would make the visit both more educational and more enjoyable by allowing people (presumably, adults or at least licensed drivers, for safety and liability reasons) to drive some of the vehicles.

Are those complaining about this alleged “glorification” of war concerned about the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds traveling to sporting events and air shows wowing impressionable youngsters with the sexier side of the military? Including, often, allowing kids to crawl around disabled versions of their planes and sit in the cockpit?

For that matter, how about those military bands going around giving free concerts at schools, conventions, and other places where they might give impressionable youngsters the idea that all soldiers ever do is play catchy tunes on the trumpet? Scandalous, I tell you!