#FuckYouWashington

From Hadear Kandil's Twitter stream, pure anti-American hatred:

She needs to GTF back to Cairo, loser Tahrir camel-smelling wench. Geez. By now I shouldn't be, but I'm still blown away sometimes by the freak-show progressive internationalists who hate the U.S. but stay here nevertheless, blathering about how horrible it is, all the while bringing down the quality of this great nation. These people are freakin' stupid. They suck. Stupid and diabolical. Go home freak-nut commies. You're not welcomed.

Retweeted by Leah McElrath, the fifth-column hater-commie who got called out for spreading progressive propaganda.

A bunch of losers, total ASFL.

Kate Upton — Next Big Thing

Well, I could've told 'em that.

At New York Daily News, "Kate Upton brings classic, voluptuous femininity back to fashion."

She's fabulous.

Bill Maher and Sexism

Steven Crowder (via The Blog Prof):

Anders Behring Breivik — No Clear Ideological Program

I linked previously to the New York Times's report: "Right-Wing Extremist Charged in Norway." The Times altered the headline at the newspaper's website, "Christian Extremist Charged in Norway" (and Memeorandum, at 7:50pm, had "Death Toll Rises to 92 in Norway Attacks"). And now it's altered it again, "Oslo Suspect Wrote of Fear of Islam and Plan for War." The Old Gray Lady is notorious for altering its news reporting, without citing changes, in furtherance of its progressive political agenda, so that's a glimpse on the witch hunt reporting that we're already seeing. FWIW, here's this from the introduction at the report:

OSLO, Norway — The Norwegian man charged Saturday with a pair of attacks in Oslo that killed at least 92 people left behind a detailed manifesto outlining his preparations and calling for a Christian civil war to defend Europe against the threat of Muslim domination, according to Norwegian and American officials familiar with the investigation.

Also, the Wall Street Journal has this, "Suspect Identified With Far Right." After a boilerplate lede, the report indicates:

While Oslo police have remained largely silent about Mr. Breivik's possible motives and background, the 32-year-old described himself on a now-shut down Facebook page as a Christian conservative with hobbies in hunting and body-building. He also had at one time been a member of the youth movement of the Norwegian Progress Party, which is widely considered as a right-wing populist party.

Populist parties are generally oriented toward elite opposition and economic injustice. Outright racist appeals are generally secondary or a function of economic dislocation. And in the European context "far-right" parties conjure images of the Nazis or the French National Front under Jean-Marie Le Pen. And for that matter, Norway's Progress Party has been shifting toward a moderate neo-liberal economic program for over a decade, attempting to downplay party schisms over immigration. So for all the media reporting, it's not definitely accurate to cite Behring Breivik as a "right wing extremist." He doesn't evince a coherent or systemic ideological program. I've read through portions of his Internet postings, translated from Norwegian. See: "This is a complete list of comments Anders Behring Breivik has left at Document.no." Positions that would normally be considered extreme right wing, especially in the traditional European context, aren't in evidence:

Anyway, we are not in a position where we can pick and choose our partners. That's why we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought. When this direction has been taken we can take it to the next level.

That's interesting, especially the anti-racist and pro-gay statements, and of course historic European right-wing ideologies were implacably anti-Semitic. And get this, at Telegraph UK:

Eyewitness reports from the island of Utoya, where the shootings took place, have also described a tall, blond haired, blue-eyed Norwegian man dressed as a police officer.

On the Facebook page attributed to him, Mr Breivik describes himself as a Christian and a conservative. It listed his interests as hunting, body building and freemasonry. His profile also listed him as single. The page has since been taken down.

The odd point is Behring Breivik's identification with freemasonry, which would contradict the media claims of him being at Christian zealot. New York Daily News also stresses freemasonry, "Who is Anders Behring Breivik? Norway shooting suspect's profile emerges."

All in all, most media reporting is lazy and incoherent. And to top it off, James Alan Fox, a criminology professor at Northeastern University, identifies Behring Breivik as a clinical mass murderer rather than an ideological terrorist. See, "Norway massacre fits the mold":

As details surface in the days and weeks ahead about Friday's massacre in Norway and about Anders Behring Breivik, the man believed to have perpetrated the bloodbath, we will hopefully be able to make some sense of what now seems so unfathomable. However, even with the sketchy information uncovered in the immediate aftermath of the shooting/bombing, the crime and the accused fit the mass murder mold in many respects. ...

Mass murderers do not typically see themselves as criminal, but instead as the victim of injustice. They often consider themselves as a heroic champion for right over wrong and their crimes as absolutely justified.

RTWT.

In sum, while no doubt Anders Behring Breivik dabbled in conservative politics and social movements, it's not the case that he had a clear cut ideological agenda. He identified as culturally conservative, but he did not attach his beliefs to classic racial supremacy theories or historic anti-Jewish movements of genocidal purity ("right-wing" by definition). He combined a frustration with the growth of Norway's multiculturalism with what would normally be seen as tolerance toward social and religious minorities. The latter points are tendencies that are championed by progressives. For Behring Breivik to exhibit these things, along with expressions of freemason beliefs, and a "hatred" of the modern institutional church, indicates a more complex pyschological profile than MSM outlets have portrayed. We saw a similar pattern of conclusion-jumping almost immediately upon the Jared Loughner shooting in Tuscon early this year.

RELATED: See the interesting discussion from Dana Loesch, at Big Journalism, "A Quick Lesson for Media on the Definition of “Right Wing”."

Also, from Mike McNally at Pajamas Media, "Can the Left Resist the Temptation to Exploit the Norway Attacks?"

Just Awful: Progressives Ecstatic Over Anders Behring Breivik Alleged Ties to Right-Wing Extremism

I had a brief Twitter exchange yesterday with Ruwayda Mustafah and Hena Zuberi. As information on Oslo's terrorism was still coming in --- and reports were going back and forth over a possible Islamist connection --- Mustafah tweeted: "@HenaZuberi @hindhassanmany Oh so there's still hope for bigots?" That's a dead link to @hindhassanmany, but Hena Zuberi was also going on about how bigoted it was to even consider Islamist jihad as the movement behind yesterday's attacks.

And now here's progressive Leah McElrath on Twitter, cheering a New York Times report that links to a video manifesto credited to Anders Behring Breivik, which as later uploaded to YouTube. And notice McElrath's good night tweet:

Well, that actually wasn't McElrath's last tweet. She took time to block JoannaOC in Minneapolis, who called her out for distributing progressive propaganda. McElrath gets angry for being called out, and claims she's saving lives. JoannaOC is trying to focus on the miracle of life and God's grace of survival. Leah McElrath is spreading left-wing propaganda and hate.

In any case, here's the main story at New York Times, "Right-Wing Extremist Charged in Norway" (via Memeorandum). Also trending today is James Fallows' attack on Jennifer Rubin, "The Washington Post Owes the World an Apology for this Item."

Michelle Malkin responds, "No, James Fallows, the Washington Post doesn’t owe “the world” an apology":

The death toll has risen to a staggering 90-plus in the Norway massacre.

It is evil in its most unfathomable depths. There are now reports of a possible second gunman/accomplice, according to CBS News and VOA. Howie at the Jawa Report says it well: “As a Christian I have to say I condemn his actions in the strongest terms. In fact the only praise I’ve seen of the attacks were not by Christians. This is cold blooded murder and no true follower of Christ could do such a thing. We pray for the victims, their families and for those who are injured to recover.” Here is a beautiful prayer for the people of Norway.

Here in America, many on the Left have reserved their greatest outrage not for the perpetrators of the crime, but for conservatives who — like many counterterrorism watchers and mainstream media outlets around the world — initially raised the entirely reasonable possibility that the gunman was a jihadist and who pointed to recent, specific death threats and plots against Norway and Norwegian government officials by Islamic militant groups and individuals.

Those initial assessments were wrong. I was wrong. As I noted yesterday and will reiterate again today for the reading comprehension-challenged:

…the context and timing most definitely suggested jihad and there should be no apology for reading the signs and connecting several large, obvious dots.

Unlike those who speculated that the Giffords’ shooter was a Tea Party activist and held onto the assumption even after it was disproved, I will not continue to insist that jihadists bear blame for this heinous attack if it turns out they played no role.

I will continue to be vigilant in thoroughly covering the global jihadist threat — and in condemning this heinous attack in Norway whoever is responsible.
Prayers for all the innocents. Standing with Norway.

Over at the Washington Post, Jennifer Rubin yesterday afternoon published a blog post mentioning some of the same information I brought to light yesterday morning as the news of the terrifying attacks broke — namely, that bloodthirsty Norwegian-based Muslim cleric Mullah Krekar was founder of Ansar Al-Islam and that jihadists have implanted themselves in every corner of the globe. She goes on to argue for continued, vigilant war against the global jihadists who remain at centuries-old, systemic war with us.

Atlantic editor James Fallows — in a prominent rant — is now clamoring for the Post to “apologize to the world” for Rubin’s post and fumes that the post has not been updated. There may be any number of reasons for her not updating yet and being offline — family obligations, Sabbath, etc. I’m pretty sure the reason is NOT that she’s purposely ignoring or misleading her readers or intentionally insulting/smearing “the world,” as Fallows seems to suggest. (In a similar meme, Twitter libs somehow have accused me of “falling silent” about the Norway horror despite the constant updating of my blog post throughout the day and night, in addition to day-and-night-long tweets as news developed.)

Check Michelle's blog for all the links. I wanted to quote at length. I linked yesterday to Jawa Report and The Other McCain, both of whom continued updating with reports on where the evidence was leading. In contrast, people like Charles Johnson used the attacks to score points on political enemies, posting a series of blogs attacking Pamela Geller and other counter-jihad bloggers, alleging their responsibility for terrorism in Norway. In fact, Anders Behring Breivik had no clear ideological agenda, and didn't appear to be an ideological or religious extremist.

I'll update with more, but I want to reiterate one of Michelle's key points:

Unlike those who speculated that the Giffords’ shooter was a Tea Party activist and held onto the assumption even after it was disproved, I will not continue to insist that jihadists bear blame for this heinous attack if it turns out they played no role.

I will continue to be vigilant in thoroughly covering the global jihadist threat — and in condemning this heinous attack in Norway whoever is responsible.

And that's the vital difference. Conservatives are anti-terror, no matter the source. Progressives are anti-conservative and turn a blind eye to terrorism unless it comes from the right.

That's evil and gets more people killed.

Amy Winehouse, 1983 – 2011

I got a sharp hit to the stomach upon seeing the news, at Bob Belvedere's, "NO SURPRISE: Amy Winehouse Found Dead – Overdose Suspected," and following the link there to Joy McCann, "Amy Winehouse Found Dead in Her London Flat."

I wasn't the biggest fan, but her substance abuse was troubling to me. A beautiful and talented woman, now lost to a blues singers' ugly death.

See New York Times, "Amy Winehouse, British Soul Singer With a Destructive Image, Dies at 27":

Amy Winehouse, the British singer who found worldwide fame with a smoky, hip-hop-inflected take on retro soul, yet became a tabloid fixture as her struggles with drugs and alcohol brought about a striking public career collapse, was found dead in her home in London on Saturday. She was 27.

The cause was not immediately known. The London police said that they had been called to an address in Camden Square in northern London on Saturday afternoon and found a 27-year-old woman, who had been pronounced dead at the scene. The police did not identify the body, but according to a report by The Associated Press, the London Ambulance Service said it was Ms. Winehouse.

The police said that they were investigating the circumstances of the death, but that “at this early stage it is being treated as unexplained.”

Ms. Winehouse’s American record label, Universal Republic, said in a statement: “We are deeply saddened at the sudden loss of such a gifted musician, artist and performer. Our prayers go out to Amy’s family, friends and fans at this difficult time.”

Instantly recognizable from the heavy makeup and high beehive hairdo she borrowed from the Ronettes, Ms. Winehouse became one of the most acclaimed young singers of the 2000s, selling millions of albums, winning five Grammy Awards and kicking off the British trend of retro soul and R&B that continues today.

Yet from the moment she arrived on the international pop scene in 2007, Ms. Winehouse had an image that seemed almost defiantly self-destructive. In songs like “You Know I’m No Good,” she sang alcohol-soaked regrets of failed romances, and for many listeners the lyrics to the song “Rehab” — which won her three of the five Grammys she took in 2008 — crystallized her public persona. “They tried to make me go to rehab,” she sang, “I said, ‘No, no, no.’ ”

I'll have more later. Fausta blogs Winehouse as well.

Added: Now a Memeorandum thread.

Lessons in Handling Plagiarism From Professor Panagiotis Ipeirotis

I had a nightmare class at UCSB in 1999, the second lecture class I taught as in independent instructor. It was a Black Politics class. I had a running battle with radical students throughout the quarter. I even had one dude pull me aside to say, "Hey, man, this is how you teach the class." I wasn't down hard enough on the Man, apparently. This dude, and some of his allies, wanted a course in victimology and racial recrimination. And I was doing straight civil rights developments and the political science of voting rights and redistricting. It started to be a nightmare. Students complained to the department that I graded their midterms "too hard." It was a big learning experience. And the final exam was the kicker. I caught a couple of black women cheating. They were passing their exam sheets back and forth with notes they'd written while writing their essays. They had arrows and diagrams tracing arguments. It was involved. When one of them turned in the exam I asked for the question sheet and she wasn't about to give it to me. I was like hello? This is what you do. So she reluctantly gave to me and later I turned the students over to the vice chair of the department. Within a couple of days I was called into the chair's office, Professor Lorraine McDonnell, who no one liked, and who had a reputation, basically, of piggy-backing off her husband, Professor M. Stephen Weatherford, a nice guy and sought-after research "quant" (a numbers and methods guy who sharpened research knives, which is hip in political science, a field that remains envious of the economics discipline for its much more formal and recognized academic rigor). Professor McDonnell threw me under the bus. (I ended up assigning grades to all students and being done with that class, and I moved on after that semester to teach at Fresno State.)

Anyway, check this piece at Inside Higher Ed, "Who Is Punished for Plagiarism?" (via Glenn Reynolds):

Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis has taken down the controversial blog post, but the debate is raging on without the original material.

Ipeirotis, a computer scientist who teaches at New York University's Stern School of Business, wrote a post on his blog last week called "Why I will never pursue cheating again." In it, he told the story of how he found that about 20 percent of a 100-person class had plagiarized -- and described the fallout from his accusations. While Turnitin led to his initial suspicions, and gave clear evidence for some of the students, it only cast doubts on other students. Many of them confessed only when Ipeirotis told the class that if he didn't hear from those who had cheated, he would report the incident immediately -- whereas in the end he included in his report the information that students had admitted what they had done.

So why does Ipeirotis consider the experience a failure? His students became antagonistic, he wrote on the blog post, and gave him lower teaching evaluations than he had ever received before. And those poor teaching evaluations were cited in a review that resulted in the smallest raise he had ever received.

Keep reading.

Ipeirotis' post is taken down temporarily. But Ruan YiFeng's Blog has excerpts. I like this:

“The process of discussing all the detected cases was not only painful, it was extremely time consuming as well.

Students would come to my office and deny everything. Then I would present them the evidence. They would soften but continue to deny it. Only when I was saying “enough, I will just give the case to the honorary council who will decide” most students were admitting wrongdoing. But every case was at least 2 hours of wasted time.

With 22 cases, that was a lot of time devoted to cheating: More than 45 hours in completely unproductive discussions, when the total lecture time for the course was just 32 hours. This is simply too much time.”

Students, in general, are inveterate liars when it comes to grades and classroom performance. I'd need more information, but this sounds like Ipeirotis' crucible from the trenches. You can't be an excellent teacher without failing a few times. And in this case there was something wrong, very wrong, with the course design. Exams and paper assignments have to be designed to prevent cheating. If he's doing research papers, there's got to be a way to create a project that students can't easily off load from the web. I still catch about one student plagiarizing a paper every year in World Politics, and usually a couple in American Government. And technically, you can't just fail them without due process. And to provide due process requires a formal administrative review and possibly hearing, and most professors don't even grasp the legal significance of the process. Since I've been a "traditional" professor on the issues, I had some experience dealing with problems at my college and soon I ended up leading a couple of workshops on academic discipline. It's the same stories over and over again. A lot of things you hear are just like what Professor Ipeirotis recounts. And that's why each professor has to develop an assignment regime that makes cheating hard, but they've also got to be ready to uphold standards. For the most part, my college today backs professors. Maybe students at community college aren't as powerful --- or their parents have less resources --- as students at competitive universities, but it pays to lay the administrative groundwork for upholding policies inside the classroom. Without that backing, teaching, inevitably, will be no fun.

Obama Slams Republicans in Debt Ceiling Press Conference

It's bluster, from the Bumbler-in-Chief.

At LAT, "Obama scolds GOP as debt talks break down: 'Where's the leadership?'":

In an unusual display of emotion, President Obama angrily responded to House Speaker John A. Boehner's abrupt withdrawal from talks on a debt ceiling increase, and summoned congressional leaders to the White House on Saturday for emergency talks to plot a new course before the Aug. 2 deadline.

"We have run out of time," the president said in a hastily-called news briefing, just moments after Boehner informed him of his decision.

On Thursday, Obama and Boehner appeared to be closing in on a deal that would have raised the debt ceiling through 2013, combined with spending cuts and entitlement reforms to achieve $3 trillion in deficit reduction.

But talks apparently broke down in a dispute over taxes. Obama, prodded by Democrats, insisted that any deal include new revenues in addition to spending cuts.

"This was an extraordinarily fair deal. If it was unbalanced, it was unbalanced in the direction of not enough revenue," Obama said. "It is hard to understand why Speaker Boehner would walk away from this kind of deal."

Not hard, actually. See Jennifer Rubin, "Boehner runs laps around Obama, again":

He’s been ridiculed by the media. Liberal spinners say he has lost control over the Tea Party. But in fact the Speaker of the House Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) had a plan, stuck to it, and is likely to get much of what he wants.

In a remarkable press conference revealed that he had a deal with the White House on large debt reduction and $800 billion in additional revenue to be achieved through tax reform and enhanced enforcement. Boehner brought out his “Jell-O” analogy once again to describe the White House. He said bluntly, “It’s the president who walked away from his agreement and demanded more money at the last minute.”

Boehner is the composed “adult in the room” now. He, excuse the expression, called the president’s bluff — a viable deal with no tax hikes and Obama blinked (or sloshed in the other direction, to follow the Jell-O imagery).

All of this followed Obama’s appearance in which he angrily accused Boehner of walking away from the deal. (According to Boehner, Obama upped the revenue figure at the last moment.)

Los Angeles Times Soft-Peddles Voter Unease With Democrats' Budget in California

At the Los Angeles Times, "California voters see some bright spots in grim budget":

Reporting from Sacramento — The budget approved by Gov. Jerry Brown and lawmakers last month was largely distasteful to voters, a new poll shows, but many felt the process went more smoothly than in past years, when political paralysis gripped the Capitol and left the state starved for cash.

The element of the spending plan that most troubled Californians was the threat of steep cuts in education. In addition, about half opposed reductions made in healthcare and other services, and more than half viewed the budget as unfair.

But the poll suggested surprisingly strong support for higher vehicle fees and a new fire levy, both of which are included in the plan. Voters were about evenly divided on paying sales tax when buying from online retailers such as Amazon.com — one of the budget's most controversial provisions that now appears headed for a statewide referendum.

Continue reading.

But also read the poll's internal data. The Times' report glosses over some key details. A plurality of 43 percent "oppose the state budget recently passed by the state legislature and Jerry Brown ..." And after a series of specific questions on the content of the budget, a plurality of 47 percent opposed "the state budget recently passed by the state legislature and Jerry Brown..." The more you know the worse it gets. Figures. And the budgeting was based on future anticipated revenues, which could be a gimmick. And a plurality of 44 percent of voters thought it was wrong to "force deeper cuts down the road." And exactly 50 percent of those polled favored cutting state subsidies to local governments, even after they'd been read this long lead-in to the question item:

Now let me read you a pair of statements that some people may make about the measure to eliminate local government subsidies provided to companies that build businesses and conduct other projects in blighted or run-down areas.

Supporters of this measure say that eliminating the subsidies would save the state 1.7 billion dollars. They say these subsidies have often been misused for projects in areas that don't need it, and the money would be better used to help balance the budget.

Opponents of this measure say that eliminating the subsidies would cost the state thousands of jobs. They say these subsidies are crucial to creating jobs and revitalizing neighborhoods, and now is not the time to make cuts that will prevent getting the economy back on track.

The prompt is framed as if subsidies are a good thing, with only the $1.7 billion in savings discussed at the middle of the paragraph. Still, half of those polled thought cutting subsidies was a good thing. There's more at the raw data file. If anticipated revenues fall short voters won't support deeper cuts to education. And voter support for the Amazon tax is tentative. It's going to be an important referendum campaign, apparently in 2012.

Kenneth Turan Movie Review: 'Captain America: The First Avenger'

At Los Angeles Times.

I'll probably take my youngest boy to see it today:

Afterburner with Bill Whittle: 'SHOOTER ONE-THREE'

Bill Whittle's a good man. And this is an excellent clip (via Instapundit):

NewsBusted: 'Many in media trying to portray Obama as a centrist'

Via Theo Spark:

Glenn Beck Visits Ma'ale HaZeitim

Beck meets with Yishai Fleisher:

Norway Youth Camp Death Toll: At Least 80 Killed

At NYT, "At Least 80 Are Dead in Norway Shooting."

And here's Judy Woodruff's report from this evening's PBS NewsHour. Finn Hagensen, in Oslo, indicates that the death toll could top 100 from the initial bomb attack in Oslo:

And at WSJ, "Terror in Oslo":

At our first deadline reports indicated that the attacks were the work of a jihadist group. Later in the evening evidence emerged that a suspect in the shooting attack on a youth camp was an ethnic Norwegian with no previously known ties to Islamist groups. Coordinated terrorist attacks are an al Qaeda signature. But copycats with different agendas are surely capable of duplicating its methods.

Whatever the case, the attacks demonstrate that Norway is no more immune than any other country to such atrocities, no matter what its foreign or domestic policies may be. If this does prove to be the work of Islamists, it will be noted that neither Norway's opposition to the war in Iraq nor its considerable financial and political support for the Palestinians spared it from attack.

In its hour of grief, we're confident that Norway, like other free societies beset by terror, will respond with conviction, courage and resilience.

Obama Losing Support From Progressives and Socialists

I have CNN on today. And I caught this Wolf Blitzer interview with Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. And at the introduction is Communist Reconquista 'MEChA Boy' Representative Raul Grijalva, cited as one of the "liberals" who disagree with Obama over entitlement reform. "Liberals." Right. Love that. Not.

And cited at the clip is CNN's new survey, "CNN Poll: Drop in liberal support pushes Obama approval rating down."

RELATED: At The Hill, "Obama blasts GOP, Boehner on debt: ‘We have run out of time’." (At Memorandum.)

Update: Linked at Right Klik. Thanks!

Anders Behring Breivik — Suspect in Norwegian Terror Attacks

There's a report at Britain's Sky News, "Norway Camp Shooting: 'As Many As 30 Dead'."

And Montse Gimferrer on Twitter links to Anders Behring Breivik on Twitter, and an identical message at a "Bild" feed.

Updates forthcoming ...

522pm PST: Okay, more at Sky News, "Suspect Held After Twin Attack In Norway."

Also, Bruce Bawer at Pajamas Media, "Norway’s Oklahoma City, or Its 9/11?"

6:55pm PST: London's Daily Mail has this, "Police dismiss initial fears Norwegian terror attacks were work of Islamist organisations." (At Memeorandum.)

Norway Island Youth Camp Massacre

An update to my previous report: "VIDEO: Terrorist Attack in Oslo, Norway."

The youth camp killings are tied to the bombings. See CSM, "Norway attacks: Details emerge about Utoya camp shooting."

Stockholm and Berlin - Norwegian Police confirmed the massive bombing in downtown Oslo this afternoon is linked to a shooting at a political youth camp west of the capital, though authorities declined to speculate on who was behind the attacks or what their motives might have been.

And the right wing angle at Telegraph UK, "Norway: dozens killed as terror attacks rock Oslo and youth camp."

At London's Daily Mail, "Blond Norwegian, 32, arrested over 'holiday island massacre' is linked to Oslo bomb blasts":

Police have linked the 32-year-old Norwegian man arrested for gunning down children on the holiday island of Utoya to the bomb blasts in Oslo.

Described as 6ft tall and blond, he is reported to have arrived on the island of Utoyah and opened fire after beckoning several young people over in his native Norwegian tongue.

Reports suggest he was seen loitering around the site of the bomb blast in Oslo two hours before the island incident - and minute[s] before the explosion.

More than 30 are believed to have been killed - seven in Oslo and between 25 to 30 on Utoya Island, 50 miles north of the capital.

It is not yet known what his motives were - whether he has been radicalised and was part of a militant Muslim group waging Jihad or was alternatively trying to further a home-grown political cause.

Also at Daily Mail, "MASSACRE AT KIDS' CAMP: More than 30 feared dead as terrorist opens fire at Norwegian summer camp and car bomb devastates Oslo."

Check Jawa Report for a huge live blog.

And expect updates ...

Bristol Palin: Fast Track to Adulthood, 'That's Not How I Pictured Losing My Virginity'

An intense interview with Dr. Drew Pinksy, at CNN.

She says that sex with Levi Johnston "wasn't rape," and then continues to discuss the emotional trauma of her first time:

Are Men Obsessed With Women's Breasts?

Okay, I'll be out for a little while.

So, to tide folks over, at Viral Footage, "A Stupid Question From MSNBC “Are Men Obsessed With Women’s Breasts?” [VIDEO]"

Plus, lots of good stuff at Linkiest.

And at Pirate's Cove, "If All You See…is an evil dog whose carbon footprint is bigger than a car’s, you might just be a Warmist."

And a Contessa Brewer flashback, "MSNBC's Brewer Displays Cleavage While Mocking Men Who Stare At Cleavage":

Man, progressives are all screwed up on their sexuality!!

Breaking! Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize-Winning Economist, Cites Blogger Amanda Marcotte as Expert on GOP Craziness!

This one is for the history books.

See "Conceder In Chief" (via Memeorandum):

Amanda Marcotte is right: of course the big problem is the craziness of the GOP. That said, I am among those in a state of suppressed rage and panic over the president’s negotiating strategy.

Keep reading. Krugman's a perfect netroots blogger who just happens to be one of the world's foremost academic economists. And links to Amanda Marcotte are good for your progressive creds!

Geez, that reminds me! Maybe this will trigger an update from R.S. McCain. See: "The Beast of Babylon Wears Bangs: Amanda Marcotte’s ‘Pure Feminist Evil’."