« National Lampoon's Palin Family Vacation | Main | Figures don't lie »

Weiner Whines

I haven't said anything about Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and his stepping on his wiener, but it's just gotten too ridiculous to ignore.

Apparently some hacker got into Weiner's Twitter account, found a hot co-ed that Weiner had made one of the 91 people on Twitter he'd chosen to follow, and sent her a photo of a guy's underwear-clad groin -- a guy who was very happy to pose for the camera, if you catch my drift.

This would normally be a Big Effing Deal, as it would be a federal felony -- but Weiner is the forgiving, easy-going sort, so he's considering it a prank and wants it to just go away.

In the meantime, he's being asked a LOT of awkward questions.

For example, is the crotch in question his? He says he can't positively say so one way or another.

Now, I'll have to admit that if you showed me a picture of my own tightly-clad nether regions, I'd be hard-pressed to point to identifying features and say "yup, that's my pride and joy" or "that's obviously an imposter." But I damned well would remember if I had taken (or posed for) such photos and uploaded them to the internet. (Unless, of course, I was wearing my Mr. Duckie thong. At that point, I'd plead the Fifth or say I was drunk, for the only time in my life.)

I don't do Twitter, but if I had several thousand followers and only 91 people I followed, I'd be fairly aware of who those are. But then again, Weiner has a high percentage of young, attractive, female "friends" he follows, so perhaps she got lost in the crowd.

I was put in mind of Weiner's former colleague, Chris Lee. At least Lee had the decency to resign when his cheesy, tacky photo and behavior became public. But then again, Weiner is a Democrat -- and Democrats have a loophole: they never promised to NOT be disgusting, vile, sleazy scumbags. So when they do these kinds of things, there's the "well, what did you expect?" angle.

A few years ago, while he was New Hampshire's governor, Judd Gregg got into a spat with another New Hampshire pol named "John Hoar." Gregg commented that the gentleman was well-named.

I always thought poorly of Gregg over that. I don't approve, generally, of making fun of someone on aspects that they don't directly control. Name, age, appearance, race, sex, orientation, handicap, or whatnot -- I prefer to abuse folks over things they have exercised some measure of choice. I'd rather hit them over that, than other, less substantive matters.

But, in this case, I gotta say it:

What a Weiner.



TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/41670.

Comments (53)

I had a laughing fit watchi... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

I had a laughing fit watching Weiner, (who always loves spewing out smartass names) have his little pressor yesterday. It is so obvious he got caught with his pants down. Figuratively and literally. I even tuned into CNN to see how they were spinning it and they couldn't except for this Tubin legal guy who actually said Breitbart exposed this so it must be made up.

I say keep going after this guy. He deserves every dig. ww

We don't know yet if the to... (Below threshold)
Upset Old Guy:

We don't know yet if the torso in that image is Weiner or not. Assuming it is, and assuming he did load the image to the picture server and sent the url to the chesty young female (don't know if she's a lady yet) we can certainly say he acted inappropriately and in very poor taste. But nobody should call him a big dick, 'cause he ain't. Nor would I even refer to him as a wiener, I think he's more of a cocktail frank.

I'm enjoying reading elsewh... (Below threshold)
Art W:

I'm enjoying reading elsewhere about the conspiracy theory being spun by rightards that says Wiener meant to send this pic (of himself) to his supposed girlfriend and uploaded it to Twitter instead.

Since I've done similar bonehead moves I can relate to that one. The idea that he got hacked seems less feasible to me.

I know it's not really impo... (Below threshold)
Joe Miller:

I know it's not really important. I know we shouldn't pay this much attention to it. But dammit, it's funny. Everything Weiner does and says makes it funnier. At this point, I hope it never ends.

Arty, you are delusional. I... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Arty, you are delusional. It is Weiner that is hyping the conspiricy. What a lame pressor yesterday. I am sure his lawyers told him to shut up or the FBI will investigate his computers and no telling what they will find. I am loving it. This guy is a grade A number 1 asshole who does not waste any time rushing to put down a republican with his faux rightious indignity. ww

Weiner has to be an idiot t... (Below threshold)
Hank:

Weiner has to be an idiot to transmit anything like that.

And as ww has pointed out, he proved it during the CNN presser yesterday.

Meanwhile, Barney Frank continues to be the luckiest man in congress with Weiner taking over the headlines.

Democrats, screwing the country, and everything else they can get their hands on.

Now, I'll have to ... (Below threshold)
James H:
Now, I'll have to admit that if you showed me a picture of my own tightly-clad nether regions, I'd be hard-pressed to point to identifying features and say "yup, that's my pride and joy" or "that's obviously an imposter."

Brain bleach, please.

Breitbart!O'keefe!<b... (Below threshold)
LeBron Steinman:

Breitbart!
O'keefe!
Koch Brothers!(giggle)
Boooooooosh!

Pee Wee Wieners Playhouse i... (Below threshold)
TexBob:

Pee Wee Wieners Playhouse is getting very entertaining.

Wiener's Wienergate has got his wiener between a rock and a hard place and that has to hurt.

He won't call the FBI because if he does, he could perjure himself on the complaint if he actually sent it.

He won't categorically deny it either.

Both are an implied admission of guilt for the obnoxious pervert from NYC and I predict he will soon leave office to join fellow disgraced NYC pervert Elliot Spitzer on their own show on CNN.

Wiener & Spitzer, Spitzer on Wiener, The Spiener Show, .....I could go on.

In any event, it is highly entertaining to watch this extreme leftard sphincter get a dose of his own pathetic ridicule.

Congrats NYC voters!

Filthy, lying Democratic sc... (Below threshold)
Jim Addison:

Filthy, lying Democratic scum like Weiner can hardly be expected to behave otherwise. Perhaps this will at least save NYC from electing the buffoon as Mayor.

Meanwhile, the market drops sharply as manufacturing output is "unexpectedly" low and job creation is "unexpectedly" low and the MINIMUM net cost to taxpayers of Obama's union/GM bailout will be $14 BILLION (not counting the losses to stockholders and pension funds which were screwed by the bailout).

Maybe he is sacrificing himself to distract attention from Obama's abysmal incompetence? If so, it is a far, far better thing . . .

LMAO

I was put in mind ... (Below threshold)
I was put in mind of Weiner's former colleague, Chris Lee. At least Lee had the decency to resign when his cheesy, tacky photo and behavior became public. But then again, Weiner is a Democrat -- and Democrats have a loophole: they never promised to NOT be disgusting, vile, sleazy scumbags.

So, Weiner is at fault, for NOT resigning - because his account was hacked and the hacker attempted to slander him with adultery?

And the reason is apparently 'cause he has a funny name - never mind the total absence of any and all evidence of even an intention to *commit* adultery?

Come on now. I know he upsets a lot of people by being a liberal and all, but doesn't that seem a bit extreme and ridiculous a criticism? Honestly?

jim x, Weiner has NOT conta... (Below threshold)

jim x, Weiner has NOT contacted law enforcement about the "hack" -- despite it being a federal offense -- but has hired a private security firm to "handle" the matter.

Either he's heavily into the whole vigilante thing, or it's like Ace of Spades noted: "victims call the cops, perps call lawyers."

J.

And? If he called ... (Below threshold)

And?

If he called in the FBI, he would probably be accused of wasting government time and money on a trivial matter.

More importantly, and back to the central point - how does that make him at fault, for not resigning because his account was hacked and he was falsely slandered as an adulterer?

What an interesting coincid... (Below threshold)

What an interesting coincidence, that this occurred the weekend after Weiner brought a lot of focus onto Justice Thomas' Friday news dump, of a lot of documentation further showing potential favoritism due to his wife's contracts.

And that, of all 20,000 of Weiner's followers on Twitter, only one of them allegedly saw this picture.

And that, rather than perform the courtesy of giving Rep. Weiner weeks to respond, as Chris Lee was given, Breitbart ran with it immediately.

I'm sure that's all further reasons why Weiner should resign, of course.

jim x ~ Are you just playin... (Below threshold)
Jim Addison:

jim x ~ Are you just playing dumb, or is it for real?

It is a felony - carrying jail time - to "hack" into any account of a Member of Congress. If Weiner isn't lying his butt off, he is guilty of misprision of a felony by FAILING to report it to the appropriate authority.

There was no "hack" beside Weiner himself, who is trying to lie his way out of it. This is very clear to all but the very stupid among us.

So, Weiner is at fault, ... (Below threshold)
cirby:

So, Weiner is at fault, for NOT resigning - because his account was hacked and the hacker attempted to slander him with adultery?

No, he's at fault for sending a picture of Mr. Happy to a much younger woman through his Twitter account, accidentally posting it for the whole world to see, failing miserably at covering it up, and lying like a fool, while claiming someone ELSE committed a crime (that he's somehow incredibly averse to having investigated by the authorities).

Put it this way: if someone posted a "fake" photo of your private parts and it made international news, wouldn't you want the FBI to handle it? Especially if you're an influential politician, and the national security implications are that obvious?

(Yes, national security. If someone got his password, it probably wasn't "hacking," but phishing - and if he fell for something once, there's a strong possibility that he fell for it in other ways. Which is something that really, no kidding, honestly needs to be cleared up. Either that or he's a lying horndog with self-control issues and a lack of common sense that should preclude him from holding office.)

No, he's at fault ... (Below threshold)
No, he's at fault for sending a picture of Mr. Happy to a much younger woman through his Twitter account,

Oh, I see. So he's immediately guilty, despite all evidence to the contrary and against his own word.

Interesting.

Do you happen to apply this same rule of guilty-until-proven-innocent happen to apply to conservatives? If so, how long should Sarah Palin hide (insert crazy conspiracy theory here)?

Put it this way: i... (Below threshold)
Put it this way: if someone posted a "fake" photo of your private parts and it made international news, wouldn't you want the FBI to handle it? Especially if you're an influential politician, and the national security implications are that obvious?

Actually, no. Because the national security implications of a hacked twitter account are nil, because the FEED ITSELF is between him and random non-cleared people in the world.

So yes, I would want and expect the FBI to be concerned with actual crimes and threats. But hey, that's just me. I like the FBI to spend their time working on crimes and threats. Silly me.

And that, of all 20,000 ... (Below threshold)
cirby:

And that, of all 20,000 of Weiner's followers on Twitter, only one of them allegedly saw this picture.

Actually, several people have come forward and admitted that they saw the pic.

Another funny thing is that someone supposedly "hacked" his Twitter AND Yfrog AND Facebook accounts, which is a harder to believe (unless he's the sort of idiot who uses the same password on everything he does on the Internet, which also addresses his foolishness).

The really, honestly dim thing is that Wiener hired a lawyer, in order to... not go after the person who supposedly hacked his account.

The Wiener campaign also have been caught flat-out lying a few times. The most blatant and stupid one was about the timing of the Tweet. No, this didn't happen during the time he was watching the hockey game and Tweeting about it - it happened more than three hours later.

The most hilarious part? He "can't say with certitude" that the photo wasn't of him. Funny - if someone popped up with a photo purporting to be of my crotch, I could easily say "with certitude" that it wasn't mine. Someone walks up to you WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR PANTS OFF, takes a flash photo from a couple of feet away, and you DON'T KNOW IT HAPPENED?

What sort of personal life does this idiot lead, anyway? Does he find himself in that sort of situation often? Is he confused, because he MIGHT have had a number of similar photos taken in the past? Apparently, this is just the, er, tip of the iceberg...

Actually, several ... (Below threshold)
Actually, several people have come forward and admitted that they saw the pic.

Uh-huh. But they said nothing about it at the time. Because that's such a commonplace thing to see, and then not tell anyone else about.

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

All of which is besdies the point - which is that Weiner says his account was hacked.

Why his word not good enough for you?

Why do you feel that "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply to him?

Oh, I see. So he's immed... (Below threshold)
cirby:

Oh, I see. So he's immediately guilty, despite all evidence to the contrary and against his own word.

WHAT evidence? So far, there's literally NO evidence to the contrary. Even the things he claim tend to point right back at "he's a foolish jerk who likes flirting with much younger women, and is stupid enough to get caught." He's got a bit of a history of doing the "I'm a Congressman, wanna go out with me?" bit, and it seems his marriage has only caused him to push it into the background, not give it up entirely.

Actually, no. Because the national security implications of a hacked twitter account are nil, because the FEED ITSELF is between him and random non-cleared people in the world.

Except, as I pointed out above, he probably wasn't "hacked," but "phished." Hacking isn't something he can do something about, but if he's dumb enough to get phished on three separate personal accounts, he's more than dumb enough to lose track of the passwords to his Congressional email (or use the public accounts for official business) - and that's serious.

By not bringing the FBI and Congressional investigators into it, he's actually breaking House rules, and could be in trouble for that, too. The moment he suspected he might have lost control of his Twitter account, he should have called some competent people in to investigate it, and he's doing pretty much the OPPOSITE of that.

If he were innocent? "My public Internet accounts were compromised, and as a Congressman, I'm bound to call for an investigation, in case it went further than the obvious felony. It absolutely wasn't me, it wasn't a photo of my crotch, and I will cooperate with the authorities in every way I can."

He did or said the exact opposite of everything in that last sentence... which is the mark of someone setting up for long-term damage control when the rest of the story hits, not someone with a solid alibi.

Uh-huh. But they said no... (Below threshold)
cirby:

Uh-huh. But they said nothing about it at the time. Because that's such a commonplace thing to see, and then not tell anyone else about.

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

You do realize that you're claiming that the photo didn't actually exist, right? After Wiener himself admitted that it was posted on his Yfrog account and mentioned on his Twitter account?

In other words, even Wiener would admit that you're making it up as you go along, and that you're even more full of it than HE is...

Does it bother you to be that far out in the community-based reality?

WHAT evidence? So ... (Below threshold)
WHAT evidence? So far, there's literally NO evidence to the contrary.

Nope, wrong. Here's an example of the evidence, which I expect you'll immediately discount- http://errorlevelanalysis.com/permalink/428f7a2/

As re: hacekd vs. phished, tomayto tomahto. There's still nothing national-security related on that feed. Contact the FBI about changing passwords elsewhere? Sure. But tracking down this prank shot? Not a good use of the FBI's time.

Now then: you still haven't answered why Weiner isn't being treated as innocent until proven guilty.

Why is that?

You do realize tha... (Below threshold)
You do realize that you're claiming that the photo didn't actually exist, right? After Wiener himself admitted that it was posted on his Yfrog account and mentioned on his Twitter account?

No, wrong. What I'm saying is that **A PHOTO** was posted to his account. The question is whether or not it was this salacious and potentially adulterous one.

If it WAS this salacious and inappropriate one, then more than one of 20,000 followers would have noticed it at the time.

Evidence seems to indicate that the screengrab Breitbart published is a fake, taking:

1.the unknown photo the hacker posted and which was deleted and
2. superimposing the pic of a person in his shorts

Nope, wrong. Here'... (Below threshold)
Eric:
Nope, wrong. Here's an example of the evidence, which I expect you'll immediately discount- http://errorlevelanalysis.com/permalink/428f7a2/

It is discounted in the very webpage you linked to.

"If you are unsure how to interpret the results, please do not claim the results of this tool as proof of anything."

That picture doesn't show any manipulation. Go to the home page of your own link http://errorlevelanalysis.com/ and mouse over the image.

The ELA shows distinct patterns of change, the Weiner image is all noise. Your evidence is lame, and still doesn't prove that his account was hacked.

I for one, stand firm in my... (Below threshold)
liberalnitemare:

I for one, stand firm in my support of congressman weiner.
I would be happy to spearhead any probe into this matter.

Yep, immediately discounted... (Below threshold)

Yep, immediately discounted as expected.

Also the EXIF information doesn't match, for what that's worth:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/exclusive-mediaite-analysis-of-weinergate-photos-supports-anthony-weiner-and-andrew-breitbart/

Note that the above article supports both Weiner and Breitbart, in that it says Breitbart isn't deliberately posting a fake. But it also confirms the scenario I'm suggesting - that the screengrab was faked and then sent to Breitbart.

No one disputes that the photo was doctored to display underwear-covered genitalia.
The only evidence is Wiener... (Below threshold)
TexBob:

The only evidence is Wiener's possible reluctance to perjure himself by filing a false FBI report. The Wiener won't do this and he won't deny it either, so in my opinion, Wiener's silence on the wiener implies that the picture of Wiener's wiener must be Wiener's wiener.

I hope this continues for months as Pee Wee Wiener's Playhouse is getting better each day and the paid trolls that come out to defend him are fun to ridicule as well. Keep trying, but try not to step on your wiener while doing it.

Now then: you still have... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

Now then: you still haven't answered why Weiner isn't being treated as innocent until proven guilty.

Allow me, Jim.

We're giving your guy the same benefit of the doubt your side gives ours. That is to say, none at all. Is that unfair? Probably. If this were a Republican, you'd be here screeching and cackling about the scandal. Since it's a Democrat, you're giving him a pass and whining about "innocent until proven guilty."

Welcome to politics in 2011. You Democrats have helped make this bed. Lie in it.

Look on the bright side: ap... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Look on the bright side: apparently not all Democrats are fruits.

Let's face it it is all Geo... (Below threshold)
Stan:

Let's face it it is all George Bush' fault. That will be the fall back position the liberals will head to when things get a bit dicey.

Now then: you still have... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Now then: you still haven't answered why Weiner isn't being treated as innocent until proven guilty.

Good point. Doubtless Martians posted his wiener. I hate it when they do that.

The surprise is finding out cockroaches have wieners. Learn something every day.

The only evidence is Wie... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

The only evidence is Wiener's possible reluctance to perjure himself by filing a false FBI report.

Why would a Democrat care about perjury? Clinton didn't worry about it. Only Americans need concern themselves with the law. Liberals have nothing to worry about.

Oh, I see. So he's immed... (Below threshold)

Oh, I see. So he's immediately guilty, despite all evidence to the contrary and against his own word.

As said above, WHAT evidence? All I've seen show that the hacking was PLAUSIBLE, not even probable. And which word? The one where he couldn't definitively say the junk shot was or was not his?

I'll come back to that one, 'cuz it's so damned funny. The ONLY way that makes any sense is if Weiner had several such shots, which he had posted somewhere on the internet. If he had never taken any junk shots, then he could say definitively that the shot is a fake -- kind of like the one of me in bed with Kirstie Alley, in her Saavik costume, when she was younger and hot.

You and your ilk can construct all the elaborate scenarios you like and say that it COULD have happened, but Occam's Razor indicates that Weiner took a picture of his Mr. Happy and meant to send it to the hot co-ed who called him "her boyfriend" and who he followed on Twitter, but put it out for the public to see. And now he's desperately trying to find some excuse to make it all go away.

J.

Maybe Gregg's comment refer... (Below threshold)
Woody:

Maybe Gregg's comment referred to the word "John."

Maybe Gregg's comment refer... (Below threshold)
Woody:

Maybe Gregg's comment referred to the word "John."

Oh, I see. So he's immed... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Oh, I see. So he's immediately guilty, despite all evidence to the contrary and against his own word.

Works for leftists/journalists all the time, I don't see why you are getting your knickers in a twist about it.

Newsflash to liberals: the ... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Newsflash to liberals: the Easter Bunny does not exist.

Sorry.

Neither does Santa Claus.

Hard to believe, I know, but there it is.

Liberals can be such wiener... (Below threshold)
Sep14:

Liberals can be such wieners!

Re: posts # 's 28-39 - not ... (Below threshold)

Re: posts # 's 28-39 - not one of you has acknowledged the information posted in # 27, that basically shows this photo was a hack smear attempt.

Now, I know you guys really *want* to believe the SCLM is that unfair to *your* guys. But I don't recall any particular case where the media has been this harsh to a GOP politician, with evidence to the contrary such as this.

Regardless of that, if it's wrong it's wrong. So if you don't like it being done to your guys, then you shouldn't engage in unfair treatment towards others.

But, whatever. :) At the end of the day, I guess it doesn't matter that much. Breitbart is still the true weiner.

I don't have any 'guys' jim... (Below threshold)
Sep14:

I don't have any 'guys' jim x. That link is about as legitimate as Barry's long form,.


Good night..

I can say with certitude th... (Below threshold)
Carolyn:

I can say with certitude that the diminutive dickpic should be this Friday's Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™ ; )

jim x, that would be more c... (Below threshold)

jim x, that would be more convincing if it was consistent with Weiner's statements.

1) He called it a "hack," now it's a "prank."

2) He will NOT say that it ain't his crotch, which implies that he DOES have pictures of his crotch floating around cyberspace where they could be stolen.

3) All it would take is for Weiner to ask Twitter to provide the IP used to send the picture to show it wasn't him.

4) Remember the kid who got into Sarah Palin's Yahoo e-mail? He got sent to prison.

5) Remember Congressman Chris Lee? All his picture showed was his chest. He resigned.

Weiner's story simply doesn't pass the "smell" test, the "would my spouse/significant other buy this" test, or the "common sense" test. He's protecting something -- either himself, or the alleged "hacker/prankster."

But in the meantime, he's providing us with tremendous entertainment at his expense, and that is more than fine with me.

J.

The entertainment factor is... (Below threshold)
Oyster:

The entertainment factor is priceless. I gotta tell ya ... I'm not a man, but I would KNOW if a picture of a crotch was taken from about the same distance and angle of my eyes.

Weiner can't say definitively if it's him? hahaha! It makes one wonder, how many pictures of his crotch has he taken that he can't tell if this is one of them?

At the end of the day, I... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

At the end of the day, I guess it doesn't matter that much. Breitbart is still the true weiner winner.

Fixed that for ya, Jim.

weiner winner<... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

weiner winner

Dammit, so strikethrough HTML works in the preview but not in the actual post? Not only did it trash the joke, it gave Jim a free one. Oh, well, Jim, enjoy it. Never say I haven't done anything for you.

Re: posts # 's 28-... (Below threshold)
Eric:
Re: posts # 's 28-39 - not one of you has acknowledged the information posted in # 27, that basically shows this photo was a hack smear attempt.

From JimX's link:

Some have indicated a belief that the screen captured image posted at Big Government showed signs of manipulation. Another blogger at Daily Kos runs through the argument: a software tool that compares compression artifacts in images seems to indicate that the Congressman’s name shows evidence of manipulation. But what’s noteworthy about this analysis is that the name shows the same level of manipulation as other text in the image. Meaning, then, that if the name were forged, it is likely that the site’s “Popular” and “Upload” links were also forged. Which, of course they weren’t. No one disputes that the photo was doctored to display underwear-covered genitalia. For which I’m glad, because I’d rather not spend a lot of time assessing that claim.
In final analysis – the screenshot posted by Big Government shows an image that appears to have been posted to Weiner’s image hosting account. It’s worth noting, too, that this is entirely consistent with what Weiner has said all along.

I might note that it is also consistent with the theory that Weiner uploaded the image himself.

Yep, definitely George's fa... (Below threshold)
Patricia:

Yep, definitely George's fault....

@43: Exactly. If my spouse... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

@43: Exactly. If my spouse came home with a story like Weiner's, and changing every day like his has, I would be suspicious. And I love her.

So of course I am going to be skeptical of a blow-hard politician like Weiner.

You can't forget that over ... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

You can't forget that over the weekend he said he was hacked. Then he lawyered up and called a press conference to NOT answer any questions on this subject. Then the next day, he did sit downs with the media to again obfuscate. Now the late night comics are on his ass. He is toast. If he would have just stated the truth on the slow Memorial weekend news days, it would be done but HE caused it to continue. I think he impulsively lied to his wife and now has to stick to it.

Personally I think he is embarassed cause his junk leans to the right. ww

But I don't recall... (Below threshold)
But I don't recall any particular case where the media has been this harsh to a GOP politician, with evidence to the contrary such as this.

Clarence Thomas was not available for comment.

But I don't recall any p... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

But I don't recall any particular case where the media has been this harsh to a GOP politician, with evidence to the contrary such as this.

Andrew Sullivan's obsession with Trig Palin's parentage...
Rathergate

That link is about... (Below threshold)
That link is about as legitimate as Barry's long form,.

I agree.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy