Silent Assassin is not too busy making bucks in NYC to keep an eye on the the new, improved, "compassionate" GOP:

The New Mexico Republican Central Committee has voted to censure the Sandoval County clerk, who issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The resolution says Republican Victoria Dunlap has brought disgrace to the party.

"Other than assassination, all we can do is censure her," said committee chairman Richard Gibbs.

Old friend Zach from Ordo on the legend.

Still not on the WH webpage. No one's talking about it.

The elephant in the room on the North Korea train collision story is the possibility that it was an assassination attempt against Kim Jong-Il.

Haven't heard this possibility even breathed anywhere, even on the BBC.

...well, the BBC at least raises the possibility on their website:

Correspondents say there are various theories about the explosion; there is speculation that it may have been an attack aimed at Mr Kim though South Korean officials have dismissed this.

...okay, the Guardian mentions it too. I take it back.

...the Post has this:

North Korea's ruler, Kim Jong Il, had passed through the area on a specially fitted train only nine hours before en route back to the capital, Pyongyang, after an unannounced four-day summit in Beijing. The talks were aimed at restarting negotiations to dismantle the North's nuclear weapons programs that have been deadlocked for months. Though the timing of Kim's travel through the area raised speculation that the explosions might have been the result of a failed assassination attempt, U.S. and South Korea officials dismissed this hypothesis as unlikely.

"All indications at the moment are that the cause of the explosion was purely accidental," said one U.S. official.

What is this "all indications" baloney? I could understand if this was a reference to internal US intelligence or something, but I seriously doubt that anyone really knows what happened. I'm sure that the current administration would love to chop the head off of one of the "axis" countries, though. If this is a botched covert action on the part of the US, we're all in some serious danger.

Is just so good.

At Wonkette.

BigD reports that the press gaggle referenced here -- the one where poor Scotty M is triple-penetrated, screaming, on the issue of the criminal Saudi gas deal -- is no longer on the White House press briefings page.

GET ME REWRITE!

Let's reproduce what Josh Marshall posted of the transcript of the vanished gaggle, just on principle:

----

QUESTION: Can you describe conversations between the White House and Prince Bandar about his essential promise to lower oil prices before the election?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think you heard from Prince Bandar a few weeks ago about --

QUESTION: He didn’t talk specifically about the election.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- the most recent conversation that we had with him regarding oil prices. And he expressed his views out at the stakeout to you all that Saudi Arabia is committed to making sure prices remained in a range, I believe it’s $22 to $28 price per barrel of oil, and that they don’t want to do anything that would harm our consumers or harm our economy. So he made those comments at the stakeout and we’ve made our views very clear that prices should be determined by market forces, and that we are always in close contact with producers around the world on these issues to make sure that actions aren’t taken that harm our consumers or harm our economy.

QUESTION: There were no conversations specifically about the President’s reelection?

MR. McCLELLAN: You can ask Prince Bandar to --

QUESTION: But from the point -- I mean, conversations are obviously two ways.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- what his comments were. But the conversations we have are related to our long-held views that we have stated repeatedly publicly, that market forces should determine prices.

QUESTION: To follow up on that then, I would gather that the White House view is one of expectation that the Saudis would increase oil production between now and November.

MR. McCLELLAN: Our views are very well-known to Saudi Arabia. Prince Bandar made a commitment at the stakeout that I will let speak for itself. You all should look back to those remarks.

QUESTION: We’re missing the allegation here, which is that Prince Bandar and the Saudis have made a commitment to lower oil prices to help the President politically. Is that your --

MR. McCLELLAN: I’m not going to speak for Prince Bandar. You can direct those comments to him. I can tell you that what our views are and what he said at the stakeout is what we know his views are, as well.

QUESTION: Does the White House have any knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: I’m sorry?

QUESTION: Does the White House have any knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I’m not going to speak for Prince Bandar. You can direct those questions --

QUESTION: Is there a deal?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- I wouldn’t speculate one way or the other. You can direct those questions to him, but I’m telling you --

QUESTION: I’m not asking you to speculate either. Do you have knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: I’m telling you what our views are and what we've stated, and I'm telling you what I do know, which is that our position is very clear when it comes to oil prices and what our views are. And Prince Bandar spoke to you all just a few weeks ago out at the stakeout after meeting with some White House officials and expressed --

QUESTION: So you have no knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and expressed their view. I'm not going to try to speak for Prince Bandar. You can direct those questions to him.

QUESTION: The President is confident that the American elections are not being manipulated by the world's largest oil producer?

MR. McCLELLAN: Our view is that the markets should determine --

QUESTION: The market doesn't. It's a cartel.

MR. McCLELLAN: But our view is that that's what -- that the markets should determine prices. And that's the view we make very clear to producers around the world, including our friends in OPEC.

----

Guardian:

The McDonald's chairman and chief executive, Jim Cantalupo, architect of a dramatic turnaround at the fast food business, has died of an apparent heart attack, the company said yesterday. McDonald's shares closed down more than 2.5% on the news.

I know, not entirely original. Atkins, the diet guru, was supposedly a fatty in terrible shape when he died, right?

Appropo of nothing, this all reminds me of comic Bill Hicks ranting about the running advocate Jim Fixx:

I'm Jim Fixx and I'm dead now. And I don't know what the fuck happened. I jogged every day, ate nothing but tofu, swam five hundred laps every morning, and I'm dead. Yul Bryner drank, smoke, and got laid every night of his life. He's dead. Shit! Yul Bryner's smokin', drinkin', girls are sitting on his cueball noggin, every night of his life! I'm running around a dewy track at dawn. And we're both fucking dead. Yul used to pass me on his way home in the morning, big long limousine, two girls blowing him, cigarette in one hand, drink in the other. "One day that life is going to get to you, Yul." They're both dead. Yeah, but what a healthy looking corpse you were, Jim. Look at the hamstrings on that corpse! Look at the sloppy grin on Yul's corpse! Yul Bryner lived his life. Sure, he died a 78-pound stick figure, okay. There are certain drawbacks.

Juan Cole has another story of our steely resolve in Iraq--our show of strength that will let the world know that you just don't fuck with the U S of friggin' A.

The Scotsman also reported on the breakdown of negotiations with some pessimism, and noted that ' The pressures appeared to be taking their toll on US Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, who appeared to briefly lose consciousness during a press conference yesterday. Kimmitt left the podium, apparently feeling unwell, but returned a short time later. '

Gorgeous, huh?

Someone more poetic than me should construct a grand Kimmitt/situation-in-Iraq analogy.