Chappelle Renews for $50 million

CNN - Chappelle renews for $50 million

Dave Chappelle has signed a massive deal with Comedy Central that will return the comedian's hit series to the network for two more seasons. Sources familiar with the deal indicate it could be worth about $50 million, vaulting Chappelle, 30, into the rarefied realm of television's top earners. The new contract is believed to mark not only a steep increase for Chappelle as star, writer, co-executive producer and co-creator of "Chappelle's Show," but more significantly, reward him with a hefty chunk of the series' robust DVD sales.

Increasing the pressure on Comedy to close a megadeal with Chappelle was interest from other programmers eager to tap his talents, including NBC Universal Television Group, according to sources, which ultimately deemed Chappelle too expensive. FX is said to have made an eight-figure offer to lure Chappelle to the network, but to no avail.

The deal also has implications beyond Comedy for Chappelle within the network's parent company, Viacom, sources said. Another component sets up Chappelle with a multimillion-dollar deal at Paramount Pictures to star in an adaptation of the autobiography of Rick James, the funk veteran whom Chappelle has lampooned on "Chappelle's Show." He may also be tapped for a different film project.

In addition, the contract is said to establish a development deal for Chappelle's production company, Pilot Boy Prods., with managing principal Mustafa Abuelhija. The pair already has a project under consideration at Comedy featuring "Chappelle's Show" contributor Paul Mooney.

Also reaping the benefits of the deal was Chappelle's longtime partner, Neal Brennan, a director, executive producer, co-creator and writer of the series. While terms of the deal for Brennan were not disclosed, it is one of the richest deals in basic cable for a multihyphenate. "I knew we could continue at Comedy Central," Brennan said. "We weren't thinking of going anywhere else."

Chappelle, who is vacationing in Paris, was not available for comment.

"Chappelle's Show" has become an important series for Comedy, scoring a trio of Emmy nominations last month and ranking as the highest-rated cable program for the network's demographic sweet spot, men 18-34, who comprised much of the 3.1 million total viewers the series averaged in its second season.

Wow.

Beltway Traffic Jam

The Tuesday linkfest:

• Dale Franks explains why a national sales tax is "not all fuzzy kitties."
• Winds of Change has had 2 million visitors.
• Dean Esmay compiles a list of Funny and Not Funny political humor.
• John Cole explains why Atrios is not only "the prince of darkness" but "wrong."
• Mark Cuban is taking on Google with a new company called IceRocket.
• Hanah Metchis is very excited about her new toothbrush.
• Alex Knapp notes that John Kerry is making promises based on an unconstitutional expansion of presidential power.
• Baldilocks is looking for work in Southern California. She's "a dependable administrative assistant with a ton o' skills."

To join in, link and send a TrackBack to this post. If your blog doesn't automatically generate one, use the Send TrackBack feature below. For more information, see this post.

Suspicious Activity

Scott Koenig is bemused by those who believe that dated attack plans are somehow evidence that counter-terrorist intelligence is bad or, worse, politically motivated.

We know that al Qaeda operatives typically spend several months or even years surveiling a potential target, probing for weaknesses. By increasing security of likely targets on the basis of the slightest intelligence (or even at random), we can disrupt their planning process, and possibly force them to abandon a plan altogether.

The easiest time to thwart a potential terrorist plan is during this critical planning period. If the surveillance can be detected, it may be possible to track the movement of the reconnaissance elements, and ultimately bust an entire terrorist cell.

But typically, the critical piece of information that thwarts an attack won’t come from captured documents, or even trained security personnel. It generally comes from an alert civilian who witnesses suspicious activity, and reports it to authorities.

In a discussion that ensues in his comments section, he defines "suspicious":

First, let's dispense with the BS: ethnic profiling works. I don't mean to offend anyone, but Middle Eastern men in their 20s and 30s are much more likely to be terrorists than say, an elderly Scandanavian woman.

What you're typically looking for is someone who is taking numerous photos of high-profile buildings or other vital infrastructure beyond what a tourist might want for his scrapbook. They would be paying particular attention to critical structural elements, like support beams, etc. Anyone who is spending an unusual amount of time observing people (especially security or delivery personnel) entering and leaving a building is obviously suspicious. Even more suspicious if he is taking notes. Anyone observing from a distance with a telescope or binoculars should raise your attennae.

But mainly, it's just any behavior that strikes you as unusual for a person going about their business, but which could easily be consistent with scoping out a potential target.

Clearly, this isn't rocket science. The bottom line is that if you have a gut feeling about someone, don't ignore it. Observe their behavior, but don't confront them directly. Make sure you can give a good description, and report the incident to the proper authorities.

Ethnic profiling isn't foolproof. While al Qaeda operatives are mainly young, male, and Arab, not all are. Still, one has to start somewhere. And it's not simply the presence of people who "look" like the people who staged the 9/11 attacks. The phones would ring off the hook in the DC area if people called the police to report every sighting of a "Middle Eastern man in their 20s and 30s." Or, for that matter, people taking pictures of buildings. But, certainly, people can develop a sense of what is "normal" for their part of the country and figure out what constitutes "suspicious."

Alan Keyes to take on Barack Obama?

Chicago Sun-Times - GOP wooing Keyes to take on Obama

Barack Obama might get a race, after all. Former GOP presidential candidate Alan Keyes told Illinois Republicans Monday that he is ''open to the idea'' of taking on the Democrat in the U.S. Senate race -- a move that would pit two eloquent, nationally known African Americans against one another. ''It would be a classic race of conservative vs. liberal,'' said state Sen. Dave Syverson, a member of the panel looking for a candidate to go up against Obama. ''It would put this race on the map in this country -- just for excitement.''

***

It remains to be seen how Keyes would fare in Illinois. Four years ago, he came in third in the state's GOP presidential primary, winning only 9 percent of the vote. And in 1996, he placed fourth with less than 4 percent. And he lost U.S. Senate bids in Maryland in 1988 and 1992.

But some believe Keyes could be just the antidote to Obama. ''Wow!" said Ronald Smith, another member of state central committee. ''I'd love it. I'd love it. I tell you, in a debate, he would blow Obama out of the water. ... I heard him speak. He mesmerizes you, just his grasp of the issues.''

I can't imagine Keyes would have much of a shot against Obama, but then neither does any other likely Republican candidate. It would indeed make for an engaging contest, however.

Keyes lives in Maryland, but Syverson argues that is not an insurmountable problem, pointing to Hillary Clinton's successful run for a New York Senate seat. ''It's not necessarily where you live as much as who you represent and the views you represent," Syverson said. "He believes that there is a void in Illinois and that Obama certainly does not represent Illinois. And he believes that he would be, if he were to run, much more representative of Illinois."

He's likely the only one who thinks that!

Hat tip: Jeff Quinton

Electoral Math

Matthew Yglesias looks at the current state-by-state numbers and concludes that Kerry is in exceedingly good shape.

The general dynamic, I think, is that Bush needs to defend many fronts -- Nevada, Arizona, Missouri, Ohio, West Virginia, Florida, New Hampshire (82 electoral votes) -- while Kerry really only needs to play defense in Iowa and Wisonsin (17 electoral votes). What could change this dynamic is if the Nader campaign picks up steam and re-produces the artificially close results we saw last time in Maine and the Pacific Northwest.

The current numbers:

According to my handy-dandy calculator, this means 289 Kerry, 232 Bush, and 17 undecided right now. The "barely" states are all within the margin of polling error, so rather dubious to include into the calculation, but there's no really good way to do it otherwise at the moment.

Like Matt, I'm rather confident that Tennessee's 11 EV's will ultimately go to Bush, notwithstanding the fact that they're currently in the "barely Kerry" column. That would switch the decideds to 278-243. Arizona's 10, Missouri's 11, and West Virginia's 5 will almost certainly go to Bush, shifting it to 252-269. Since 270 is the magic number, Bush is in decent shape, considering his convention is yet to come while Kerry's has come and gone without a measurable "bounce."

Still, I agree with Matt: the math favors Kerry. Ohio's 20 and Florida's 27 EVs are in the "weak Bush" category. Bush won both states in 2000, Ohio closely and Florida by a whisker. He needs to hold both--or pick off Pennsylvania--to stave off Kerry. If Bush takes all three states, which is not out of the realm of possibility, he'll win easily. But just a little bad news at the wrong time, or a poor performance in the debates, could just as easily cause him to lose all three.

Bush’s Briar Patch

Whether by serendipity or calculation, President Bush has the opportunity to change his mind on two issues that, were he to do so, would redound decidedly to his political benefit.

• For reasons inexplicable from a tactical standpoint, he is resisting pressure to let Ralph Nader in the presidential debates, insisting on going mano-a-mano with John Kerry. LetNaderDebate.org is taking out BlogAds in various places (such as Dan Drezner's site) trying to get people to write letters to Bush demanding that Nader be allowed in. I say he should relent. While it's true that this would result in a 2 vs. 1 contest ideologically, raising Nader's credibility can only help Bush get re-elected.
• Bush is refusing to call Congress back from their traditional recess to debate and enact intelligence reform. Now that John Kerry has called for, nay, demanded, that he do so, Bush should relent, even giving Kerry credit for helping him change his mind. He then forces his opponent to either spend valuable campaigning time sitting around committee rooms or to skip these meetings--that he called for!--to go campaigning. Either way, Bush wins.

Leading Muslim Clerics in Iraq Condemn Bombing of Churches

NYT - Leading Muslim Clerics in Iraq Condemn Bombing of Churches [RSS]

Top Muslim clerics and political leaders united Monday behind Iraq's Christians, condemning the coordinated bomb attacks on five churches the day before as a dangerous escalation of the war and an assault on centuries of coexistence between Christians and Muslims here. Still, some Christians, who make up less than 5 percent of the nation's 25 million people, said they feared that the attacks were a frightening signal of a rise of fundamentalist Islam - and that the day might come when they were no longer welcome in Iraq. At least 10 people were killed in the bombings, timed as Christians gathered in churches for Sunday evening Mass. "What else do they want?" asked a Christian woman, who gave her name as Um Khalid, 56, who runs a food shop down the street from an Assyrian Christian church in Baghdad, where twisted and blackened cars still stood from the explosion the night before. "They want us out of here."

Iraqi officials lay blame for the attacks on Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian militant with ties to Al Qaeda. But his group, Tawhid and Jihad, did not claim responsibility for the attacks, as has been its practice for others. The group did release two videotapes on Monday: one showing what appeared to be a Turkish hostage shot to death with three bullets to the head, the other saying it was releasing a Somali truck driver because his employer had agreed to halt operations in Iraq.

The Iraqi Christian community, concentrated around Baghdad and the Kurdish-controlled region in and around Mosul, is one of the oldest in the world, tracing its roots back 2,000 years. Most of its members are Assyrians, an independent Christian church, and Chaldeans, Eastern-rite Catholics who recognize papal authority. Though subject to persecution throughout their history, they considered themselves generally well treated under the largely secular rule of Saddam Hussein, and some of them - notably the former deputy prime minister, Tariq Aziz - rose to positions of power. Their numbers have dwindled to about 800,000 now and falling, from about one million in 1991, around the time of the Persian Gulf war. The exodus has grown markedly since the fall of the Hussein government last year, with the crumbling of the generally secular atmosphere and the spread of lawlessness. A recent rise in attacks on retail businesses often owned by Christians and considered blasphemous by Islamists - liquor stores, beauty salons and shops selling Western music - has increased the worries.

On Monday, leaders from nearly every major Muslim group, Sunni and Shiite alike, spoke out forcefully against the bombings, in what amounted to a call for national unity against what they said were terrorists aimed at pulling the country apart. The most revered Shiite leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, described the bombings as "criminal actions" and called on the new Iraqi government to end such violence. "We confirm the necessity of respecting the right of Christians and other religious minorities and their right to live in their country, Iraq, in security and peace," Ayatollah Sistani, who communicates publicly only on matters he regards as vital, said in a statement. There were similar words from the Muslim Scholars Association, a relatively moderate group of Sunni Muslims which nonetheless has ties to the insurgency here. Even Moktada al-Sadr, the rebel Shiite cleric whose militia is thought to be responsible for many of the attacks on liquor stores, condemned the bombings.

That Christians are being targetted is hardly surprising, given that the insurgency is Islamist. The public denunciations by Muslim clerics is encouraging, since many of them refuse to condemn acts of terrorism, although it is not unheard of for these leaders to say one thing for public consumption and another thing in private.

Beauty Won’t Spare You Heartache, Says Halle Berry

Fashion - Beauty Won’t Spare You Heartache, Says Halle Berry

Beauty?" ponders gorgeous Berry, who has split from her unfaithful husband Eric Bennet earlier this year - “Let me tell you something — being thought of as a beautiful woman has spared me nothing in life. No heartache, no trouble. Love has been difficult. Beauty is essentially meaningless and it is always transitory."

At a press-conference in London promoting her new movie Catwoman, the Oscar winning actress and former Beauty Queen has slammed the growing obsession with plastic surgery and a culture that pushes women to risk their health in pursuit of youth and good looks. “Personally, I'm really saddened by the way women mutilate their faces today in search of that," she says. "There is this plastic, copycat look evolving and that's frightening to me. ... It's really insane and I feel sad that's what society is doing to women."

Sharon Stone, 46, who portrays a cosmetic mogul in the movie and who claims she has never turned to plastic surgeons herself, gives other angle. “You have to do what makes you feel good,” she says.

This rings a little hollow, considering that both women are multi-millionaires almost entirely owing to their good looks. Certainly, wealthy, beautiful people have to endure many of the same trials and tribulations as the rest of us. Both wealth and beauty can help buy one's way out of some, though, and can ameliorate the effects of many others.

(via GoogleNews)

Intelligence Reform And False Urgency

Sen. Chuck Hagel has an op-ed in today's WaPo entitled, "Intelligence Reform And False Urgency." As the title implies, he's concerned that there is something of a rush to judgment on the 9/11 Commission reform and a push to "do something" quickly that may overwhelm considered judgment.

We stand at a moment filled with potential for bringing about the responsible intelligence reforms needed to meet the threats of the 21st century. But if we allow the current national consensus for intelligence reform to become a tool in the partisan rancor of presidential politics, we risk doing enormous damage to our intelligence community. We must not allow false urgency dictated by the political calendar to overtake the need for serious reform. This is an enormous undertaking filled with consequences that will last a generation.

There is no debate about the need to reform our 20th century intelligence infrastructure. Yesterday President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry publicly discussed several reform ideas that Congress will consider. But there is much work to be done to bring about the right reforms. Policymakers must not shy away from this responsibility; we must embrace it. The stakes could not be higher. While inaction is unacceptable, serious consequences will come with reform. Policymakers owe it to the American people to understand these consequences before they act.

A mistaken impression has developed that since Sept. 11, 2001, little has been done to improve our intelligence capabilities. This is not true. We are unquestionably a safer nation today than we were three years ago. The legislative and executive branches of government have been reviewing and adjusting our intelligence -- the gathering, processing and management of it -- since Sept. 11. We are vastly more prepared to respond to biological or chemical terrorist attacks than before Sept. 11. Our border security, documentation, information sharing and coordination among government agencies have all been improved. Last month, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, on which I serve, issued the first part of our report on intelligence failures prior to the war in Iraq. We have begun the second phase of our report, which will include recommendations on reform of our intelligence community. We have heard and will continue to hear from current and former members of that community, intelligence experts and policymakers responsible for making decisions based on the intelligence they are provided.

***

The American people should have confidence that our intelligence system is the finest in the world. This is no reason to ignore the reforms needed to meet the threats we face, but it is reason for the American people to feel secure. They should not be misled into believing that they are at risk because of an incompetent, inadequate intelligence system. Panic is not the order of the day. Responsible reform is the objective.

Our society is the most open, transparent and free society in history. Because of this, we will always face risks. The leaders charged with keeping this country safe should never be satisfied that we have done enough. There will always be room to improve our intelligence and security systems.

We will reform our intelligence community. The responsibilities of leadership require our action. But we must not rush haphazardly through what may be the most complicated and significant government reorganization since World War II. By the time the commission that President Bush empaneled to examine U.S. intelligence reports to him next March, we will have completed a massive series of investigations and hearings and a decisive presidential election.

The consequences of the decisions we make regarding intelligence reform will ripple far beyond our shores. The security of the next generation of Americans and global stability depend on our ability to wisely answer history's call. We must match the timeliness of our actions with wisdom and reason. This requires responsible reform.

Hagel is right. Kerry has politicized the 9/11 Commission's recommendations by his inane insistence, starting less than a week after its report, that the president was acting too slowly in enacting its recommendations and that, were he president, he would enact its recommendations wholly and without question, down the dot over every "i" and cross over every "t." Rather than responding that a president, as opposed to an absentee senator, must actually demonstrate responsible judgment and sober reflection, President Bush instead took the bait and allowed himself to be forced into a hasty judgment.

The 9/11 Commission was a panel consisting almost entirely of people with no expertise in intelligence gathering or analysis. Their judgments may nonetheless be quite solid, given the time and other resources they put into the effort. Still, it is the job of presidents and legislators to make judgments on such weighty matters for themselves. Blue ribbon panels are sometimes useful for defusing a political hot potato. They must not become mini governments, however. The idea that an unelected panel should have the combined powers of the executive and legislative branches and have carte blanche over something so important as reforming our national security apparatus is absurd and, frankly, a bit frightening. We had several such panels during the effort to reform our military establishment in the 1940s. The National Security Act of 1947, however, which ultimately created the CIA, National Security Council, and what would become the Department of Defense, was a product of the normal legislative process which considered these various reports as useful inputs but nothing more. That's the correct outcome.

OTB Status

My computer is tango uniform at the moment, with some sort of problem involving the motherboard. Fortunately, the contents of the hard drive are intact, if only accessible for minutes or seconds at a time before the machine overheats and freezes. Dell is going to replace the offending parts in the next day or two but, in the meantime, I'm without computer access at home.

Perhaps this is the excuse to buy that notebook I've been thinking about getting. . . .

Beltway Traffic Jam

The Monday linkfest:

• Julian Sanchez finds it ironic that Kuwait is banning Fahrenheit 911, which claims Saudi is "undemocratic."
• Dean Esmay answers Spoons and Michelle Malkin.
• Courtney Knapp pledges to quit posting about ice cream for a while.
• Scott Koenig writes about fake planes and fake medals in the Navy. And, no, it's not about John Kerry.
• Steven Taylor has a new Toast-o-Meter up.
• Stephen Green offers yet another reason to be thankful Howard Dean won't be president.
• Mrs. Blackfive is supposed to deliver today. Congrats, guys.

To join in, link and send a TrackBack to this post. If your blog doesn't automatically generate one, use the Send TrackBack feature below. For more information, see this post.

Bush Calls for New Intelligence Director

AP - Bush Calls for New Intelligence Director

President Bush on Monday endorsed creation of a national intelligence czar and counterterrorism center - his first steps in revamping the nation's intelligence-gathering system to help prevent a repeat of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "We are a nation in danger," Bush said as he announced his position during an appearance with top administration national security figures in the White House Rose Garden. Bush thus embraced, with some changes, two key recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, which outlined lapses in intelligence that left America vulnerable to the attacks.

Homeland security has taken center stage on the presidential campaign with both Bush and Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry dueling over their national security credentials.
Kerry, who has given a blanket endorsement to all the commission's recommendations, applauded Bush for embracing some commission proposals. But he said the president wasn't moving with sufficient urgency. "The time to act is now, not later," the senator declared, saying Bush should call Congress back from its summer recess to begin working on the changes.

Considering that the report has been out ten days and that making this announcement last week would have been roundly criticized for trying to overshadow the Democratic National Convention, it's unclear how the president could have reacted more swiftly. Now, granted, there was nothing preventing him from doing this without waiting for the Commission's report but that, too, would have been criticized by the Kerry camp.

The bipartisan panel's most overarching recommendations in a 567-page report were for creation of a counterterrorism center, which the commission envisions as a joint operational planning and intelligence center staffed by personnel from all the spy agencies, and a national intelligence czar. The chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, and former Rep. Lee Hamilton have insisted that the center and the national intelligence director position be placed in the executive office of the president to give the White House clout in dealing with all intelligence agencies. Bush said he wants them outside the White House. "I don't think the person should be a member of my Cabinet," he said. "I will hire the person and I can fire the person. ... I don't think that the office should be in the White House, however, I think it should be a stand-alone group to better coordinate."

Kerry criticized the president for ignoring the panel's recommendation to put the director in the White House. "You give greater power and leverage to the person who is the national director if they are seen as speaking directly for the president within the White House," Kerry said. "You also coordinate more effectively with the other agencies that you need to coordinate in order to summon the greatest possible response to protect Americans."

I'm rather agnostic on the issue of a DNI, let alone whether it's a cabinet post or where his office is located. Given that my interest in the issue is leaps and bounds more than that of the average undecided voter, my strong guess is this narrow difference will have approximately zero impact on the campaign.

U.S. Forces Clash With al-Sadr’s Gunmen

AP - U.S. Forces Clash With al-Sadr's Gunmen

U.S. forces clashed Monday with gunmen protecting the house of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in the holy city of Kufa. One woman was killed and three people were wounded, a hospital official said. The U.S. military had no immediate comment.

At least six U.S. military vehicles entered the Zahra area in Kufa near al-Sadr's house, which is protected by his militia, the Mahdi Army, witnesses said. Heavy gunfire and a mortar barrage set cars on fire before Iraqi police intervened and the U.S. forces withdrew, witnesses said. "One woman was killed and we have three injured," said Ajwak Kadhim, director at Al-Hakim Hospital in Kufa, 100 miles south of Baghdad. Al-Sadr, who is wanted by U.S. forces on an Iraqi warrant for the April 2003 murder of a moderate cleric in the nearby city of Najaf, was in his house at the time, witnesses said.

The radical cleric, who has grassroots support for his anti-coalition stance, began a two-month rebellion in early April after the U.S.-led occupation authority closed his newspaper and arrested a key aide. A series of truces ended the fighting, and the issue of whether to arrest al-Sadr was dropped without resolution.

Interesting. One hopes we in fact get him this time.

Video: Turkish Hostage Murdered

Reuters - Website shows video of Turkish hostage death

Islamist websites have showed a videotape of the killing of a Turkish hostage in Iraq by a group linked to al Qaeda ally Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The tape, carried by several Islamist sites on Monday, showed a masked man shooting the hostage while he was seated in a chair. When he fell to the ground, the gunman shot him two more times with a pistol while shouting "God is Greatest". The tape had shown the hostage, in a shirt and trousers, speaking in Turkish while three masked gunmen stood in front of a banner resembling that of Zarqawi's Tawhid and Jihad Group. It was not immediately possible to identify the hostage or to verify the authenticity of the tape.

"Turkey is still insisting on aiding the infidel U.S. operation...We will apply God's law on this apostate and ask Muslims in Turkey to help their Muslim brothers and not the occupation," one gunman said in a statement read out in Arabic. Some sites carried still pictures depicting the execution. A number of Turks have been taken hostage in Iraq and at least two have been reported killed.

On Saturday Al Jazeera television broadcast a videotape from Zarqawi's group threatening to "apply Islamic law" and behead two Turkish drivers unless their company stopped supplying the U.S. military in Iraq and quit the country completely.

Rusty Shackleford has the video.

Jeff Quinton has a roundup of blogger commentary and notes that, "The murdered hostage's name is Murat Yuce."

TCS: The Dragon Stirs

My long-awaited article on China, "The Dragon Stirs," is in today's TCS.