Lovely. Joan Rivers comments on the Prince Harry’s Nazi outfit during Larry King Live:

KING: What’s your read on this royal scandal? I know you know Prince Charles.
RIVERS: I adore him. I feel very sorry for Harry. It’s a mixed message world. You can’t go (UNINTELLIGIBLE) “The Producers” where they have chickens doing the Nazi salute. The kid is at a private party. The invasion of privacy that a friend takes a picture on a cellphone, it’s sad. And he did apologize. Leave him alone.
KING: But they don’t, right? The tabloids will never let this…
RIVERS: You know the tabloids. They’re still about me and my breasts. How low can they go?

So it’s okay for him to dress as a Nazi as long as there aren’t any public cameras around? And what kind of “mixed message” is someone in the British royal family receiving about donning a swastika? Sheesh.
Seasoned Resonance readers may have gathered that I don’t have much use for the celebrity hype industry to begin with. So Ms. Rivers is standing in a pretty deep hole to begin with. And for her, a person who has created an identity in analyzing what celebrities wear, to ridicule others for commenting on the inappropriateness of someone’s dress is pathetic.
How do these people get air time?

The blogging ethics police have dictated that everyone come clean.
I have never been paid by anyone (campaign or otherwise) to blog. Anyone wishing to pay me should contact me at the e-mail address on the right column.
As far as I know, I have only met two bloggers who people in this neighborhood might be familiar with: I was once a classmate of Bjorn, and I was in one of Instapundit’s classes in the pre-blog era.
I am currently blogging on a HP computer.
I am currently browsing using Mozilla 1.7.2.

From an interview with Barbara Walters:

“I watch what I say. I said some things in the first term that were probably a little blunt. ‘Bring it on’ was a little blunt. I was really speaking to our troops, but it came out and had a different connotation, different meanings for others,” he told Walters.

Sorry, false alarm. He doesn’t admit to saying anything wrong; we’re the ones who made the mistake in misunderstanding his meaning. And we’re not the only ones:

More recently, guerrillas in Iraq have used the president’s words in a propaganda video narrated in English, according to the Reuters news agency. The narrator of the video says, “George W. Bush, you have asked us to ‘bring it on.’ And so help me, [we will ] like you never expected. Do you have another challenge?” The video then shows explosions around a U.S. military vehicle.

Wonderful.

Then:

Two years ago, I told the Congress and the country that the war on terror would be a lengthy war, a different kind of war, fought on many fronts in many places. Iraq is now the central front. Enemies of freedom are making a desperate stand there — and there they must be defeated.

President George W. Bush
September 7, 2003
And now:

Iraq has replaced Afghanistan as the training ground for the next generation of “professionalized” terrorists, according to a report released yesterday by the National Intelligence Council, the CIA director’s think tank.
Iraq provides terrorists with “a training ground, a recruitment ground, the opportunity for enhancing technical skills,” said David B. Low, the national intelligence officer for transnational threats. “There is even, under the best scenario, over time, the likelihood that some of the jihadists who are not killed there will, in a sense, go home, wherever home is, and will therefore disperse to various other countries.”

“Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground”
Today’s Washington Post
Well, we didn’t find those weapons of mass destruction, but we did succeed in making Iraq the central front in the “war on terror.” Great job guys.

From The Daily Show, here’s what the White House means when they say September 11 “changed the equation”:

September 11 + x* = Shut up!

* Whatever we say.