Bomb Throwing Pacifist

Announcement

2007-06-06T11:33:00.000-04:00

Okay. Transferring shit between Livejournal and Blogger is way too much of a pain in the ass. If you haven't done this already, from now on, check for new materials at my LJ blog, http://molotov_quaker.livejournal.com. Thanks!

~M

New Shorter

2007-06-06T11:30:00.000-04:00

He's an oversexed Jewish jungle king who dotes on his loving old ma. She's a sarcastic cat-loving Hell's Angel in the witness protection scheme. Together, they fight crime!

The Way Starbucks Sees It

J. Matt Barber

Java giant Starbucks finds itself entangled in yet another brewing controversy over its "The Way I See It" campaign.

One sentence in, and we're already encountering coffee-related puns and other presupposed bons mots. Matt, no offense, but there's a major difference between being able to play a game of random association on your particular topic of choice, and inserting a funny, cutting, and pithy observation at a particular juncture in the conversation. The former you seem to have well under control. The latter is, like the candy bar you have taped to your office ceiling, somewhat over your head.

Starbucks has a history of placing liberal, pro-homosexual and anti-God statements submitted by customers, celebrities and other public figures on the side of its coffee cups for customers to contemplate while they wash down a muffin with a Frappe-Mocha-whatever.

The fiends! Don't they know better than to risk the wrath of J. Matt Barber and the combined forces of the Concerned Women for America?

I also enjoy Matt's dismissive reference to Starbucks' product, referring to them as "Frappe-Mocha-Whatevers." Because if that's the level of precision he normally employs when trying to place an order at a restaurant, it's no wonder that a high percentage of his food seems to taste like snot and dandruff flakes.

Although the company has every right to do what it wants with its cups[...]

Except perhaps enable terrorists with them. After all, while the free market is widely-acknowledged as being the Ultimate Goodness(tm) when it comes to all matters physikal, rhetorical, and philosophikal, as far as domestic security is concerned, the free market must yield right of way (unless the matter under discussion is fuel self-sufficiency or beefed up port security).

one questions whether it makes good business sense to intentionally alienate a large percentage of the coffee drinking public with these inflammatory political musings.

In short: don't do that, Starbucks! You're gonna piss of the rubes! Why can't you stick to something less controversial? Like American flags, or yellow ribbons, or the statue of liberty? Or one of those Jesus fish in the midst of eating a Darwin fish? Can't you tell that your iconoclastic tendencies and reckless pursuit of free thought puts your business plan in harm's way?

The Quaker adds: Dude, it ain't our fault liberals make the best coffee (Starbucks), ice cream (Ben and Jerry's), ketchup (Heinz) and the best search engines (teh Google). The Free Market has spoken!

Many customers with traditional values find it quite offensive.

As well as those of us who value our traditions. Four bucks for a freaking coffee?? If fifty-cent gas-station coffee is good enough for grandpa, by gum, it's good enough for us!

Although the company has used some religion oriented statements in the past — such as one by Purpose Driven Life author Rick Warren — the preponderance of politically and spiritually themed quotes that make the "cup cut" seem to represent a hard-left ideology.

Translation: the failure of Starbucks to quote directly from the Bible, Ronald Reagan, or tell fags and liberals they are going to burn in hell is a clear sign of the unyielding, relentless hatred to which me and my conservative bretheren are subjected every day.

I know... it's difficult to believe that a company headquartered in Seattle, Washington, would labor under such a leftist bent, but sadly, such is the case.

They of course have never worked the land and developed the common-sense, salt-of-the-earth thinking that can't be acquired through all that fancy-smancy book-learnin', like J. Matt Barber and Ronald Reagan did.

Again, that's the company's prerogative. But come on guys. How about some open mindedness — a little balance?

Translation: Your failure to condemn what me and my 28%-er cohort finds offensive is proof of your bigotry and close-mindedness. I mean, have you ever really stopped and considered the fact that homofags might go to hell? How dare you, sir? How DARE you?

Concerned Women for America (CWA) pulled the lid off Starbucks leftist corporate ideology a couple of years ago and stirred up controversy by pointing out that Starbucks had sponsored multiple "gay pride" events and had given monetary support to ultra-liberal abortion provider Planned Parenthood.

If by "pulled the lid off Starbucks" you mean they pointed out something everyone else already knew [viz. Starbucks is generally a progressively-oriented company], and "a couple years ago" you mean "eighteen months" [viz. August of 2005], you'd get a statement generally approaching the truth.

For a while, the company seemed to back off a bit with the liberal activism, but they now appear to be warming things up again.

Sometimes, I just feel like spitting on my hands, donning my voyageur cap, and splitting something open with a tomahawk. Usually I picture a tree stump or a watermelon. Today, however, I have an altogether different picture in my mind.

So, in the interest of equal time, I've submitted the following "The Way I See It" quote from a Christian conservative perspective for Starbucks to consider.

Which I am sure they will give it the careful and thoughtful consideration it is due, before flushing it down the toilet with all the other turds.

New "shorter"

2007-05-18T14:06:00.001-04:00

Shorter "Americans for Truth" ("a Group Devoted Solely to Countering ‘Gay’ Movement") president Peter LaBarbera:

Even though he really loved homosexuals as people, their quick and scornful condemnation of him and his passing pretty much proves Jerry Falwell was right all along.

How to properly execute a radical leftist takedown...

2007-05-18T13:59:00.000-04:00

You know, every once in a while I find myself a little surprised at life's occasional quirks. While I have, in the past, been known to style myself as a screaming, raging leftist, it has from time to time occurred to me that I am am really not all that far off to the left. At least, not compared to some people.

After all, I am happy that Nicholas Sarkozy won the French election, am generally supportive of restrictions on immigration, don't usually like "nanny state" restrictions (like mandatory seatbelt and helmet laws), and am opposed to the tightening of gun control beyond what we already have in place and is necessary for the maintenance of law and order. I do not support the establishment of a 1970s confiscatory-style European welfare state in America (although I do think we could go much further...basic health-care as a basic minimum), and while I recognize that major inequality and institutional racism exists and continues to exist in this country, I don't think it is as all-pervasive and as conspiratorial as many people to my left seem to think.

In other words, by American standards, I'm a bomb-throwing communist. By international standards, however, I'm a moderate centrist, maybe even a little to the right of center.

However, just when I start to think I am the single most rabid left-wing person in the country and am preparing to set up my own modernized version of the Rote Armee Faktion or Weatherman Underground, I end up meeting some real screaming leftists. I use the term "leftists" in the loosest possible sense of the word, for while they are on the left side of the political spectrum, there is hardly anything "liberal" about them, at least according to the classic definition of the term, viz. "open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc."

Whereas I have always understood liberalism to be rooted in a sense of genial self-reflection, introspection, open-mindedness and willingness to modify one's beliefs based on the ability of the evidence to convince the disinterested skeptic, in certain areas of the blogosphere, these are considered the hallmarks of wishy-washy centrism and seen as indicative of doctrinal impurity. In this regard, yesterday evening and this morning, I was unpleasantly surprised to discover that there are, in fact, people on the left as disinterested in the spirit of free inquiry and freedom of thought as there are people on the right.

So, ladies and gentlemen, buckle down and prepare for this special edition of Molotov Quaker, entitled "How to properly execute a radical leftist takedown (with pictures!)"

How to Properly Execute a Radical Leftist Takedown (with pictures!)

Setting: A guest post on blog Jesus' General

Topic: A Quaker Oats ad featuring what appear to be Latino children is subliminally racist because it portrays white people as the great provider, feeding the masses of unwashed brown people.

Notable Phrases: In this Quaker ad immediately adjacent to the Smiling Quaker Man were a couple Latinas, or maybe black girls. They were brown, that is clear. They were happily tugging on the tall pink-faced, white-haired icon-man's sleeve for some food. Oh, I know—you can tell that I am reading things into it that don't exist. That's part of my madness, you see. It comes with having beastly and primitive blood in me, it scrambles my mind up something terrible. Bear with me.

The Battlelines are Drawn: From commentator "Mznicky": Excellent post. Yes yes yes and yes. Media messages, subliminal or not, are there and seep into the consciousness. Thus has it ever been. More of the same follows from all other commentators.

The Engagement Commences: Hoping to stimulate a bit of debate, I challenge the assertion of the article, that the ad is subliminally racist, while trying to maintain a light tone.

I write: I don't get it. I mean, I'm open-minded, liberal and all that good stuff. But still. You have some Latina girls scoring some food from the Quaker Oats dude. I fail to see where the insult or insensitivity is.

I mean, I get and by large agree with the whole "white fucked up the world and continue to oppress brown people" narrative, and you can argue (as you do) that this represents a subliminal message which is designed to make "white" people feel good about themselves for symbolically feeding the masses of "unwashed brown people," but in casual observation, it seems to me that this has veered away from the realm of material culture and into the field of art criticism.

More to the point, if all the commercials ever showed was white kids chasing after the Quaker Oats guy, would that mean that the commercials are an example of cultural reinforcement and that the Quaker Oats man represents an authoritarian WASP nurturing his flock at the exclusion of all other ethnic groups? As Freud once famously said, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

But then again, maybe I'm an insensitive gringo (and a Quaker, to boot!)

Battle is Joined:

First Ghost of Adolph Russ fires a salvo:

"I don't get it. I mean, I'm open-minded, liberal and all that good stuff. But still.

You're right, you don't "get it."

Since you're not sensitive wrt ethnicity, why are there no "white" corners in the NFL? Are all the white kids, who play that position, just lazier than the African Americans who beat them out?

I'm always interested in how white people know they are "white." How does every white person I know, know that Jessica Alba and Halle Berry are BLACK actresses. Is that like ethnic radar? Are Puerto Ricans white or black? ARod's Puerto Rican, isn't he. Does he qualify as white? What about that Alan Deshowitz fella? Do you really consider him "white?" How about Pollacks, oops, I'm sorry, I meant the politically correct version, Poles, because you're an "open-minded," and "liberal" kind of guy. Do Poles qualify as white? Hitler didn't think so, but what about you? How about the Italians? Do you really consider them "white?"

You live in a fantasy world, where you imagine that you are not "sensitive," about ethnicity, but everyone else (non-whites) are. Sometime, ask a car load of "brothers" for a ride into your lilly white suburbs. You're an open minded liberal, so I'm sure they won't charge you much. After you leave the ghetto, let us know how long it takes before the cops pull you over. Sometimes an ignorant white supremacist is just an ignorant white supremacist. The ones who pratter about how "open-minded" and "liberal," do the most damage imho.

Not one to let sleeping dogs lie, self-proclaimed "feminatzi" MzNicky leads her wing into the fray:

Marc: No, dude, I hate to tell ya, but you're not "open-minded and liberal all that good stuff." This is proved by your subsequent observation that you "fail to see where the insult or insensitivity is." That these two sentences occur in the same paragraph should provide for even the least-aware individual an insight into self-contradiction.

Nez has clearly deconstructed the subliminal racism in this ad. It's "veered away from the realm of material culture and into the field of art criticism"? What does that even mean? Are you actually equating the avaricious manipulations of ad agency hot-shots with art? And what do you mean by "material culture"?

The rest of your gibberish springs from your cherished position of obtuse white male privilege. Until you realize that, you have nothing to say that's of use.

Tactical Situation at 0900 hours:

Opponents' preliminary thrusts have so far established that...
* I "don't get it"
* I am a closet racist
* I am probably a white supremacist
* I am similar to Hitler in my views
* I live in "lilly [sic] white suburbs" and fear "brothers."
* I am not a real liberal
* I my arguments are gibberish
* I live a life blissfully unaware of my male privilege
* Have nothing to say that is of use in a conversation until I have completed pennance

Never worry, however. Even though MzNicky and Ghost of Adolph Russ (GOAR) have made some decent initial headway, they merely brushed past my skirmishers and are about to encounter the main line of resistance.

Tactical Response to GOAR:

Whoa. Check the hostility people. I just wanted to have an open and honest debate about the article. I didn't realize that failure to fall in lock-step with everyone else represented a capital offense.

Ghost of Adolph:

"Since you're not sensitive wrt ethnicity, why are there no "white" corners in the NFL? Are all the white kids, who play that position, just lazier than the African Americans who beat them out?"

Beats me, I don't follow sports. Sorry!

"How does every white person I know, know that Jessica Alba and Halle Berry are BLACK actresses"

Actually, last I checked, Jessica Alba 's father was of Mexican descent. As for what constitutes "BLACK," beats me. Apparently in your book it has something to do with being a Franco-Mexican. I don't make up the labels. They tend to just appear and I run with it. Sure, I suppose I could mix it up a little and call Halle Barry a Korean actress, but in the world we like to call the consensus reality, this makes no sense. (As an aside, I am well aware that there is a fascinating debate to be had on the issue of racial labeling and self-identification and the history thereof. I assume that is what you are getting at, but if you're going to accuse me of being a white supremacist without knowing anything about me, and conflate spittle-flecked doctrine with the spirit of open-ended inquiry and interpretation, well then you're just wasting my time.)

"How about Pollacks, oops, I'm sorry, I meant the politically correct version[...]Hitler didn't think so, but what about you?"

Ever hear of Godwin? He wants his law back (although usually, it takes more than a single post for the debate to jump the shark). In the meantime, you lose.

"You live in a fantasy world,"

Nonsense! Those unicorns are totally there, and you just can't see them because you're not special.

"Sometime, ask a car load of "brothers" for a ride into your lilly white suburbs."

I live in southeast DC and am damn near being the only white person in a 4-block radius. Check your assumptions, come up with a new batch of condescending, elitist, astroturfing nonsense (hopefully this time a little closer to the situation in reality), and try again.

Result: Initial blows blunted, ignorance of GOAR revealed regarding basic facts of life. His assumption regarding my "lilly white [sic]" background embarrasingly stopped dead in its tracks, and his outright laughable accusations of comparing me to Hitler demonstrate his own shrill polemics and inability to wage an argument without resorting to ad-hominems.

Tactical Response to MzNicky:

MzNicky:

"No, dude, I hate to tell ya, but you're not "open-minded and liberal all that good stuff."

Damn. Now I've gone and had my liberal credentials and progressive merit badges yanked.

"That these two sentences occur in the same paragraph should provide for even the least-aware individual an insight into self-contradiction."

So in other words, debate on matters of subject interpretation is closed and any dissension from, discussion of, or otherwise questioning of an article of faith is enough to get my liberal badge and gun pulled until I agree to march lock-step with unquestioning fervor? That's not liberalism, miss. That's authoritarianism.

"Nez has clearly deconstructed the subliminal racism in this ad."

And while I am well aware of his/her points and understand the argument quite clearly, I am making a counter argument in the tradition of Edouard Said and arguing that when it comes to matters of subjective interpretation, we are each so influenced by our life experiences and cultural baggage that an objective analysis becomes fraught with difficulty (translation: while Nez's conclusion that the above ad represents an act of subliminal racism is extremely pertinent and valid, I would argue that this conclusion is not the ONLY conclusion there is to be had on the subject, nor is this the only interpretation available to us.)

"It's "veered away from the realm of material culture and into the field of art criticism"? What does that even mean?"

See above. If you prefer, I can send you a link to Wikipedia and you can look it up yourself.

"Are you actually equating the avaricious manipulations of ad agency hot-shots with art?"

FANTASTIC! Not only do you have the power to determine who is and is not a true "liberal," you also have been granted the power to make the distinctions between what is and is not art. BRAVO! (Seriously though, if you'd like to establish some baselines or a basic set of definitions as to what is and is not "art" for the purposes of facilitating our conversation, I'm game).

"And what do you mean by "material culture"? "

From the mighty WikiGod:

The term material culture refers both to the psychological role, the meaning, that all physical objects in the environment have to people in a particular culture and to the range of manufactured objects (techno-complex) that are typical within a socioculture and form an essential part of cultural identity.

As you can see, it's kind of relevant.

"The rest of your gibberish springs from your cherished position of obtuse white male privilege."

I just thought it came off as gibberish because you didn't understand it, didn't want to debate it, and generally were too lazy to take the 5 minutes out of your day to consider a dissenting opinion. If you want to conflate that with my cherished position of obtuse white male privilege, I certainly think its an interesting way of excusing laziness, but whatever. I'll let it slide.

"Until you realize that, you have nothing to say that's of use."

Yeah? E-mail me at mllaut@gmail.com and we'll have ourselves a nice, civil conversation about television advertisements, potential interpretations, and their role in the establishment, modification, and influence on the social psyche and prevalent consensus reality. Or hell, just e-mail me to flame my ass. I don't care. And as a postscript, I'm sorry if this came off as harsh or dismissive (I intended the former, not the latter), I'm sorry. But when people make close-minded assumptions about who I am, where I live, and how I view the world based on a single, self-effacing dissent of a post, then it gets stuck in my craw. Be hearing from you!

Result: Blows blunted. Her inability to brook a dissenting opinion regarding a certain subject as well as her apparently gleeful lack of familiarity with the said subject brought to the forefront. As before, sad ignorance of my own personal life situation woefully misjudged. Her cherished position of keeper of the ledger with regards to what is or is not art and who is and is not liberal roundly mocked, as deserved. All the while I maintained a civil tone and made it clear that I was willing to engage her in regular, serious conversation if she so wished.

Tactical Situation 1200 hours: Assault stopped dead in tracks, both wings of opponent in full retreat.

Second Assault of the Day: Not content to let her spanking shut her up, MzNicky decided she wanted another round.

I don't need a grad student "translating" Said for me, thanks ever so much. Interesting how pretentious pricks such as yourself cherry-pick from actual writers' work and then pervert it to your own ends. And how unsurprising that you would lazily cite "Wikipedia" as a source. I never let my students get away with that. "Be hearing from" me? Don't hold your breath, kiddo. There are enough condescending twerps like you out and about as it is; I sure don't need to go seeking them out.

Compared to the first assault, this one was tame. She obviously wasn't expecting a backlash and this has obviously rattled her, as seen in her need to call me a "prick," as well as her condescending tome regarding "grad students" and her reference to herself as a teacher. Ah well, I almost feel bad about doing this. But she started it.

Counterattack:

"I don't need a grad student "translating" Said for me, thanks ever so much. Interesting how pretentious pricks such as yourself cherry-pick from actual writers' work and then pervert it to your own ends."

Ouch. Have you ever actually read Said? I mean, the whole principle of Orientalism is that culturally constructed narratives can't be taken at face value due to the point of view and cultural baggage we each bring to the table. I was merely applying that to Nez's argument. Saying that I'm cherry-picking Said to prove my point is like accusing me of taking the whale in Moby Dick out of context when I say that it's a book about whaling. A+ for effort though. Ooooh, and you called me a "prick" too. How wonderful to see that unlike me in my obtuse white male privilege, you're enlightened enough to not use epithets which use bits of anatomy as stand-ins for gender-based insults (see: "pussy," "cunt," etc). What a mighty and enlightened feminist you are.

"And how unsurprising that you would lazily cite "Wikipedia" as a source."

Welcome to the world of irony. I hope you enjoy your stay.

"I never let my students get away with that."

People actually pay you to teach? AND you consider it a point of pride that you never let your students get away with using Wikipedia as a source? Congratulations. What do you teach? Fourth grade?

"Be hearing from" me? Don't hold your breath, kiddo.

Hey now. You're the one who claimed that I had nothing positive to add to the discussion.

"There are enough condescending twerps like you out and about as it is; I sure don't need to go seeking them out."

The person who single-handedly gets to decide who is and is not a liberal, which ideas are good and which are "gibberish," and what is and is not "art" is calling me a condescending twerp? That's probably the funniest thing to emerge for teh intertoobz since that video of the cat running in the giant hamster wheel. You have no ideas, no imagination, no tolerance for dissent, and no desire to engage in any form of useful dialogue. Fourth grade teacher sounds about right.

Tactical Situation 1400 Hours: Dust settles on the battlefield. At one point GOAR attempted to fight a rearguard action on the typically ham-brained notion that if he could somehow get me to agree that I determine what someone's race was based on a visual observation, this would somehow prove that I was a racist. Of course, the entire premise of his argument was that I was a racist scumbag and a stand-in for Adolph Hitler, which, while inaccurate, automatically made him lose the debate based on Godwin's Law of Argumentation (first person to compare his opponent to Adolph Hitler loses).

As such, while he did do a very good job of getting me to "admit" that I identify and classify people by race visually, his celebratory w00ts! of victory quickly spiraled into the drain of irrelevance, and he was left with nothing to say, except for the basic implication that I talk about and think about race and am therefore a racist while he...isn't...somehow...

Ah well. Victory is mine! After dinner, I will drink my celebratory glass of mead out of the shrunken and pitch-coated head of the undoubtably ugly lesbian Mznicky, because while I certainly don't use ad-hominems against people during the course of an argument, I certainly see no cause to desist afterwards. Tamerlane, here I come!

I will make you hurt...

2007-05-18T13:56:00.000-04:00

Sometimes the world of wingnut transcription and analysis can be somewhat frustrating. After all, while circular linking is a commonly-practiced trait amongst the denizens or Right Blogistan, all too often the torturous circuit of sub-par logic and homicidal ragegasms (see: Malkin, Michele) ends up back where it began: circling the toilet bowl as ineffectively as the last time someone pulled the chain.

In short, I really did mean to bring you a Renew America column this time around. However, by clicking on one of the links provided on their front page, I was immediately whisked away to Joe Farah's equally assinine (though oftentimes less humorous) clone of Alan Keyes' wastepaper basket.

In any case, since my piece on cheap Mexican abortions was such a hit last time, I figured we'd tap this pony again, because it's Friday, and I'm unoriginal. Today's author and winner of the Terri Schiavo look-alike contest (post-coma) is Jill Stanek. According to her official blurb, she was invited by President Bush to the signing of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act in 2002, ostensibly to witness the signing. I also suspect that her secondary role was to serve as a useful on-hand prop to prove that just because babies can be born without brains does not mean they are incapable of writing conservative columns later in life.

Any way, let's get this one rolling.

The Forced Abortion Act

Posted: May 2, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Promoters call it the Freedom of Choice Act, which is actually true.

Oh gawd, here we go. Jill, you cannot, I repeat, CANNOT begin with a snarky, dismissive quote about something you don't like without first beginning with a little expository paragraph and explaining what the hell "it" is and why it deserves your scorn. I understand that you may be struggling to come up with a good hook, and while the elements are kinda sorta there, you have only so far established three things: 1) that there is something called the "Freedom of Choice Act," 2) like films, boxers, and concerts orchestras, it has promoters, and 3) that you're a really shitty writer. Moving on.

If passed, it would retroactively and forever free the abortion industry to infinity and beyond[...]

Apparently, this Freedom of Choice Act is worse than we thought. Someone better call Buzz Lightyear and Star Command.

"We don't do abortions on my planet. We prefer exposing them to the elements."

Pro-aborts[...]

Jill, pro-aborts isn't catchy, alliterated, convincing, or particularly sneering. I might just as easily call you Ant-aborts, which at the very least has the advantage of a nice ring to it, as well as the fact that it could lead to all sorts of jokes and double-entendres at your expense. After all, I know it's been a while since people made fun of you in the playground, knocked over your cafeteria tray, and made a big deal about scoring the last box of chocolate milk right from under neath your nose, but do you really need a new nickname that badly? Because I can very easily see Jill "Antaborts" Stanek working its way into the naitonal lexicon.

[...] reintroduced FOCA[...]

At the FOCA, FOCA cabana, they mix the best abortion pills with your pina colada...
[...] immediately following the Supreme Court's April 18 decision upholding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban with expressions of financial panic not seen since the stock market crashed in 1929.

"They banned partial-borth abortion? SHIT! Now where is KFC supposed to get its chicken tenders? I'm ruined!"

Pro-lifers have aborted FOCA several times since the 1980s, but terrified pro-abortion politicians and abortion-industry thugs fearing for their deathlihood seized on the Supreme partial-birth abortion decision to attempt a do-over.

Gah! Just...just...gah! What the fuck is she even trying to SAY?? It's like someone performed a dilation and extraction on her brain!

Public relations aficionados that they are, Planned Parenthood and other industry leeches reassured us in press statements they intended not just to rescue partial-birth abortion for America but also every other equally "seismic" and "grim" Supreme Court anti-abortion decision that might be made ever after.

Auditory hallucinations are a hallmark of schizophrenia: 50 to 75 percent of the 2.8 million Americans who suffer from the illness hear voices that are not there. ~ NAMI-SSC

Doug Johnson of National Right to Life called FOCA the Freedom for Partial-Birth Abortionists Act, which is catchy.

If by catchy you mean "couldn't be catched with a catchy looking catch-mitt by Catch "Catcher" McCatchy, winner of last year's All-American 'Catch Yourself a Catchy Catch' competition on Nation Catch the Caught Day," then yes. It certainly is.

FOCA would kill every abortion law in the land the Supreme Court has rendered constitutional under Roe and pre-emptively strike any pro-life law ever to follow.

Interestingly enough, I though it was the position of the antaborts that the Supreme Court's job is to rule on the constitutionality of laws, not legistlate from the bench. But I guess that's part of a pre-9/11 worldview.

FOCA would wipe out every parental notification and consent law, every informed consent law, every law restricting government funding of abortion, every law prohibiting abortions in public hospitals, every law mandating waiting periods, every medical professional conscience clause law, every abortion clinic regulation, every law stating abortion procedures must only be committed by physicians, and more. Pro-life politicians would even be prohibited from giving pro-life speeches.

In order to fully appreciate the sinister tone of this paragraph, I will provide you with the appropriate soundtrack. Sit tight.

Under FOCA, mothers on their way to abortions would no longer have to obey traffic signals. Family and friends would be forbidden to suggest the other a-word – adoption – out loud. Phone companies could be sued for lightning storms that rendered phones useless when a mother tried to make an abortion appointment.

OK, I added those last three. But you get the point.

The point in question of course being that Jill makes shit up all the time. Moving on...

Under FOCA, no abortion procedure could be touched with a 10-foot legal crochet hook.

Or strategically bent and twisted coathanger. See where we're going here?

Obviously, FOCA would reverse the partial-birth decision and "enshrine," as NOW president Kim Gandy phrased it, every other abortion procedure under the moonless sky.

Okay, now this has gone on so long, I've started to lose my point of reference. I hope this ends soon.

This would have to include Everything Delivered But The Big Toe Abortions, which Sen. Barbara Boxer infamously refused to say should be illegal during an enlightening exchange with then-Sen. Rick Santorum on the Senate floor in 1999.

"Everything Delivered But The Big Toe Abortions"? Yeah...that's got Santorum's fingerprints all over it. That's almost as good as the "Almost Entirely Delivered Except For His Last Treeclimbing Claw Because You've Just Given Birth To A Wookie Abortions" legistlation he introduced his first day in office.

FOCA states that prior to legalized abortion "an estimated 1.2 million women each year were forced to resort to illegal abortions, despite the risk of unsanitary conditions, incompetent treatment, infection, hemorrhage, disfiguration and death."

Hmm.

Kermit D. Frog moment.

I wouldn't want to accuse the abortion industry of inflating numbers for their own gain, but I'm having trouble comprehending how a population of 200 million in 1970 could render 1.2 million illegal abortions when a population of 300 million in 2006 rendered 1.3 million legal abortions.

It's kinda like when legislators make it easier to get concealed carry permits in their districts, and then the crime rate doesn't go down. In essence, the law has no effect on the incidence of a social indicator, it merely changes the terms under which that social indicator operates.

Honestly, I can't help but wonder if Jill tries to open up her tube of toothpaste by screwing it the opposite way when she's in the southern Hemisphere.

As for "unsanitary conditions, incompetent treatment, infection, hemorrhage, disfiguration and death" pre-Roe, surely pro-aborts are not implying anything has changed. I'm forced to wonder if they've been trying to get high off their own suction machines.

My suction machine is yo' mamma! (Yeah, I know that's crude and pointless, but I'm about at the end of my rope here).

In the classic rock band satire movie "This is Spinal Tap," Nigel explained to Marty how his band's amplifiers went one notch above the standard "10."

"If we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?" asked Nigel.

"Put it up to 11," answered Marty.

"Eleven. Exactly," responded Nigel. "One louder."

In America, abortion has already pushed millions over the cliff. FOCA would force abortion on us "one louder."

Um. I think that's all there is to be said.

Vote antabort in '08 or the terrorists win Spinal Tap will abort your baby with its guitar amp on stage!

Short Entry

2007-05-18T13:54:00.000-04:00

Because I'm bored. But not THAT bored. Yo, Pat Buchanan! Stir me up some of that patented 7-layer crazy, mid-90s style!

Since the massacre of 32 students and teachers at Virginia Tech, the mainstream media have obsessed over the fact the crazed gunman was able to buy a Glock in the state of Virginia.

Because, in the words of John Stuart, "only a sicko would try to use the Virginia Tech massacre to win an argument about the availability of firearms in this country."

Little attention has been paid to the Richmond legislators who voted to make "Hokie Nation," a Middle American campus of 26,000 kids, a gun-free zone where only the madman had a semi-automatic.

Touche. Having recently graduated from college and in light of the fact that I will be returning to grad school in the fall, I think I have a special interest in such matters. But Pat? Please. You want to reverse a law that would allow people like these from keeping guns in their dorm rooms? C'mon...

Almost no attention has been paid to the fact that Cho Seung-Hui was not an American at all, but an immigrant, an alien.

Hell, Pat remembers the good old days when the only people who had names like that were ironing his shirts at a company store in Deadwood, but let's not belabor the point. I totally agree that the "yellow menace" angle has been downplayed here, and that were it not for Pat's fearless investigative reporting, your average American might be under the impression that Cho Seung-Hui was not, in fact, a White Anglo Saxon Protestant from Cedar Rapids, Iowa. </irony>
Had this deranged young man who secretly hated us never come here, 32 people would be heading home from Blacksburg for summer vacation.

In fact, his hatred was so secret and so passionate that even the mandatory psychiatric evaluation he was ordered to undergo and the violent plays and papers he had written gave us no clue as to what might have happened down the road.

Cho was among the 864,000 Koreans here as a result of the Immigration Act of 1965, which threw the nation's doors open to the greatest invasion in history, an invasion opposed by a majority of our people.

"Verily, when the Koreans saw the standard of Seoul on land, and the galley of their lord touching ground before them, each held himself for shamed, and they all [...]leapt forth, and landed. Then might you have seen an assault, great and marvellous; and to this bears witness Geoffry of Villehardouin, who makes this book, that more than forty people told him for sooth that they saw the standard of Seoul at the top of one of the Space Needle, and that no man knew who bore it thither." Although in retrospect, the Mongol Invasions and the Germanic Peoples Migrations were pretty impressive too.

Thirty-six million, almost all from countries whose peoples have never fully assimilated in any Western country, now live in our midst.

Translation: Once they got rid of the Asian Exclusion Act of 1924, it was all downhill from there.

Cho was one of them.

In stories about him, we learn he had no friends, rarely spoke and was a loner, isolated from classmates and roommates.

In other words, your typical Applied Sciences student.

What happened in Blacksburg cannot be divorced from what's been happening to America since the immigration act brought tens of millions of strangers to these shores, even as the old bonds of national community began to disintegrate and dissolve in the social revolutions of the 1960s.

With tens of millions of immigrants at 30-odd victims each...well, I will let you draw your own conclusions. We have a crisis, people!

To intellectuals, what makes America a nation is ideas – ideas in the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Gettysburg Address and Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech.

Heh. Liberals think they have rights because a piece of paper says so. How quaint. And pre-9/11.

But documents no matter how eloquent and words no matter how lovely do not a nation make. Before 1970, we were a people, a community, a country. Students would have said aloud of Cho: "Who is this guy? What's the matter with him?"

And why are we talking about a guy who won't be born for another 15 or 20 years? Cue theme music.

Thursday Morning Comedy Hour

2007-04-26T13:20:00.000-04:00

Things are picking up. By which of course I mean work is slowing down, thus resulting in far too much free time being wasted on writing journal entries and perusing the outer reaches of Right Blogistan. What can I say?

Anyway, today's column is from perennial favorite Erik D. Rush, Fox News' affirmative action attack candidate who despite being batshit crazy and chronically ill-informed, finds his obliviousness to his surroundings matched only by his willingness to take a hatchet to other black leaders with whom the right disagrees (in short, everyone except Clarence Thomas, Alan Keyes, Condi Rice, and the 2% or so of the black population that had a positive opinion of W. in the weeks following Hurricane Katrina).

Here goes.

The Second Most Dangerous Organization in America

Erik Rush
March 21, 2007

While researching a story about a city council race for a local newspaper, I came across one of the most disturbing and disgusting phenomena I’ve yet seen come onto the scene in American politics.

And remember folks. This is the guy who said that, in retrospect, Pat Robertson was right in calling for the assassination of Hugo Chavez.

We all know about the parade of far-Left freaks that includes MoveOn.org, George Soros, Peter Lewis, David Geffen and their ilk, who are using their vast resources to propagandize the American public into voting us incrementally toward being a morally bankrupt, internationally castrated nation.

As I always suspected. It's not just that the Commiedhimmieliberalnazicrats want to force us into being immoral, but it's their propensity for wiener-whacking which is especially troublesome.

We’ve heard the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) referred to as “the most dangerous organization in America” due to its support for nearly everything evil.

Granted when you heard it, you were probably drunk off your ass in some anonymous biker bar on the other side of town, so you're reasonably sure you don't have to worry about bumping anyone who heard your subsequent 15-minute-long tirade against the ACLU and their perfidious attempts to suck away your precious bodily fluids around the office water cooler.

And yes, I realize that I am perhaps being unreasonably charitable in suggesting that Rush actually interacts with other human beings in an office-like setting, instead of occasionally hurling feces-smeared manuscripts at his handlers during his semi-annual cage cleaning. Call it artistic licence.

Well, I think I may have discovered the second most dangerous organization in America.

If you think he's referring to the KKK, Posse Comitatus, the Phineas Preisthood, the Michigan Militia, the Animal/Earth Liberation Front, or the World Church of the Creator/Creativity Movement, you would be...well..you know...

I’m referring to the Washington-based organization Progressive Majority, a lobbying group dedicated to:

“…identifying and recruiting the best progressive leaders to run for office; coaching and supporting their candidacies by providing strategic message, campaign, and technical support; prioritizing the recruitment and election of candidates of color; and bringing new people into the political process at all levels.

In other words, the most dangerous group in America is not a group of shadowy, paranoid, armed-to-the-teeth radicals who intend, plan and execute acts of violence in the name of a murky, cult-like ideology. Nope. The "most dangerous group in America" is a liberal advocacy movement which seeks to support progressive candidates, especially those of color. Yeah, considering Rush's readership, I'd say that's about right.

“We elect progressive champions by:

▪ Identifying every electoral opportunity
▪ Recruiting the best progressive leaders to run
▪ Training candidates and staff to win
▪ Providing state of the art political support
▪ Helping them become effective leaders once elected.

“…We build locally to win nationally.”

You know, I'll say this for Osama bin Laden. While he hates democracy and all it stands for (much like Erik Rush), at least he can grasp the fundamental logic upon which the concept is built. People with different opinions on different matters come together to resolve their differences via the magic of the voting booth. For Bin Laden, Liberalism is merely the flip side of the same democratic coin- one which he wishes to see eliminated. For Erik Rush, it's a perversion of the greatest order and a threat of the largest magnitude, because both sides of the coin should (in his book anyway) say the same thing. Le plus ca change...

heir agenda – the Progressive agenda – includes well-spun catch phrases that translate into[...]

Oooh, well-spun catch phrases? Let's see if I can identify them.

socialist policies[...]

"One man, one vote!" "Votes for women!" "Equal pay for equal work!" and "Black or white, unite and fight!"

unfettered abortion[...]

"Out, out! Vile blastocyst!"

open borders[...]

"iViva la Raza!"

affirmative action on methamphetamine[...]

Um, this one is just wierd. I think it's a transcription error.

economy-stultifying environmentalist zealotry[...]

Boy, that's a mouthful. Um, "Save the Whales!"?

and more pliant, radical Cynthia McKinney and Charlie Rangel types in Congress.

Hey, wait a minute. There are no wel-spun catch phrases that translate into McKinney and Rangel. What kinda stunt are you trying to pull here, Rangel? But while we're at it, uh..."Vote McKinney, she's phat, not skinny!"

Their president, Gloria Totten, “has worked for progressive causes"[...] and is also President of the Board of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center – all far-Left political advocacy outfits.

Hah! You see? That's the thing about liberals. Oh sure, they claim they're all inclusive, but check it out: their president is a screaming liberal! What more proof do you need?

When you cut through Progressive Majority’s Coke commercial website and the altruistic claptrap, what you have is an organization dedicated to the stealth placement of “acceptable” candidates throughout a sleeping citizenry – at every level of government.

Holy shit. I think Erik's about to blow this case wide open. That despite claiming to be a liberal group dedicated to the advancement of progressive campaigns and candidates, they are in fact dedicated to the "stealth" placement of candidates throughout a sleeping citizenry, presumably by using their mass-hypnotic mind-control antenna located deep within the Washington forests.

The most concerning (and convicting) of Progressive Majority’s promises is that of helping candidates “become effective leaders once elected”, essentially confirming said candidates as their agents. These candidates of course generally disavow any significant entanglement or identification with the organization, citing the “plausible deniability” of 527-like tax-exempt advocacy groups and PACs.

If this is sounding more than a little alarmist or conspiratorial to you, it's because it is. In addition to claiming that Pat Robertson was right in calling for the assassination of Hugo Chavez, Erik Rush also claimed that Barack Obama's church was essentially a cult-like front for a black supremacist agenda- evidence he uncovered while pounding the cyber pavement and interviewing cyber witnesses like the good cyber journalist he is...by spending 15 minutes in front of Google.

Perhaps what troubled Erik Rush the most about Barack Obama's church was its 10-point "Black Value system," which included such items as "A Commitment to the Black Community" and "A Commitment to the Black Work Ethic." Then again, given Rush's own status as Fox News' token go-to guy whenever a minority candidate needs to be criticized, I can see why this would be troubling to him.
Americans need to recognize what a dangerous precedent this is, and what politics has become in America.

Grass-roots groups organizing to advance their political causes. Truly, not even in the darkest days of WWII did the Nazis present such an insiduous threat to our freedom.

Turning over local government to operatives for national lobbyists – of any political stripe – poses the specter of a government in which the individual’s vote is effectively nullified. According to Progressive Majority’s stated mission, Americans from local to national levels will be governed by agenda-driven lobbyists in Washington, D.C. rather than locally concerned members of their communities.

Because if there's one thing we know about local politics, its that it has nothing to do with party affiliation, nor the currents emanating from Washington. Besides, there are 3077 counties and parishes in the United States. If you are honestly worried that the race for neighborhood dog catcher is being controlled by a shadowy (non-profit) cartel in Washington, well, it's time to call the pharmacy and have your prescription renewed.

Hey Erik, want to worry about something useful for a change? How about the fact that 80 to 90% of American news media (and virtually 100% of all TV news media) is owned by a handful of for-profit corporations who effectively filter and control what is and is not reported? Or the fact that Regent Law School, founded by Pat Robertson and only accredited by the American Bar Association in 1996 has had over 150 alumni hired for federal government positions in the Bush Administration since 2001? Or that Exxon Mobile recently offered up to $10,000 to individual scientists and economists in exchange for their disavowal of Global Warming? Those items seem far more troubling with regards to the hijacking of political discourse in this nation than the fear that a non-profit, grassroots group says in their statement of purpose that they plan on identifying progressive candidates for every race out there. But then again, I've never been on Fox News.

It is time to step up our engagement in the Culture War.

I personally plan on filling an oil drum with styrofoam and setting it on fire. You know, because global warming is bunk and because I can.

Make no mistake: This brand of Progressives aren’t ‘Sixties liberals or misled Left-leaning Democrats[...]

You read that right, ladies and gentlemen. Today's liberals are officially worse than the Dirty Hippies(tm) of the 1960s...

they are amoral socialists who intend to transform America into a cross between Amsterdam and San Francisco.

It will be like Bullet. Only the gays will probably force each other to get pregnant every once in a while just so they can keep the great tradition of unfettered abortion alive. And they'll all be speaking Dutch.

What I want to know is: Haven’t we seen enough of the Progressive movement’s results to know that their agenda is social and national suicide?

It's kind of hard to be lecturing others on the agenda of social and national suicide when you're starting a $9 trillion deficit in the face, Erik. Not to mention or or two other items...

The “progress” they’ve advocated over the last 40 years has been the direct cause of[...]

Oh boy, here we go again. Another game of charades. But after this, you need to put the word processor away Erik, and get to work on your homework, ok? A deal is a deal.

the culture of dependency and mediocrity amongst poor and minority individuals,

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and all the other programs that help ensure we don't have thousands of people living in shacks and starving to death in public parks.

the dissolution of the American family,

Umm...legalized divorce? The Eisenhower administration? Satanism?

an industry of black market fetus parts,

Definitely Satanism here.

widespread moral ambivalence, early sexualization of children, an epidemic of child rape (and occasionally murder),

But it's so fun when we do it on the X-Box (especially once you have that bootleg "Child Rape and Murder Patch" uploaded and installed off the internet)

nascent religious persecution,

I.e. Churches can't tell you how to vote without risking their tax-exempt status

weak foreign policies which served to embolden our enemies,

Like the Camp David Accords, authorizing the capture of assassination of Osama bin Laden, or the intervention in the Balkans and Kosovo

and apathetic or even disdainful attitudes amongst Americans toward our sovereignty and the nation itself.

Liberal Democrat (LIB-ur-ul dem-O-krat), n.: Someone who hates freedom, the nation-state, Jesus, and possibly fetuses (unless sold on the black market).

The choice: Americans, and Conservatives in particular can wake up and vigorously counter this blight, or we can start considering where we’re going to put our red light districts and when we’ll celebrate Gay Porn Day, which was recently signed onto the books in San Francisco.

A Gay Porn Day? Those fuckers get to have all the fun. It's discrimination I tell you! I'll tell you one thing though, pal. You may have your Gay Porn Day, but us heterosexuals have us a Straight Porn Week. It's called Spring Break and it's coming to a city near you (assuming you live in LA, Miami, Daytona Beach, and Mexico).

In any case, congratulations Erik Rush. You have done it again. You have taken a boring, ordinary Thursday and filled it up to the brim with the best, most-godawfully brilliant insanity this side of a David Lynch acid trip. I salute you!

Join us next week for Erik's most explosive, insightful and provocative column yet, "The Most Obscene Person in the Nation," in which he identifies the driver of a green 1998 Subaru Forrester with a "Buck Fush" bumper sticker as the vilest, most profane peddler of filth in the Western Hemisphere.

I'm out.

Update

HOLY SHIT! This guy has a book out in which he actually claims the best way to solve America's illegal immigration problem is to annex Mexico. Hey Erik, I got a tiny little problem for ya. Latin America doesn't stop with Mexico. Nope, it goes all the way down until you hit England. Typical, Erik. You're a good guy, but your ideas just aren't BIG enough!

I know what my next Amazon purchase will be...

Huzzah for Stephen!

2007-04-25T12:57:00.001-04:00

The Good

Stephen Colbert is Time Magazine's #1 Most Influential Person In America

The Bad

From the "Cons" section of his profile: "His performance at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Association dinner stirred controversy, raising concerns over the biased nature of his satire."

The Ugly

People, the guy is a FUCKING COMEDIAN. Conservatives are by far and large completely incapable of self-mockery and satire, the two key ingredients for being a successful comedian. Oh sure, there have been some pretty funny comedians who also happen to be conservative or libertarian (such as the South Park gang and I believe Drew Carry), but they are by far and large a minority and (very wisely) tend to stay the fuck away from overt political satire. Why? Because in the words of a friend of mine, conservative humor really just consists of their talking points with a laugh track added in. Remove the set and the canned laughter, and all you have is pretty much the same stuff you had before: "humor" that is clumsy, obvious and vindictive.

Not to mention the bullshit complain that Colbert is "biased." People, Republicans control the White House, the Supreme Court, and -until recently- Congress. In those 6 years they gave us over 3,000 American dead in Iraq (without the WMDs), Hurricane Katrina, a Nuclear North Korea, a $9 TRILLION deficit, surging gas prices, skyrocketing prescription drug bills, a plan to "fix" Social Security, a withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol, torture, a suspension of Habeas Corpus, warrantless searches and wiretaps, an attempt to gut PBS for being "too liberal," bought reporters to pimp their talking points, exposed the identity of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame, the Walter Reed scandal, and dozens, dozens more.

So let me ask you. What on earth have the Democrats done to deserve "equal treatment?"

From the department of dum, dum dum dum, dum....

2007-04-25T12:55:00.000-04:00

Short little sniplet from J. Matt Barber, affirmative action hire at the Concerned Women for America and general, out-and-out douche.

Don Imus, recently unemployed pioneer of the high-dollar "shock-jock" industry, is a truly gifted man. He has the rare but unenviable ability to really tick people off at both ends of the political spectrum and everywhere in between.

Agreed. We on The Left(tm) don't like him because he's a living, breathing example of the foul-mouthed bigotry for which people have gotten a free pass on provided they wrote it off as a joke (see Coulter, Ann, keyword search: Edwards, Faggot, Stevens, Supreme Court, Rat Poison, NYT Building, 9/11 Hijackers). People on the right don't like him, well...because even though he's very good at stroking and caressing the lizard brain of the American right, he doesn't consistently STFU whenever an embarrassing story regarding the administration leaks to the fore. More on that in a minute.

To the chagrin of the leftist anti-war "you baby killer" crowd, he's been a staunch defender of our wounded troops at Walter Reed.

Um...let's try that again. I think my eyeballs exploded.

To the chagrin of the leftist anti-war "you baby killer" crowd, he's been a staunch defender of our wounded troops at Walter Reed.

Once more, with feeling!

To the chagrin of the leftist anti-war "you baby killer" crowd, he's been a staunch defender of our wounded troops at Walter Reed.

This is perhaps, in all my years dissecting and analizing wingnut prose, one of the singularly, most comprehensively, catastrophically retarded statements in the history of mankind. And believe me, I get to hear quite a bit about it.

To comprehensively and completely cover all the various angles, dimensions and planes in which this statement is mind-over matteringly, jaw-droppingly, seizure-inducingly bad, let's just take the following three statements in no particular order.

In case you're wondering what constitutes a staunch, conservative defense of our wounded troops at Walter Reed, take a gander:

Lt. General Kevin C. Kiley: "This is not a horrific, catastrophic failure at Walter Reed."

Jonah Goldberg (quoting an anonymous marine): "Having served at Bethesda and Walter Reed, I was not a big fan of the
WaPo articles. Would you believe that about 5% of the Marines we had complained endlessly about their treatment? Well I think the WaPo found almost all of them. One of the Marines interviewed in the article was given almost everything possible."

Jean Schmidt (R-OH): "While I believe that this building is beneath the standard of what is acceptable, I think it is wrong to suggest that mold found behind an air conditioner somehow is an excuse to say that all of our veterans are receiving substandard medical care[...] It is important to remember that the building in question is an apartment building, not a medical facility. Further the building was scheduled to be torn down within two years.''

A chart from Jesus' General indicating the number of times the term "Walter Reed" appears in several conservative blogs:

And of course, what did the "you baby killer" crowd have to say about it?

John Stewart: We have received word that many hundreds of American troops are being held in deplorable, squalid conditions. What kind of people would treat our soldiers in this horrible manner? Funny story…turns out it's us."

Heh. I'd laugh, if it didn't hurt so much.

My big fat Mexican abortion

2007-04-11T16:10:00.000-04:00

Sometimes, what starts off as an innocent and playful romp through the pastures of life suddenly takes a turn for the worse and rapidly becomes something far more sinister. Examples of this include:

1) getting a few brewskis at a bar with friends, and waking up 18 hours later with a raging headache, a buzzcut, a tattoo of a naked woman on your arm, and an M-16 in your hand,

2) going on a drunken romp through the countryside, lighting the leaves of a plastic plant in a small rural church on fire just for kicks (and because it made sense at the time), burning 3 more churches for kicks, another 4 churches to cover your tracks, and ending up with an 8-year federal prison sentence,

3) this column, which begins as your fairly standard, if albeit unintentionally hilarious anti-abortion tirade infused with just a hint of mexophobia, and rapidly veers into the rutted, densely wooded terrain of anti-authoritarian serial bombers and professional abortion-provider snipers.

First, a word about our author, one Mark Crutcher, a onetime car dealer and motorcycle racer turned anti-abortion crusader. From his "official" WorldNetDaily bio:

Mark Crutcher is president of Life Dynamics Incorporated of Denton, Texas.

Hmm. That doesn't tell us much. Maybe the great god Google will be a little more helpful...

Sweet! We have a picture. Now, let's follow up the link to...

In founding Life Dynamics, Crutcher said that he wanted to fill in the gaps left by other organizations. One shortcoming he noticed was in what he called "professional counter-intelligence or intelligence-gathering". Thus, Crutcher focuses much of his organization's efforts on operations involving gathering new data on abortion facilities and pro-choice organizations[...]

[...]Crutcher gave a seminar at the 1995 national conference of the American Coalition of Life Activists in Kansas, which, according to the Pro-Choice Action Network, was also attended by those who have advocated anti-abortion violence.

Anti-abortion violence? Creepy...

But wait! There's more! According to Planned Parenthood LDF has...

* An annual income of about $ 1.1 Million,

* The motto of "Pro Life, Without Compromise, Without Exception, Without Apology,

* Once paid a spy $21,000 over two and a half years to infiltrate companies and clinics that provide or obtain fetal tissue for medical research and also secretly recorded security meetings of the National Abortion Federation (NAF),

* Published a booklet of crude and sadistic jokes and cartoons about abortion providers and mailed it to half of the medical students in America,

* Misrepresented itself under the guise of an abortion rights advocacy group called "Project Choice" in order to survey abortion providers about their personal fears and misgivings, and then released the findings to the media,

* Regularly claimed that abortion providers rape and sexually assault their clients, that abortion causes severe psychological trauma to women and providers, and that obstetricians use abortion to "cover up their mistakes."

Now, in their defense, they do have a website, which can be reached at www.ldi.org. I was going to search for some materials on there to help present a nice, fluffly little blurb about the organization in it's own words, but trust me. There ain't any. Any website which explicitly links abortion and family planning providers with the Nazis, to include images of doctors wearing KKK hoods and putting up the Nazi flag on their site is, well, the English language fails.

Anyway, having prepared you for the worst, here we go!

Mexico: Big Abortion's safety net

Posted: April 11, 2007 1:00 a.m. Eastern

When the U.S. government began dropping the hammer on American tobacco companies, these corporations became alarmed that their prospects for long-term survival might be no better than it is for the people who buy their products.

And what a mighty hammer it was. Good thing cigarettes aren't available, cool, and ADDICTIVE anymore.

Their response was to redirect their marketing efforts toward foreign countries where the governments don't regulate the sale and use of these little white cancer sticks. The plan worked, and today, an enormous percentage of the profits made by "Big Tobacco" are generated by cigarette sales in foreign countries.

Which I always thought was kind of puzzling given that virtually all nations have their own local brands which, while not as refined and highly prized as American brands, nevertheless had one redeeming characteristic: the fact that they were literally dirt cheap. If you don't believe me, ask the 1.2 billion Chinese who consume 30% of the world's cigarettes, not to mention the fact that the Chinese government is the largest producer of cigarettes in the world.

Yes, I do believe that Mark is full of the proverbial ye olde shitte. But anyway, let's move along.

Now, another American institution faces a similar situation and embraces the same response.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that Mark isn't referring to the manufacturers of asbestos or Chlorofluorocarbons.

If all goes as predicted, Mexico will soon legalize abortion and become a full-fledged participant in the most prolific holocaust the world has ever known.

Though interestingly enough, as long as we're throwing out gratuitous Holocaust references here, did you know that Nazi Germany had one of the most effective and prolific anti-smoking campaigns in the world and that Hitler was a rabid non-smoker? True story.

To bring this about, the Mexican abortion lobby has regurgitated the same collection of lies and distortions that their American counterparts have used over the last 40 years or so.

Those silly Mexicans! Don't they realize they're so behind the times? Sure puts the notion of the "Mexican minute" into perspective though...

They clearly operate on the assumption that Mexican politicians are as stupid, corrupt, immoral and cowardly as American politicians, and the results show that the assumption is not unjustified.

You know, I believe this is the first time on World Net Daily that we have EVER seen ANYTHING Mexican represented as other than drug-running, job-stealing, hygiene-impaired and subhuman. My, my, time marches on.

Interestingly, pro-life forces in Mexico are complaining that a major reason why they are losing is because American pro-abortion groups are on the ground there working around the clock to get abortion legalized. They say there is also a significant amount of money flowing from the U.S. into this political effort.

So you see, Mexico. Two can play that game. You send your migrant labourers across our border to steal good American jobs picking lettuce for $1.05 an hour, we send pro-abortion lobbyists into your country to fuck up your abortion laws! Quid pro quo, baby!

The question is: why? After all, "Big Abortion" is sending out fund-raising letters all across America warning their followers that Roe v. Wade is about to fall and that the end of legalized abortion in America may be on the horizon. If that is true, shouldn't these organizations be concentrating their efforts at home rather than pouring valuable resources into another country?

Mexico. The Helm's Deep of the pro-choice movement!

Or perhaps there is another dynamic at work here.

I have fought the American abortion lobby for many years, and if there is one thing I have learned about these people it is that everything they do is driven by self-interest.

And if you don't believe me, I have two years' worth of secretly recorded audio tape and pilfered medical records to prove it!

If you don't know anything else about the abortion battle now raging in Mexico, know this: The only reason the American choice mafia is there is because they have concluded that there is something in it for them.

Wait, wait, wait. There's an American Choice Mafia? Why didn't I hear about this? I want to join!!

"Are you gonna keep barking, little doggie, or are you gonna bite?"

Same mafia, different choice.

Ten years ago, when Bill Clinton was in office and the "right to choose" looked safe, Canada and Mexico were not on the abortion lobby's radar screen. But now they see this "right" being threatened and a back-up plan has been launched.

We call it "Plan B." No, not that Plan B. A different Plan B.

I have long predicted that when America returns legal protection to the unborn, the American abortion industry intends to set up a network of abortion clinics along the borders just inside Canada and Mexico.

And you thought those "free trade" zones were only good for scoring cheap wine, trinkets, and jeans. It's also good for discount abortions!

Of course, Canada poses no threat to this plan since, as improbable as it may seem, the Canadian government is actually more godless and morally bankrupt than the U.S. government.

I mean, first they replaced "God Save the Queen" with "Oh, Canada," and it just went downhill from there.

That means the only obstacle has been the fact that abortion is illegal in Mexico.

That is what this battle is about. Mexico is the missing ingredient in the American abortion industry's contingency plan.

That and a half teaspoon of paprika.

The fact is the Mexican government is being played for a fool. The legislation they are about to enact will not only result in the wholesale slaughter of Mexican children by the millions, but it will turn Mexico into a dumping ground for the moral decay that is already rotting the United States.

Not to mention a wholesale increase in the cost of living as salad prices double and hotel guests are required to make their own beds.
To appreciate the level of hypocrisy being displayed here, all you have to do is reverse the roles. Let's say that 35 years ago Mexico had legalized abortion while America continued to legally protect its children.

The subtext of course being that in an ideal world, not only would American society roll the clock back 35 years, but would take its cultural cues from Mexicans. Try that one on for size, Mark. See how it plays with all the other crackheads at LDI.

Let's also say that Mexico is now poised to reverse itself and shut down its death camps.

Okay, now this is getting to be the creepy part I told you about earlier.

If that was the situation, and the Mexican abortion lobby came into the United States and tried to use its political muscle to legalize abortion, would there be one person anywhere in the world so stupid they could not see what was going on? Also, is there any doubt that the American people would be outraged at this outside interference in our political process? (In case you haven't guessed, the answer to both questions is a resounding "No!")

Though hopefully someone with more than two braincells to rub together and a copy of Atlas Shrugged would come to the brilliant conclusion that if you repackaged the whole situation as a free market breakthrough, whole legions of people named Mark Crutcher would suddenly achieve enlightenment.

So while America would never tolerate this sort of intrusion against us, American death merchants are going into Mexico to do that very thing.

Because if you think life is cheap in Mexico, you have no idea what death will go for. Seller's market, baby!

You can bet the family farm that if Mexican pro-life groups tried to come into the United States and influence our current legislative effort to outlaw abortion, the American pro-choice groups now in Mexico trying to influence their political process would be the loudest screamers. They would be the ones on the evening news every night with beet-red faces and bulging veins bellowing that the United States doesn't need advice from Mexicans about how to run our affairs.

Mark, your multi-paragraph excursion into the realm of topsy-turvy land where north is south, America is Mexico, and a blasocyst is a person has left be confused and bewildered. Time to move onto the conclusion...

One of the great ironies here is that Mexico has always prided itself on having abolished slavery many years before the United States. They will also point out that they did not need a bloody civil war to right this wrong.

So did Canada, as a matter of fact. As did Sweden (1335), Finland (1335), Britain (in stages, 1771-1807), Haiti (1791), France (1794), Chile (1811), Argentina (1813), most of central America (1821-1824), the Greater British Empire (1833), Denmark (1848), Peru (1851), Moldavia & Wallachia (1856), and Russia (1861). When the land of Vlad the Impaler beats you to the punch on a moral issue, Mark, you've got problems. Then again, Blue America began abolishing slavery in the 1790s, so spare us the lecture.

But today, whatever moral superiority Mexico might legitimately claim over that issue is being flushed down the toilet.

Along with the results of so many miscarriages (sorry, I couldn't resist).

The American abortion lobby is manipulating the Mexican political process to turn this once proud nation into the abortion capital of the Western Hemisphere. And once that happens, they will pour millions into the pockets of Mexican politicians to see that it never changes.

Thus creating an interminable American Fetus- Mexican Fetus imbalance. Gentlemen, we cannot afford to let the Mexicans continue to outpace us in the production of balsocyst-citizens! To the birthing chambers! I trust you all brought your earplugs.

The inevitable result will be that the United States will be able to sit back and show the world that we are too good to tolerate the evil of abortion, while a steady stream of American women pour into Mexico's death camps.

I guess it just goes to show that when God closes a door, he opens a Mexican death camp. Or something.

It's called naked exploitation, and it is the mother's milk of pro-choice politics.

Along with the yummy, yummy blood of babies yet unborn.

Join us again next time, won't you?

VOR!

2007-04-09T14:41:00.001-04:00

It's been a long weekend and I have a headache. So instead of my normal intro, we're doing this gangsta style: balls to the wall, chrome off the slab, and without trick-ass introductory props, yo. Her name is Marsha West, and her column is on the dangers of Gnosticism, a threat so old and insiduous that most Christians have actually forgotten it once existed, even as it moons them from the passing Volvo with the Kerry/Edwards '04 sticker on the bumper.

Marsha, take it away!

Gnosticism, contemplative prayer and other "Christian Traditions"

Marsha West
March 30th, 2007

Christians are being exhorted to put their minds on hold through meditation and take a step into the supernatural realm. Is it biblical to connect with the supernatural realm?

If a thought passes through your head and fails to connect with either brain cell, did you actually think?

In an interview with Emergent leader Rob Bell[...]: "Central to the Christian tradition, for thousands of years, have been disciplines of meditation, reflection, silence, and breathing. It was understood that to be a healthy person, to be fully connected with God[...] So ordinary people spent significant parts of their day in silence, meditating?

What are we, talking into a frying pan or something? For the love of God woman, make your fucking transition already! It's bad enough that I have to dissect this fossilized owl pellet of a column for the sake of my readers, I sure as hell don't feel like sitting here absorbing vaccuous drivel which makes a Tickle Me Elmo doll sound like freaking Mark Anthony's funeral oration. Move on.

Even if it were true,

Wait, here it comes...

nowhere in the Bible are God's people encouraged to stop using their minds and to connect with the supernatural world.

The Bible doesn't say anything about sticking those metallic fish all over the trunk of your car either, but somehow that doesn't seem to bother the rest of the lobotomy survivors you call your extended family, Marsha. It does however, command women to be silent in churches, a suggestion which I feel has great merit in your case and should be applied as frequently as possible, both in church and online.

Believers are to worship God with their heart, strength, mind and soul. In an altered state of consciousness the mind is not engaged, it's blank!

I wonder if Marsha enters an "altered state of consciousness" when she fires up the ol' word processor. It would certainly explain a hell of a lot.

For over two thousand years (not "thousands of years")[...]

Can you believe this woman actually writes books for use with homeschoolers? And to think in another 20 years, these will be the type of people running the government under Jeb Bush. It's kind of like knowing that our sun is going to run out of energy one day. You know that it's going to happen, but you feel so powerless at the same time.

For over two thousand years (not "thousands of years") Christians have followed a whole host of unbiblical practices that God regards evil. But that hasn't stopped untold numbers from participating. Example: Even though God forbids fortune telling (divination) countless people, including Christians, have visited mediums to "look into the future."

You know what else God forbids? Shrimp. But don't let that stop you the next time your family loads up the special bus for an excursion to the local Red Lobster now.

For more than five thousand years meditation has been practiced by Eastern religions and has become mainstream in Western culture. It is true, as Bell says, that Christian's have been practicing meditation for centuries.

It is also true that the kid's who end up reading Marsha's book's are going to have notably atrocious grammar skill's. Good thing mom doesn't take off point's for spelling.

Christian meditation came about when monks began reading the Bible slowly. As they read, they would ponder the deeper meaning of each verse. This is called "divine reading" or lectio divina. As a result of their Scripture meditation the monks found themselves spontaneously praying. Their prayer would move them to a wordless focus on God. They called this "wordless love for God" contemplation. More on contemplative prayer in a moment.

I feel the same way when I'm trying to read the warning sticker on the empty bottles of Jaegermesiter at 4am on a Saturday morning. That's not prayer. It's brain damage.

Lacking a biblical worldview and an understanding of Scripture is the main reason Christians are dipping into the forbidden waters of Eastern meditation to "know the unknowable."

Dipping into forbidden waters? Eastern meditation? Knowing the unknowable? Sounds like someone's copy of the Kama Sutra is overdue at the county library.

Contemporary Christianity is following "every wind of doctrine." Believers are listening to what their "itching ears want to hear." Regrettably, their itching ears are tuned to neo-gnostic heresy. One of the obstacles the Apostles faced were false teachers, the Gnostics being the most prevalent of the bunch. Gnosticism was condemned as a heresy in the first century church. Here's the crux of Gnosticism:

And here I was, thinking the primary threat to the church was abortion, the removal of the Ten Commandments from public buildings and the elimination of school prayer. Never occurred to me that Simon Magus was that high on the list as well.

"Christian Gnosticism is the belief that one must have a "gnosis" (from Greek "Gnosko," to know) or inner knowledge which is mystical knowledge obtained only after one has been properly initiated. Only a few can possess this mystical knowledge, limiting the number of those "in the know". ... Gnosticism today seems to provide a lot of the form and color for the New Age portrait of Jesus where Jesus is seen as the illumined Illuminator: one who serves as a cosmic catalyst for others' awakening. As such it is as false and heretical as the Gnosticism of the first century and needs to be roundly condemned for the heresy that it is."

Normally I wouldn't bother with this, but just so you can see how fuct up Marsha's line of reasoning really is, there you have it. The first person who can tell me what any of the above means in 10 words or less gets a Snickers Bar.

Most of us think it's cool to have inside information. Makes one feel important. Even special.

At least until the Securities and Exchange Commission comes sniffing about.

You say, "My church isn't into any of that New Age stuff." No, but you'll read about the New Age stuff in books purchased in your local or online Christian bookstore. You'll also see an abundance of false teaching on Christian blogs all over the Internet.

Okay, this column has gone from just plain silly and incomprehensible to creepily authoritarian. Time to make sure my passport is in order.

Or you'll hear name it and claim it prosperity preachers on TV acting as if the Almighty is actually whispering into their ear as they impart their false teaching to millions of viewers.

Aw c'mon! God totally wanted that hit on Hugo Chavez!

You can't even escape Gnostic heresy in modern Christian music. You could be singing it in church! Listen to the lyrics of so-called worship songs and be amazed! And be sickened.

Or you could just check out this photo of the world's largest colon (currently on display at the Mutter Museum in Philadelphia). The effect will be the same.

Last, but not least, the Oprah Winfrey Show if rife with Gnosticism. Those who tune into Oprah's program (a number of gullible Christians do) will hear her guest's share their esoteric mystical experiences.

All right, this just isn't funny anymore. Sad, pathetic, and creepy but not funny. Marsha, the RED squiggles are spelling errors, the GREEN squiggles are grammatical errors! You can't just ignore them because it makes you feel good, hon.

Biblical prayer advocates engaging your mind, even wrestling in your mind, as did Epaphras, not emptying your mind!

I don't envy the headaches she must have at the end of the day.

Will practicing Eastern mysticism really help to open you up to a greater spiritual experience with God, or just the opposite? Since God opposes mysticism in any form, perhaps contemplatives are really experiencing visits from demonic spirits. Meditate on that!

And there you have it, you crack smoking liberal hippy Christians! Join us next week for another exciting column in which Marsha explains how global warming is very real, but that secular scientists and atheist abortion doctors are trying to confuse us by blaming it on cars and CO2 emissions, instead of Satan's rancid flatulence. Details to follow!

Kinky!

2007-03-27T17:01:00.002-04:00

Campus Health Hijacked

By Ashley Herzog

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

When it comes to sexual health, every college student knows the basics: get tested for sexually transmitted diseases and always use condoms.

This is of course assuming that the student in question is a well-rounded, fully educated individual whose academic portfolio has included at least a basic health and wellbeing class, and not a functionally illiterate home-schooled fuckwad whose sexual education was limited to Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction at Superbowl XXXVIII.

But the things campus health services don't talk about can pose serious risks to students' physical and mental health.

Last Friday, Dr. Miriam Grossman visited the National Press Club in Washington , D.C. to discuss her new book, Unprotected. You probably haven't heard of it.

When you have an industry which pretty much employs an army of moneys armed with typewriters to church out semi-coherent sentences interspersed with the words "liberals," "conservatives," and "banana," what more do you expect? Five bucks says you'll be able to get it for 99 cents in the discount bin by this time next month as well, I'll wager.

Grossman, a psychiatrist at UCLA's student health clinic, says her profession has been "hijacked" by radical politics.

Well, its good to see a medical professional take their responsibility to do no harm so seriously. At least its not like she's been able to turn a buck or two off peddling the "OMG!! colleg iz full of liburhuls who wants to make sexxy tim with yur darling babbies!!11!!1!" meme. Just sayin'.

Unprotected reveals how campus health professionals often risk students' well-being in order to promote feminism, androgyny, and "anything goes" liberalism. The consequences can be devastating.

As devastating as having a person in a position of trust and confidentiality writing a tell-all novel in which she details the filth and perversion of today's college students who no doubt would be devastated to learn that their deepest, darkest emotional struggles have been laid bare with all the detailed cover of a pseudonym? Time will tell.

Keep in mind that Grossman is not a political or religious ideologue.

Of course not. She just happens to hate "political correctness" and the non-judgemental "freedom to be yourself" mentality it encourages, like any other patriotic America. It's not like the book's subtitle (A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student) could be considered alarmist or anything.

And as an aside, I somehow feel that there are much more dangerous and depressing catalysts which might lead a disturbed, hurting teenager to commit suicide or engage in risky behavior...like the sense of betrayal they would no doubt feel if it turned out that their story was featured in a book their counselor was writing about the dangers of liberalism and multiculturalism. There! And I'm not even a psychiatrist. Where's my freaking book deal? Get Soros on the phone right away.

She's a psychiatrist whose clinic has treated thousands of patients, many of them self-destructive or even suicidal. And yet, despite the epidemics of eating disorders, self-mutilation, and sexually transmitted diseases among college students, many of Grossman's colleagues refuse to offer advice or treatment that obstructs their personal social agendas.

In other words, to shut the fuck up and stop being faggy homo gay fag-fags. If they weren't so perverted, then maybe they wouldn't have these kinds of problems. Good lord.

But then again, that's typical of conservative "freedom of conscience" morality and traditional pop-psychology to conflate the symptoms with the actual disorder. If a kid cuts himself because he's depressed over being gay, the solution is not to 1) tell him to "snap out of it" or 2) convince him that there is something intrinsically wrong with him that needs to change. No, the solution is 3), convince the kid that it is okay to be gay, that it's a normal part of life, that he is not alone, and that he should channel his feelings into something positive and creative instead of self-destructive, such as focusing on a sport or hobby, or joining a Gay-Straight Alliance or something of that nature.

Likewise, if a girl is depressed because she feels bad over her sexual escapades and and guilty about it, the answer is not to tell her to stop having sex or condemn her for being "wrong," but rather to address the root of the issue, discuss the reasons why she feels guilty, assuage her guilt as much as possible by reminder her that all people make mistakes and that sex can be a fun and enjoyable activity, and giving her advice on how to make better choices in the future and avoid potentially negative situations.

But then again, that's the politically correct answer. In the Bible, you just stone them.

According to Grossman, many campus health professionals' first priority is to never make moral judgments about students' behavior.

Indeed. I though campus health professionals' first priority was to help the student cope with trauma or sickness, be it physical or psychological, not sit around and pass judgment on people. An example (albeit anectdotal) of this involved my time working for the police department.

A woman had been raped but because she was embarrassed and confused and frightened, she didn't tell anyone for 24 hours, at which point her friend immediately called the police. A police officer came over and offered to drive her to the hospital for tests and treatment, which she accepted. However, upon arriving at the hospital and being admitted, the duty nurse clucked and muttered at the victim, saying things along the lines of "Well of course any potential sample is going to be ruined now. Maybe the next time you're raped you shouldn't wait 24 hours before coming to the hospital." Needless to say, that nurse never, ever spoke to a rape victim that way ever again (at least, not in the presence of the local police officers).

Point is, it is not the job or duty of health care professionals to pass judgment on their patients, but to help them out as best they can, period.

There is tacit approval of casual sex: student health services pass out free condoms and instruct students on their use.

The idea of course being that as fully rational adult human beings living in a close-knit, densely populated community, the first task of the health center is not to judge students when they engage in sex, but rather to ensure that they do so safely.

Or, more succinctly: "I have this runny sore on my dick and I'm kinda worried about it, but if I go to the student health center, they'll laugh and/or give me shit. So I guess I'll just wait and see how it plays out."

But they won't mention the psychological health risks of promiscuity -- which Grossman says is a major cause of emotional disturbance among her female patients.

Because while I am unaware of any literature suggesting that promiscuity carries certain psychological health risks (aside from the expected social and psycho social component), there is ample evidence to suggest that unnaturally high levels of promiscuity are symptomatic, rather than causal, of psychological distress.

Being gay is not a medical precursor to depression, although gays do have depression at a much higher rate than the straight population. Being an athlete does not make you abuse performance enhancing drugs, but they are related. Whether this is due to a biological component or a social, judgmental climate, I'll leave for you to decide (translation, cram that up your politically incorrect pipe and smoke it, Grossman).

When Dr. Grossman sees a patient reporting depression or excessive self-criticism, she often discovers, with a little prodding, that the cause is a casual relationship that has produced unreciprocated attachment. Her claims are supported by neurobiological research, which reveals that women are hard-wired to attach to sexual partners.

Oxytocin is to blame. [...]Thanks to biology, a woman who allows an endless parade of men through her bedroom is putting her mental health at risk.

Hmm, hmm, hmm. Let's see what the science has to say...

What really irks Schmitt is that many people interpret this finding to mean that women are designed to be faithful but men are predestined to be promiscuous. That's not what the evidence shows. Instead, both women and men are fully equipped for one-night stands and lifelong relationships.

Just because men and women are programmed for promiscuity doesn't make it impossible -- or unnatural -- to have faithful, monogamous, long-term relationships.

"I tell people to honor their values," Williams says. "If you honor fidelity as important to you and your relationship, it is a matter of your own integrity to honor that.

SOURCES: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, July 2003. David P. Schmitt, PhD, founding director, International Sexuality Description Project, and associate professor, Bradley University, Peoria, Ill. Helen E. Fisher, PhD, Center for Human Evolutionary Studies and Department of Anthropology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. George Williams, PhD, marital and sex therapist, Atlanta.

I win.

This fact is largely unknown to college women, who have grown up with the feminist myth that women respond to casual sex the same way men do.

Feminist myth? Let's look at that again.

That's not what the evidence shows. Instead, both women and men are fully equipped for one-night stands and lifelong relationships.

Bad news woman. But because of the biologically proven fact that women have on average 20% less brain capacity than men, I'll let it slide.

Students' physical health is also put at risk by politically correct--but medically inaccurate--information campaigns about sexually transmitted diseases.

Speaking of which...

HIV is fraudulently presented as an equal-opportunity infection, creating unnecessary panic among low-risk groups. In fact, HIV is spread almost exclusively by anal sex, intravenous drug use, or a partner who does those things.

Almost exclusively by anal sex and intravenous drug use? Ashley, 13.2 MILLION African women would like a word with you.

And, despite the obsessive focus on "safe sex," most women remain unaware of an easy way to protect themselves from STDs. They aren't told about the cervical transformation zone, a ring of cells that is vulnerable to infection. The transformation zone is large in a teenage girl, but shrinks as she gets older. In addition to condom use, a woman can reduce her risk of contracting an STD simply by waiting a few years to become sexually active.

In short if you have it, you're a filthy slut who probably deserved it.

Grossman's arguments against the campus "hook-up culture" are medical, not moral.

And yet for some reason she felt the need to publish her findings in a popular psychological text already making its way about the right wing talk circuit as a cautionary tale against the evils of political correctness and liberalism. Besides everyone knows, peer-reviewed journals are for faggy gay homo fag-fags.

'Til next time! :)

Red State Update

2007-03-27T17:01:00.001-04:00

I think I have just found my new Youtube love...

Ancient naked man-wrestling...

2007-03-15T16:04:00.000-04:00

You know, sometimes I start a review never really knowing where it's going, but following it through to the bitter end. Sometimes (okay, most of the time) it gets really tedious, really fast). However, every once in a while, you find yourself pleasantly surprised. This is one such case. Sit back and enjoy, because Jack Cashill is about to tell us...

Why '300' so deeply troubles Hollywood

Posted: March 15, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

In pondering the question of whether it was appropriate to present children with frightening images, C.S. Lewis answered:

"Since it is so likely that they will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage. Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker."

He could have just as easily have said "Yes, and I also think that we should teach them about sex at an early age so that they might be prepared to make informed decisions when then time comes," but I can see why Jack might want to steer away from that particular bit of Screwtape wisdom.

Lewis understood something that the political left decidedly does not: young people, males especially, need worthy role models.

Role models like Jack Abrahmoff, Tom Delay, George Allen, Claude Allen, Duke Cunningham, Scooter Libby, and Bob Ney: oily, glistening turds who have two redeeming characteristics: their utter contempt for the legal system and their innovative free-market approach to political action.

The few masculine heroes the left serves up – Mumia, Che, Leonard Peltier – are murderous thugs masquerading as martyrs, incapable of being emulated by the comfortable minions who admire them.

I was particularly fond of Mao "freedom comes out of the barrel of a gun" Tse-Tung myself, but personally he was a bit too much of a Republican for me. I'm not a big fan of the NRA.

Especially since I suspect Jack's idea of a "masculine hero" is a cut, chisselled white guy who likes to engage in all kinds of manly-man activities with his comrades in the defense of western civilization from the great unwashed hordes when not beating his wife, chewing tobacco, worshiping God, or burning powder at the firing range. Just a guess.

For the rank and file, progressive opinion shapers glorify passivity, petulance, self-absorption and sexual ambiguity.

When they're not busy being faggoty gay homo fag-fags, that is.

The young guys on the left try to fashion themselves thusly, but their innate and undisciplined sense of aggression inevitably seeks an outlet.

Seriously, did he just use "thusly" in a sentence? Looks like the meanies on The Left(tm) aren't the only ones with sexual ambiguity issues.

From what I can see, that outlet takes the form of vile language – a recent survey showed "Daily Kos" to have 20 times more profanity to the page than "Free Republic" – and self mutilation through multiple piercings and tattoos.

Well, call me a petulant, petty leftist, but personally, I find the word "fuck" much less offensive or obscene than, oh I dunno, this:

Now THAT is fucking obscene (whoops, did it again. What a pottymouth I am!).

The young males who recreate themselves in this image can't feel very good about themselves. Neither can their "partners" of whatever gender.

Oh I don't know about that. I've felt pretty damn good in a number of ways with a number of different people in my time, and I think it's safe to say the feeling's been pretty mutual. I don't have to look at the image above and try to justify it in my mind and rationalize it away so that I can sleep at night. But then again, I doubt people like you even have trouble consciences at all, much less guilty ones.

These opinion shapers can sustain the worth of this image only because they monopolize the visual media. And when that monopoly is threatened, there is hell to pay.

I'd be pissed as hell too if MTV suddenly decided that in order to conform to the desires of the FCC and Brent Bozell, they moved their Spring Break program to Northern Waziristan and replaced all the dancing bikini-clad coeds with toothless 36 year olds in Burkhas. Just sayin'.

This I discovered by happenstance.

Cue Abe Simpson quote...

"We can’t bust heads like we used to, but we have our ways. One trick is to tell 'em stories that don’t go anywhere -- like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. 'Give me five bees for a quarter,' you’d say."

Unaware of the controversy to come, I used the excuse of an overcast sky to duck out of yard work and into my neighborhood cinema for a Saturday matinee of the movie "300."

It's nice to see that not everyone has to work on Saturday. At least not when you're on wingnut welfare.

Directed by Zack Snyder and based on a graphic novel by Frank Miller, the movie tells the well-known story of Spartan King Leonidas and the battle at Thermopylae and does so in great visual style.

I went for no better reason than the previews intrigued me.

And for the totally arousing prospect of seeing totally not-gay, buff white guys slaughtering the dusky hordes in the name of the west. And maybe some boobies.

Given its R rating, I was hoping that I would not be the only one in the theater at 1:30 in the afternoon. I wasn't.

At this point I was kinda hoping for a Pee Wee Herman angle to develop, but alas, nothing came of it. If indeed Mr. Cashill's trousersnake came out of it's den during the climatcic confrontations and the gallons of middle eastern blood being spilled on screen, we will never hear the tale.

The theater was about 2/3 full. Something was going on here.

That something has the critical community in a snit. "It's not so much the body count or even the blood lust that's disturbing," opined CNN's Tom Charity two days before the opening. "It's that the film, with its macho militarism, seems out of step in a war-weary time."

Out of step were CNN's critic and his colleagues.

Ooooo, Charity. Someone just got pwned Hoplite-style!

The film grossed a stunning $71 million opening weekend, a figure twice as high as even optimistic projections, higher than the next nine films combined, a figure that defied the critics' best effort to cripple the movie at the starting gate.

And that $71 million is just the beginning.

Because we all know the proof of a movie's worth as a valuable artistic expression and addition to the artform is by the amount of money it makes (the Incredible Hulk anyone? *Shudder*).

Wrote one liberal blogger in summarizing the critical response, "I mean, even normally well-heeled mainstream film reviewers are really, really disgusted with the brazen orientalism, homophobia, sexism, racism and testosterone-heavy jingoism."

Had the audience known the film had so much added value – orientalism? – the opening weekend might have topped $100 million.

Now he's just throwing words out. C'mon Jack, you couldn't give me a working definition of Orientalism if I gave you a copy of Said and two weeks to read it in.

Still, the blogger's summary was not off the mark. A.O. Scott of the New York Times began his review thusly: "'300' is about as violent as 'Apocalypto' and twice as stupid."

It's not that Scott opposes violence. He found some of the images in Quentin Tarantino's "astonishingly violent" "Kill Bill" "rather thrilling." It is just that Scott opposes violence that serves a noble purpose like that in "300" or in any Mel Gibson movie.

A man who loves The Passion of the Christ but hates Kill Bill and South Park. Pot, meet kettle.

Also note that Cashill still hasn't told us what this "noble purpose" is. In the light of this revelation, I still stand by my chiseled white guy assertion.

At Newsday meanwhile, after debating whether the American military mission mirrored the Spartans' or Persians', the self-deluding Gene Seymour opined that it didn't matter because the movie is "too darned silly to withstand any ideological theorizing."

No, what upsets Seymour and Scott and their fellow cinematic travelers is that "300" is neither silly nor stupid.

If only the same could be said for this ever more tedious column. In other words, critics hate the movie because OMG they h8 teh soljers!!!11!!!!!11! Yawn.

These critics know the film will have a powerful effect on the audience. They know what that effect is, and they don't like it at all precisely because "300" is ideological to the core.

Likewise, critics also panned the deeply moving and powerful film The Hulk because they knew the audiences sympathized with Bruce Banner and were afraid that they might suddenly be overwhelmed by an army of giant green movie-goers if they gave the movie positive reviews. Genius!

In the film, rather than appease "the thousand nations of the Persian empire," Leonidas and 300 of his best special forces ops take pre-emptive action against this imminent third-world threat.

Did he just call the "thousand nations of the Persian empire" a third world threat? An empire hundreds of years old that stretched from Afghanistan to Cairo? The empire that had about as much trouble with the Hebrews and the Jewish god as they had picking their noses? When compared to a group of dirt-eating cavedwellers barely evolved enough to hold spears and shields? No, no my friend. Sparta is the "third world threat" as you so aptly put it.

But don't think too hard about that. Because if Sparta was the third world threat, then that would make them the modern equivalent of the Taliban. Following that train of logic, that would mean that the mighty world superpower that conquered most of the globe was the ancient equivalent of...erm...uh, let's just leave it at that.

While the 300 journey afar to confront the multicultural Persian hordes, the lovely and loyal Queen Gorgo tries to rouse a divided and even treacherous congress back home.

(Read: liberal backstabbers in bed with the enemy)

"We are at war, gentlemen," she reminds them. She then argues for a massive troop surge in the hope that the efforts of "a king and his men have not been wasted to the pages of history."

The parallels are uncanny. Though of course in order to be truly analogous, President Bush would have to be slinging a ruck and carrying an M-16 on patrol in Baghdad. Not like, you know, sitting at home and trying to figure out how best to ignore his father's plan to get him out of his mess without pissing anybody off.

As is obvious to the viewer, these congressmen are no more "war-weary" than the film critics at CNN. They have sacrificed nothing and suffered nothing.

Point taken, Jack. While we're on the subject of the media and pundits who have sacrificed nothing but cheer from the sidelines, when's your next tour?

The queen exhorts them nonetheless to send reinforcements "for the preservation of liberty ... for justice ... for law and order ... for reason." Only a progressive film critic could mistake her unambiguous and unapologetic pro-Western message.

Or somebody as utterly ignorant of ancient history as Jack Cashill is. Sparta was a viscious, aggresive, expansionist monarchy built on a solid foundation of slavery, and was universally reviled as the most oppressive, backwards, primitive city state in all Greece. Christ, it wasn't even a DEMOCRACY! The faggotty homo gay fag-fag Athenians, on the other hand...

To be sure, the film is a bit over the top. The well-ripped Spartans could pass for the Chippendales in designer battle gear[...]

BING!

Nor are the Spartans ideal role models for American troops. They have been bred to near perfection by a program of infanticide that even the critics find troubling – the Spartans had yet to invent the conscience salve of partial-birth abortion–and they take no prisoners, real or figurative.

Not to mention the fact that they're pagans and fight with spears. And have homosexual liaisons. And of course, seem to have a more advanced concept of genetics and evolution than the average American citizen.

That much said, the film presents an attractive image of disciplined male camaraderie that the left is incapable of even imagining.

The left will have a particularly hard time figuring out the naked man-on-man wrestling and will no doubt try to give it some kind of homoerotic connotation. But what's a little drunken groping between comrades?

Early on, in fact, Leonidas distinguishes the mission of his men from that of the "boy-lovers" of Athens (and did that line send the critics howling!).

A line taken straight from the comic book, and historically innacurate. In fact, you might even say that it was

God, I missed that graphic.

"A new age has begun," the king tells his troops, "an age of freedom, and all will know that 300 Spartans gave their last breath to defend it." Although the sets are virtual, the emotions are real and raw.

Unlike so many critically cherished Hollywood films, the violence in "300" is not purposeless. There is nothing camp or ironic about it.

Unlike the recent motion picture blockbuster, "The Passion of the Christ."

"If critics think that '300' reduces and simplifies the meaning of Thermopylae into freedom versus tyranny," writes classicist Victor Davis Hanson, "they should reread carefully ancient accounts and then blame Herodotus, Plutarch and Diodorus."

Entirely unbiased and fact-based historical sources, one and all. But considering how they had a tendency to label anyone was didn't speak their language and share their culture "barbarians," I think the issue will be lost on most people. But then again, this is the same Victor David Hanson who maintains that Iraq is a modern success story and continues to hilight the unique and unconquerable benefits of the western way of warfare, well...I think his record speaks for itself.

The U.S. Marines have never had a better recruiting film. The young males who dominate the audience will leave the theater not so much eager to behead a Persian as to examine their own, dare I say it, manliness.

Ok, now I'm sure Jack's trousersnake left it's den at some point during this movie.

The progressive media moguls, who have so dominated what these young men see and hear, can offer them no such visions "of brave knights and heroic courage."

They are losing constituents with every showing of "300," and they are howling mad about it.

Because nothing hurts Hollywood moguls more than a film grossing 70 million dollars in its opening weekend. That's all folks!

UPDATE: This is what Jack Cashill's bio says: Jack Cashill is an Emmy Award-winning American author and journalist best known for his investigative reporting on American government and politics. Cashill is a weekly contributor to the online journal WorldNetDaily, and executive editor of Ingram's Magazine in Kansas City, Missouri. Jack has co-written with James Sanders the groundbreaking exposé First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America on the mysterious crash of TWA Flight 800 in July of 1996.

Interestingly enough, neither the Primetime nor the Daytime search engine available online have any listing of a Jack Cashill ever having won an Emmy, nor is the context of his Emmy actually ever given. Well, I mean maybe his mom was named Emmy and she gave him an award or something at some point, but one was or another, I smell a rat.

Boooo-rrrrrrring!

2007-03-15T16:02:00.000-04:00

Who will save the children?

March 12, 2007
Joshua Herring
RenewAmerica analyst

Sometimes, these parodies just write themselves...

The things that have been taking place in the courts of this nation regarding the raising and educating of our children are increasingly disturbing.

Because, as Helen Lovejoy might say, "Won't somebody please think of the children??"

In some of the news articles I've run across in recent weeks, I've seen things such as this — which has the backing of Walter Cronkite:

*Durk durk whoop!* White anglophone Christian conservatives are the most disenfranchised and persecuted minority of all! *Yoink whoop awooga!*

Similarly in the state of Massachusetts, we have this recent development:

The development in question of course being a court ruling that since homosexual unions are legal in the state of Massachusetts, schools have an obligation to teach the students about them in order to ensure that they are well-rounded and informed members of society and all that. Lord knows how dangerous a little information can be...
In something I wrote about myself some time ago, there was also this piece of judicial tyranny handed down by the Ninth "Circus" Court of Appeals:

These block quotes are getting kind of tedious. In any case, as Herring obviously feels that his ninth "Circus" court of appeals joke is the funniest thing since his decision a few years back to go to the Renew America Haloween party dressed like a fish and insists on repeating it as often as he can, I'll just cut to the chase. All you need to know is that he doesn't like it.

The case involves the Palmdale School District in California, which notified parents of its intentions to conduct an assessment of children ages seven to ten in order to 'establish a community baseline measure of children's exposure to early trauma (for example, violence).' What the letter to parents did not convey was that ten of the 79 questions on the survey would ask the children about the frequency of 'touching my private parts,' 'thinking about having sex,' 'having sex feelings in my body,' and 'can't stop thinking about sex.'

Oh my God! Liberals have deployed teh sexay! Our Judeochristian magick is useless against it! Hide the women and kids, lest they ask them a clinically relevant question too!

Either that of the school district was trying to gauge the number of kids out there who were suffering from sexual abuse in the household. Don't know why Herring would be upset about that, but anyway, let's move on...

There is more going on than just an effort to silence the voice of Christians in this nation. On a Christian radio station in the town where I live, I recently heard an eleven year old talking about global warming. In a voice that was cold and venomous, this child was literally threatening adults that when his generation aren't kids anymore, they are going to pay us back for all the trouble we've stored up for their generation through our mismanagement of the world.

Damn. Kid's got cohones. Oddly enough, I can't tell what horrifies Joshua more, the fact that the kid believes in global warming, or that those who have fucked up the globe are going to be held accountable for it someday. The fact that Joshua also felt threatened by the "cold and venemous" voice of a well-educated 11-year-old says something about his intestinal fortitude as well.

Who says the youth of the nation are ruined and worthless?

Someone needs to do something with that child, and while we're at it, I would welcome a debate with the Cronkite and the Interfaith Alliance anytime and anywhere.

Damn dude, now you're the one showing cohones there, Joshua. Please come and wrap your big muscles around me, and tell me everything will be ok.

While echoing the mantra "First Amendment First," they have no idea what the First Amendment really stands for, and I for one would love to treat them to a history lesson drawn from unimpeachable sources.

Because no matter what crazy liberals might have told you in school, what the first amendment really stands for is "shut the fuck up and obey."

And while we're on it...what the fuck does this have to do with anything?
The falsely conceived doctrine of Separation of Church and State is the modern Supreme Court's distorted interpretation of a First Amendment that was in truth formed on the founding doctrine of "disestablishment" — meaning, forbidding the establishment of an official national church, of the sort common in Europe.
Huh. And I thought it had something to do with Thomas Jefferson's "wall of separation" letter.
The members of the Supreme Court of the founding generation and the members of the Court in early generations of Americans that followed would absolutely flip their lid if they saw what the Court has done with the First Amendment today.
Not to mention that whole freeing of the slaves thing or giving women the right to vote. Come to think of it, I can see why Josh is so keen on these old, dead white guys.

Ah well, this thing goes on a lot longer, and basically revolves around block quote, block quote, and block quote. As such, I will leave you with an amusing picture and bid you adieu until next time.

My Very Own Conservapedia entry (Part II)

2007-03-13T10:54:00.000-04:00

Man, Conservapedia is the gift that keeps on giving...

Let's take a look at their entry on Judicial Activism.

Judicial Activism

There are two major types of judicial activism practiced in the United States' court system:

1. Liberal judges striking down laws that uphold core conservative American values
2. Liberal judges refusing to strike down laws that subvert core conservative American values

[Ed: In other words, when judges do something we don't like, and when judges don't do something we do like]

The most famous example of this is Roe v. Wade. Other examples include Brown v Board of Education and Loving v Virginiawhich stripped state control over education and marriage, respectively, putting it in the hands of the federal government; McCreary County v. ACLU in which judges stripped free speech and religious freedom from McCreary County; Hamdan v. Rumsfeld in which the Supreme Court sided with terrorists over the protection of the United States of America. and Schiavo v. Schiavo, in which judges ordered the death of an innocent handicapped woman against the wishes of her parents and many pro-life supporters.

In other words, examples of the "Judicial Activism" of liberal judges include the right to privacy, desegregation and the striking down of racial marriage laws. Classic.

My very own Conservapedia entry!

2007-03-13T10:53:00.001-04:00

Since so many people have already raked over Conservapedia ("a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia[;] an online resource and meeting place where we favor Christianity and America") looking for wonderful little nuggest of information such as the existence of Unicorns, the immorality of Bonobos, and the meaning of racism, its only fair that I add my own find to the mix.

Fascism

Fascism is a political form of government that believes that the nation is more important then any individual. A dictator rules the nation and imposes economic and social regimentation. It is often an autocratic system that has a militarized government. A symbol, like the swastika, is often used for mind control. Special salutes to the dictator are also common. Equally common in Fascist societies is strict information control, such as the "people's radio" in Nazi Germany which delivered only one channel of propaganda, 24/7. Allowing only information which supports the far-left state is a common means of fascist control. This is especially pertinant in websites such as Wikipedia which allow liberal-only information through.

Fascism is the opposite of communism. Fascist and Communist countries were mortal enemies. Communism sought to unite the entire world and abolish national identity, while fascism promoted great pride and dedication to one's country. Communism represents the extreme left of the political spectrum, while Fascism represents the extreme right.

The name "fascism" derives from an ancient Roman symbol, the fasces, a group of birch rods bundled together with an axe. It symbolizes strength in unity; the rods are weak by themselves but strong when bundled together. Although the symbol was adopted by the Fascists, it does not in itself signify fascism. In the United States House of Representatives, a fasces symbol appears on each side of the American flag, and old U. S. dimes, with a picture of the god Mercury on the front, have a design including a fasces on the back. [Emphasis added]

Well then, that clears that up.

Fix that Caption!

2007-03-06T11:47:00.000-05:00

If there's one thing I truely detest in life, it's crappy, unfunny comics. However, if they do have one redeeming factor that makes them somewhat enjoyable to read, it's the fact that they are a hell of a lot of fun to laugh at (just look at Faithmouse, the anthorpomorphic toilet seat).

This week's edition of "Fix that Caption" comes to us by way of a Faithmouse link. The drivel goes by the name of "Hey Harry" and is in the words of the author: "a family friendly, clean, single panel weekly comic drawn by yours truly, Thomas Ebert. Where the cartoon character "Harry" can range from bird, fish, guy, girl and so on, all cartoons in a uniquely funny situation and enjoyable for all ages kids to adults."

Assuming of course that the kids and adults in question are locked away in a mental institution and have had their frontal lobes severed via the magic of a transorbital lobotomy and thorazine. Anyway, here goes.

,

Because, honey, one nightmare a night is quite enough as it is, thanks.

Up a certain creek without a certain instrument?

I'll say! Never seen a stream quite that powerful before in my life!

And a predisposition to narcolepsy. As you may or may not know, it tends to run in families.

And on the day of your psychiatrist's appointment too!

And so the ancient sport of Siamese twin tag-team wrestling made its way to American shores.

Rocket haybales. The first, last, and only Amish line of defense.

And so the next chapter of the Lovecraft horror mythos was born...

She says if I keep this up, maybe I can get a job working for Halliburton!

And I told you that low-flying Stuka wasn't a cropduster either, hun.

No honey, of course not. I will, however, need some of your skin.

Don't see why not. You're obviously renting your "wife."

And now that I've recieved my special haircut, I'm ready to go "ride the lightning." Whatever that means.

Meanwhile on the tee vee...

2007-03-05T12:13:00.002-05:00

Most reactionary advertisement...EVAR!!

Let's start with the kids. While the one most visible to the viewer in the foreground to the right looks suitably horrified, the same does not hold true for the rest of the kids. Oddly enough, the one in the middle seems to be stuck in deep concentration on the goings-on on the tv screen, and the one on the far left has a look on her face which can only be interpreted as "Yay! Barnyard Sluts 9! I wonder which scene Old McDonald is in..."

Not to mention their choice of a spokesman. Pat Boone? If anyone knows anything about victims of auditory rape and the pollution of the home, it's him.

The prosecution rests.

In other news...

2007-03-05T12:13:00.001-05:00

I really need to spend more time looking for "fair and balanced" newssites dedicated to combating the secularization and liberalization of the American media machine. I mean any website featuring an article which contains the phrase "Concerned Women for America fears Democrats will succeed in passing a so-called "hate crimes" bill in Congress" accompanied by a picture of Ku Klux Klansmen saluting a burning cross is...well...comedy gold.

Today's summaries come from One News Now, complete with catchy (if slightly redundant) subtitle: The One Site for your News Right Now. Let's have a look at some of the headlines.

Title: Senate GOP leader says Democrats divided on Iraq

Photo:
Opening Sentence: The top Senate Republican [Mitch Mcconnel] testifies to an internal fight among Democrats about whether to cut funding to U.S. troops serving in Iraq.
Snarky Comment: I know a lot of us get all hot and bothered every time we hear the words "Republican" and "testifies" used in the same sentence as anything other than an item in a list of things which would never happen, but don't worry. All he's doing is pointing out that the democrats are hopelessly divided and stuff and will never be able to block any kind of powerful Bush surge, newfound majority or not. And also, the new GOP is totally gnna kick ass in '08.
The Kicker: President Bush will be in Louisville on Friday for a campaign event on behalf of McConnell.

Title: Conservative group predicts passage of 'hate crimes' bill, ENDA

Photo:
Opening Sentence: Concerned Women for America fears Democrats will succeed in passing a so-called "hate crimes" bill in Congress.
Snarky Comment: Because nothing says give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free quite like putting a set of air quotes around a 'so-called "Hate Crimes" bill.'
The Kicker: As he believes about HR 254, Barber fears that once the ENDA measure is introduced it will pass the Democratic-controlled Congress -- much to the delight of homosexual activists. [It's not the passage of the bill that really bothers me so much, but do they really have to be so freaking happy about it?]

Title: Feds asked to investigate 'obscenity' in school curriculum

Photo:
Opening Sentence: A pro-family group in Howell, Michigan says the local school district is exposing students to obscene material, including a book that graphically describes the rape of an 11-year-old girl by her father.
Snarky Comment: If you think they're referring to the Bible, you'd be way off. It's actually a reference to "The Bluest Eye" by Toni Morrison.
The Kicker: Fyke admits she is "a little angry" that the school board did not see fit to fix the process that failed to screen out these books with their graphic content. The school officials know the system is broken, she insists, and yet "they didn’t see fit to keep these kids protected from material like that.” [In other news, the Howell School district has postponed a planned visit to the art museum in light of the controversy, insisting that the curators either put some clothes on those statues, or hire themselves a damned good lawyer.]

Title: 'Crazy' views of Weather Channel climatologist assailed

Photo:
Opening Sentence: A growing number of meteorologists are publicly countering the claims of environmental activists who argue manmade global warming threatens the planet's existence.
Snarky Comment: After all, if there's one group who has the authority to speak authoritatively on the issue of climate change, it's the guy who stands with a microphone out in the hurricane and informs the anchors that "it's a little windy out" as an abandoned schoolbus comes skidding on by.
The Kicker: Last week a panel of veteran Cleveland TV meteorologists said global warming should not be considered a scientific fact. [Thus adding their weight to the debate along with that of Rupert Murdoch, Rupert Murdoch's wife, all of Rupert Murdoch's wife's friends, all of Rupert Murdoch's associates and employees, and some guy I met on the metro named Bernard.]

Title: Vets to counter anti-war march

Photo:
Opening Sentence: A POW-MIA group will be heading to Washington later this month to voice support for the U.S. military operation in Iraq and to prevent anti-war activists from desecrating veterans memorials in the nation's capital.
Snarky Comment: Well if they are indeed legitimate POW-MIAs, its so nice to see that their captors will let them have the day off to go hold a counter-protest. Makes you wonder why they even want to leave, really.
The Kicker: And in further reference to anti-war activities of celebrity status, [Pro-war protestor] Muller adds: "All the movie stars in Hollywood would not have the money they do, if it were not for the veterans of this country." [Because nothing else spells out "instant Hollywood Blockbuster" like catering to veterans. Just look at "Tears of the Sun," "The Marine," and "Home of the Brave," for instance.]

And in other news...

2007-02-27T11:56:00.000-05:00

The time is now

Brad Turner
February 25, 2007

It has been quite a while since I have written a column, but I have enjoyed the free for all that is American politics. You see, the game is never over and the end of one election is the beginning of another.

Or as mack-daddy pimp and continual perveyor of street-seasoned, authentically American wisdom Pope Sweet Jesus might say "That's a violation, sucka! A pimp may be on sabbatical, but he ain't never out of the game, y'understandwhatimsayin?"

The wrapper says 'Ribbed for her pleasure' but turn it inside out and it's ribbed for YOUR pleasure.

True dat, dawg. True dat.

I have noticed the number of candidates that have thrown their hats into the ring to lead this country in 2008. I am still waiting on one to wow me, but that hasn't happened yet.

Five bucks says we encounter a Ronald Reagan reference in the next 2 1/2 inches of column. C'mon, I've never played Dungeons and Dragons, but I know a random encounter when I see one.

For some reason we do not have a clear cut, Ronald Reagan conservative to push to the front.

That particular reason being, of course, the fact that he's a dead, buried, and rotting corpse whose brain has deteriorated to the point where if by some chance a wandering necromancer stumbled across his grave, dug him up, and turned him into a zombie, the reanimated Reagan would probably speak in more coherent sentences and with a stronger grasp on reality than he did when he was actually alive.

We have allowed ourselves to be put on the defensive by the anti-America crowd and we won't swing back. We have been labeled as "mean-spirited," "radicals," "warmongers," and the like. We have lost our fight and we need to regain it before it is 2008.

Right. Because if there's one thing Republicans haven't done enough of, it's playing hardball (cuclear option, anyone? AMazing how important that filibuster power is now tha tyour party is in the minority).

Hannity: "[O]nly liberals" (like Orrin Hatch) "could think of" DREAM Act

Savage on Sawyer: a "lying whore" who "in essence, is agreeing that the Holocaust didn't occur"

O'Reilly: Abducted child "liked ... his circumstances," had "a lot more fun" than usual

More "Freak Show"-- John Harris discussed the Clintons' sleeping arrangements on Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck touted slanted poll on whether U.S. should stay in Iraq

Wash. Times' Pierce reprinted GOP talking points (literally)

CNN and Hotline on McCain: Is the "maverick" back?

And that's just since Friday.

I think that leader is right here in our midst. I think that leader is right here in our midst. We all know him, we all respect him, and we all would follow him. I want to encourage Dr. Alan Keyes to consider setting up an exploratory committee to run for President of the United States.

Let's just dwell on the geologically significant stupidity of that for a moment, and try again.

I think that leader is right here in our midst. I think that leader is right here in our midst. We all know him, we all respect him, and we all would follow him. I want to encourage Dr. Alan Keyes to consider setting up an exploratory committee to run for President of the United States.

My thoughts exactly.

From your mouth to God's ears, Brad Turner.

Dr. Keyes is the cure for what currently ails America. We are at a crossroad of moral decay and human secular arrogance, and that movement has people in the highest levels of power.

Translation: the problem with America is that we're not conservative enough, and that's just pissing God off.

It WILL NOT get any better under individuals like Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Henry Waxman setting the secular agenda for our children and grandchildren for the next 10 years.

Because if you will allow me to remind you of our glorious Constitution's first ammendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; unless of course the aforementioned religion is evangelical Christianity as practiced by white conservative males, in which case it is the exception and must be invoked continuously in order to better secure the creator's almighty divine approval and sanction.

Folks, we have judges ordering homosexuality to be taught to Christian children at the age of 9, we have the homosexual movement roaring full steam ahead, yet we sit and do nothing. It's time to fight.

Y'know, I should hope that most kids have a basic idea of what happens during sex by age 6 or 7, let alone 9. Hate to break it to you, but if you think your kid isn't going around the school playground calling other kids "fags" and homework "gay," you've got a serious case of whisful thinking going on.

I watched Dr. Keyes on television when he was speaking at a recent event and was re-energized by his commitment and his ideas.

Not to mention his bald-faced hypocrisy and complete lack of scruples and principle. As a Republican candidate, he'd do great.

Our foundation is based on truth and strong moral fiber.

Which is why nominating Alan Keyes to be your candidate is like putting your life savings on having a bowling ball win the Kentucky derby: fucking retarded, but oddly appropriate at the same time.

We lean towards becoming Rome if we don't do something now. I cringe when I think of what we could have if a secular liberal is elected to lead our country for the next 4 years.

Because when you get right down to it, I can't think of a better example of how a secular liberal leader lead a great nation to destruction than that provided by that notrious atheist and textbook marxist Gaius Julius Caesar Octavian.

I understand his concerns[...]

Like the fact that he's never broken 38% in an election (all of 20 years ago) and won a whopping 27% of the vote against Obama.

the demand away from his family[...]

Especially his lesbian daughter.

the grueling hours spent on the campaign trail[...]

Something he should know a lot about, considering how fast he had to move from Maryland to Illinois in order to qualify to lose to Obama in '04.

but America is at a crisis point.

Namely, the Republican party is about to implode and go the same way as the Federalists and the Anti-Masons.

The leadership Dr. Keyes can provide will evoke the ghosts of our Founding Fathers.

So can any basic practicioner of Vodun when armed with the appropriate ingredients (chilli powder, some red string, a flint knife, and a live white rooster). That doesn't mean I want Papa Doc Duvalier running my country though.

The Constitution has been perverted by secular agendas and individuals. We all know church and state is a myth perpetuated by the ACLU and other anti-Christian organizations.

And who says Americans are the world's stupidest people?

Dr. Keyes is one of the few leaders who understand how the country was established to be governed, and we need it now more than ever. I encourage others to contact Dr. Keyes and tell him that America needs his leadership!

Considering the fact that Keyes' last opinion peice on his OWN FREAKING WEBSITE predates the '06 elections, I think it's easy enough to see how seriously Alan takes his committment to the people he pays to shill for him at the "grassroots" level.

You might think this is an attempt to curry favor with Dr. Keyes, because this is his site.

Perish the thought (and in all seriousness, I haven't read ahead). Can't imagine how anyone could get that idea (thanks Armstrong "I love No Child Left Behind, now where my money at?" Williams).

Believe me, it is not.

"Brad, have you been eating cookies before dinner?"

*Mmmph-mmph* "Nuh-uh!"

It is a cry for real reform. It is a cry for limited government. It is a cry for a return to what made this country strong.

It's a cry for something, I'll give you that.

Dr. Alan Keyes can provide that necessary leadership to turn this country around and stand against radical Islam, rogue dictators, and secular movements designed to harm America.

The first of which to be addressed shall be bowl movements. I for one cannot think of a more insiduous menace to the people of these United States, or indeed, anywhere.

I encourage those who read this article to forward it on to those of a like mind. My e-mail address is available at the top of the column, and let's let Dr. Keyes know the time is now for his return to the forefront of the conservative movement.

"Return," of course, implying a position he never actually held originally. But hey, since when has that stopped Republicans from claiming to be something they're not. Just look at "Tailgunner" Joe McCarthy.

Dr. Keyes, think about it. Pray about it.....................and let's all picture America if we don't do our best to try and change her from the current path. That should be enough to stir our hearts and minds into action. Our children's future is at stake, so how could we do anything less than fight?

And I think that on that note, we'll just let this column fade quietly into the night as I quietly dream of Obama-Keyes '08: The Rematch. Oh please God, let it be so.

And now for a story...

2007-02-26T12:33:00.000-05:00

I haven't done one of these in a while, so here goes. It's a Jack Chick tract entitled "The Fool." Enjoy!

And what an ugly bastard he was, what with itty bitty legs, turkey-like jowls, spaghetti for hair, and about 15 years' worth of untrimmed nostril fur. For years he had never understood why his kingdom was so poor and his citizens so generous. Time and time again he'd go around the land, handing out coins with his manly profile stamped on the side, only to see children run home screaming, beggars politely walk away, and monks quietly shuffling across the street and refusing to meet his gaze every time he came along with a bag full o'money. Eventually he just gave up and kept it himself, spending it with the only people who'd accept his currency: designers of vaguely phallic footwear and artists fixated with the idea of painting the purple nurple on every shield they saw. In other words, the insane.

Who also shared with him a fascination with silly hats, screaming infants, suspisciously-shaped huts-and-cloud formations, and the glorious purple nurple device.

C'mon, you can't convince me I'm the only one reading a fruedian subtext here.

Much like our current president, he was happiest when surrounded by people of minimal intelligence, child-like simplicity, single-minded obsessiveness, and an unflagging will to tell him whatever it was he wanted to hear. It's good to be the king, even if your villagers do have to eat babies to survive and live in penis-shaped huts.

The quickest and most effective method of course was usually with an noxious-smelling odor/sound combination. Juggling chainsaws never really seemed to work, unless of course it ended in the dismemberment of a trio of adorable, fluffy baby animals (man, the parallels are uncannily similar).

Common sense would naturaly lead you to conclude that the King had seen the wisdom of investing in some hygene management courses, plastic surgery, etiquette lessons, and a subscription to the New Yorker. In actual fact, in one of those rare moments of dazzling insight and heart-rendering genius which ever so often rise up to change the course of history, the king decided to invent the light bulb. This was of course a brilliant and worthy idea, except for the fact that electricity would not be discovered for another 800 years. After several spectacular failures involving thunderstorms, lightning rods, and char-blackened stableboys, experiments were discontinued and the lightbulb was lost to history (until Mr. Thomas Edison came along, that is).

Now before you pass judgement on this, a little bit of historical context is in order. It was the middle of winter. The queen had once again began complaining of a headache, the tourist season was over, the roads were impassible, the palace was suspiciously deserted, the page boys had all gone home for the holidays, most of the other rent boys were on a mandatory work stoppage while waiting for the dreaded Crab Plague of 1054 to ease up, and the Capital City Guild of Prostitutes' strike was entering its third week with no end in sight. Desperate times called for desperate measures.

It had just come in from the speciality shop in the neighboring capital's pleasure district, and he was eager to try its polished, glowing golden surface out on the puzzled (and dare I say, a little retarded) Jester (who probably wouldn't know what was going on anyway).

As it crackled and vibrated with unholy, arcane power...

In truth, the Jester was a little hard of hearing, what with his ears still ringing from the incident three weeks pervious when the king, in a fit of artistic rage, had decided to teach the Jester the important lesson of diversifying one's comedic portfolio with the aid of a monkeywrench and several dozen blows to the head. However he got the message and, eager to avoid a second trip to Ye Olde Intensive Care Ward, quickly scuttled away.

Oblivious though he was to the rapidly changing and extremely suggestive countours of the hills around him.

And only occasionally getting a bucket of pig manure thrown over his head after making unfortunate references to the the villagers' wives and "other barnyard animals."

Part of this had something to do with his majesty's insistance on using the Blacksmith from Army of Darkness as his personal physician, and the latter's insistance on measuring the king's pulse using nothing more advanced than a 3-minute egg timer.

Never have truer words been spoken between lovers.

Either that, or he was referring to the fate of the readers suck with this tract. In his defense though, he was delusional, surrounded by radioactive flies, and crippled by the exponential growth of two of his eyelashes, and unfortunate side-effect of retaining a metal worker as your cheif chemotherapist.

"To the whipping post at once, slave! Weak and frail though I may be, I feel that I still have one more good flogging left inside of me."

Belatedly the king came to realize that in his weak and frail state, he would not have the power to stave off the vicious advances of the embittered and travel-hardened man he had so cruelly tormented in ages past. While the very though filled him with fear, he was oddly excited by the sudden reversal of roles as well.

Call me crazy, but I think the majority of readers have enough sense to avoid appearing weak and fragile before their hellishly-trated slaves. Or at the very least invest in a good, solid, Maximum-Security Prison rated chastity belt whenever talk of wands is rolled out.

Or fingers for that matter.

That thing is huge. I wonder if he has to invest in special medical support devices every time he feels the urge to pick his nose.

...says the disembodied hand, as NASA predicts generally sunny weather, with an outside change of Jesus showers moving across the People's Republic of China later in the afternoon.

And it was all told with all the gravitas of a cheap, 1970s broadway musical, complete with searchlights and styrofoam "boulders".

You can bet your ass that if he tried I'd be giving himself a little something of my own. Specifically a load of 00 Buckshot coming out of the buisness end of my Remington 870.

From the Files of Pathetic White Guys

2007-02-21T16:43:00.000-05:00

"Why Imams Be Playin' Us"
By Kevin McCullough
Sunday, February 11, 2007

From the hit television show '24', to the annual gathering of Democrats in winter retreat and stretching even to the university campus, Imams be playin' us.

Congratulations, Kevin. Until this moment I was firmly convinced that title of “single most pathetically white man in the Universe” belonged to Eugene Levy, veteran of such memorably bad films as all FIVE installments of American Pie, Cheaper by the Dozen II, and “Bringing Down the House.” However, following what can only be termed as one of the worst-wrought sentences ever to befoul the English language, I can only assume that you have launched a palace coup in an attempt to dethrone Mr. Levy. May the most hilariously straight-laced man win.

He is also a life long supporter of Hezbollah - a terror network with wider reach than Al Qaeda.

The same Hezbollah which you will recall was responsible for blowing up the Marine Corps barracks in Lebanon in 1983, to which Reagan bravely and boldly responded by aborting a planned airstrike on Iranian-backed Hezbollah targets and withdrawing from the country just 4 months later.

I'd like to dip you in Cheez Wiz and spread you all over a cracker. You got me straight trippin, boo!

Radical ones are amused at our blatant display of weakness on our televisions, amongst our elected leaders, and at the spineless provosts in educational arenas.

And even amongst our military who just recently tried to put a muzzle on the producers of 24 on the grounds that the gratuitous torture scenes hurt America's image abroad, were unrealistic, and encouraged the troops to act out. Thankfully, Joel Surnow, the producer, declined. Otherwise, it might have emboldened the terrorists even more!

They are laughing at us, mocking us, and praying prayers of conversion over us, and we keep inviting them back for more.

Yeah well, you got a problem with that K-Dawg? I thought a stone-cold playa hata such as yourself would welcome the opportunity for Islamofascists to get in your grill, fo' shizzle.

Normally I'm a big fan of Jack Bauer and his pursuit to get the terrorists before they assassinate the President, release biological weapons, or detonate nukes on American soil.

I probably would be too, except for that fact that 1) Bauer is basically a criminal with a badge and 2) the show is FICTION, Kevin. There are no scary Serb assasins with a striking resemblance to Dennis Hopper waiting in the shadows to take out President Palmer, and believe it or not, the terrorists do not have a Nuclear Lab in downtown Los Angeles (and if they did in real life, it'd be the fault of whoever in power kept dillying and dallying every time somebody brought up the issue of cargo inspections. Y'dig?).

This year I'm grateful that they have played out a relatively believable storyline in terms of the dangers we face.

What? You mean they finally had a season where Jack's daughter publishes a article in the New York Times critical of the administration and a vindictive Vice-President decides to out Jack's secret identity just in time for him to get capped while undercover, and the next 23 hours revolve around Jack's funeral? They didn't? Oh...

However, I've grown ever tired of the ranting rampage of more than one character on the show this year more or less lecturing the viewers about the "constitutional protections" of those who wish us dead.

Translation: I really like the parts where they have Jack running around shooting Muslims, and the parts with torture and stuff, and when some politician says we should intern all Muslims, but when they start mentioning the Geneva Convention and Constitution, my eyes kinda glaze over.

I'm sorry, did I miss something? Have we, did we set up internment camps somewhere on our soil - even after 9/11?

Camps? How quaint. No, back in September of 2001 they were INS detention facilities. And we do have Guantanamo Bay and secret prisons in Eastern Europe, but those aren't technically on our soil so our laws don't technically apply.

But, it's not like we've ever done anything like that before, right?

I'm also not thrilled with the fact that they have portrayed a President who is actively negotiating with terrorists. At least he's a liberal democrat though - they get points for consistency.

Hey, psst, Kevin? Any of these quotes ring a bell?

Happy Birthday, Iran-Contra!

"We did not -- repeat -- did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages -- nor will we."

"What began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, not trading arms for hostages."

"The delegation also carried a chocolate cake [in the shape of a key] from a kosher bakery in Tel Aviv -- 'more of a joke than anything else between North and [arms middleman Manucher] Ghorbanifar.'"

"The only honest answer is to state that try as I might, I cannot recall anything whatsoever about whether I approved an Israeli [arms] sale in advance. My answer therefore and the simple truth is, I don't remember -- period." --

"I wouldn't say that we treated [President Reagan] as a mental patient ... But certainly we were all appalled by the absence of the kind of alertness and vigilance to his job."

"I take full responsibility for my own actions and for those of my administration ... And as personally distasteful as I find secret bank accounts and diverted funds -- well, as the Navy would say, this happened on my watch."

No? Then maybe this picture will refresh your memory. It's a little more recent (the guy on the left is the leader of the Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq).

And setting up a Yassar Arafat-like character to be the noble pursuer of what is right is just the unbelievable cherry on top.

Unbelievable? Why? Was he played by Mel Gibson?

There are always the real-life democrats who held their annual winter retreat last weekend and invited an Imam to come pray a prayer of conversion over them as they started the meetings.

Oddly enough, Conservatives haven't always been this opposed to politics and religion mixing. At least insofar as it will get the voters out that is. Just ask Roy Moore.

Interestingly enough, the prayer he read went as follows:

In the name of God the most merciful, the most compassionate. We thank you, God, to bless us among your creations. We thank you, God, to make us as a great nation. We thank you God, to send us your messages through our father Abraham and Moses and Jesus and Mohammed. Through you, God, we unite. So guide us to the right path. The path of the people you bless, not the path of the people you doom. Help us, God, to liberate and fill this earth with justice and peace and love and equality. And help us to stop the war and violence, and oppression and occupation. Ameen

Justice, Peace, Love, and Equality? Yeah, I can see why conservatives might have a problem with that.

He is a life long supporter of the Ayatollah Khomeini. For you youngsters he's the radical Imam who took our boys hostage for 444 days under the "impressive" days of Jimmy Carter's presidency. For literally more than a year our government held its breath and hoped that maybe he might just change his mind.

Well that and there was that abortive, completley unfeasible Opeartion Eagle Claw that Jimmy Carter agreed to because the Pentagon guaranteed him it would work. And there was the subsequent project nicknamed "Credible Sport" which involved rescuing the hostages using a modified C-130 Aircraft. All the while of course, Carter was refusing to negotiate with the Iranians or give in to any of their demands. Reagan, on the other hand...well, see above.

All of that came to a swift end the moment Ronald Reagan put his hand on the inaugural Bible. Khomeini’s choice was, let 'em go or get turned into crispy pork rinds. (See Reagan's presidency was so impressive it even spared his enemy's life.)

Or the Iranians wanted him to win. Yes, I too can see how the mighty hand of justice of a washed-up, brain-addled former governor of California might scare the living daylights out of the Iranians. Except of course for the fact that if the Iranians had wanted Carter to win the election, they would have released the hostages right before the election. Not to mention the persistent rumors that Reagan's staff was communicating with the Iranians behind closed doors to delay the hostage release until after the election. I guess they just figured that Reagan, unlike Carter, was a man they could do business with (and business they did, see: Hostages, Arms for). Despite all of the heated "Osama wants the Democrats to win the 2008 elections" rhetoric we see from the right today, history is not on their side.

But I digress... back to Husainy.

He is also a life long supporter of Hezbollah - a terror network with wider reach than Al Qaeda.

The same group you will remember was single-handedly responsible for Ronald Reagan fleeing from Lebanon like a whipped dog after the 1983 Marine Barracks bombings.

One particularly peculiar anecdote emerging from these appearances being that they thought the Imam was being inclusive by citing Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed. The former Veep didn't even realize that by including only those four he was advancing a strict doctrine of Islam.

Well no shit, son. What did you think he was gonna pray about when he showed up? The wonderful redeeming power of the Bhuddist Sutras?

Finally this week at the C.W. Post campus of Long Island University, on Long Island, New York, five otherwise exceptional young men have their campus jobs stripped for making a parody video on YouTube in which they as the Resident Hall Supervisors of one dorm, donned ski-masks and kidnapped "Pete the rubber ducky" - who as it happened was a campus mascot. Their big crime? The Ski masks and cartoonish Middle Eastern accents!

Which when you get right down to it is really ethically speaking no worse than if they'd dressed up in blackface and eaten chicken and watermelon on camera to celebrate Martin Luther King Day. I mean, they were only Resident Hall Supervisors, and it's not like that had any authority over their chargees.

Evidently they had crossed the line of "sensitivity," even though none of the schools 8500 students had complained and the vast majority of the campus supports the five boys.

Something tells me that if they'd dressed up as Romans, whipped Pete the rubber ducky, and threatened to crucify him, K-Dawg would be singing an altogether different tune.

For as long as we tell our culture through our entertainment that taking the wrong side is the right thing, as long as we give terror-supporting radicals places of prominence, and as long as we tolerate feigned outrage at harmless pranks while holding no one accountable for actual atrocity then our enemies will believe that we are weak.

And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. Kevin McCullogh, leader of the "Musclehead Revolution," sitting there and fretting because he worries about what the terrorists must be feeling. Kevin, we have Dick Cheney on the other line. Want to talk with him first, or should I summon your therapist?

Till next time!

It burns....

2007-02-09T16:48:00.000-05:00

Ladies and gentlemen, this particular peice isn't going to be pretty.

There. I said it. That way, you can't come crawling back to me later howling about how I've betrayed you and how you are now scarred for life for all the horrible things you have seen and read on this blog. Yes, yes, yes. I know it hurts. Believe me, I know. The nightmares you awake from in the middle of the night, bursting out of your fitful slumber like a swimmer breaking the surface of a black pool. The loss of vision associated with the retinal scarring. The fact that your eyeballs are now the same consistency of a hardboiled egg and that your optic nerve is now more shot, stripped, and overloaded than Baghdad's power grid (January 2007: 4.5 hours of electricity daily!). The constant state of paralizing fear you must endure at various points throughout the day when you ralize that not only do you live on the same continent as these cretinous throwbacks to the neolithic period, but you actually share your citizenship with then and even breathe the same air.

Unfortunately, I have some bad news. Another weekly column has surfaced from the stinking, cankerous sore that is Alan Keyes' "Renew America." This time it comes a particularly blockheaded mental defective I am sure you will all recognize: our friend, Warner Todd Huston. While Warner is normally better known for his impressive, steely demeanour and his not a little shocking tendency to wear marsupial pelts on his face in a show of backwoodsman prowess, those of you with the suitable nerve may also be impressed that he fancies himself as something of a colunist and pundit as well.

At least inasmuch as anyone with an internet connection, a pathological hatred of society, and two brain cells to rub together can get something published on Alan Keyes' sight. I can only assume that Warner's successful entry into the field of online witlessness is that given his particularly loathsome appearance and barely controlled, squinty-eyed fury that they were willing to waive the two-braincell requirement. Kind of like knowing the guy who runs the rickety rollercoasters of death at your local amusement park. Sure, the sign says you have to be so many inches tall, but what's a little seatbelt malfunction and a 15-storey drop between friends, right?

Anyway, Warner has prepared something very special for us this week, and it goes a little like this.

Internet tattletales -- is it right to 'spy' on a neighbor?
Warner Todd Huston
February 7, 2007

A recent Wallstreet Journal editorial by Jennifer Saranow entitled The Snoop Next Door, highlighted some interesting websites that have been taking their slot on the World Wide Web of late... and, no, it isn't porn.

Which is something I think we can all be thankful for. Considering the personal goorming standards obviously espoused by Warner and other conservatives like Ted Nugent, I can only shudder in horror at the thought of his sweaty, greasy, bewhiskered form conducting some in-depth "research" on the moral depravity of transvestite prostitutes caught on cam in his star-spangled bikini bottoms and cowboys boots.

Good lord, I think I'm going to be ill.

Apparently these sites are being used to tattle on other people. One site claims to be ready to reveal bad drivers and people who don't know how to park well, one to uncover the identity of the person who is stealing newspapers in the wee hours of the morning before the neighborhood is awake to get their morning editions, and one to highlight litterbugs. All supposedly feature video or clear photos of the perpetrators of the ill the website's creators wish to right.

In other words, these websites have been set up by self-appointed vigilantes to mock and marginalize various pricks about town. While we know that deep down that anything that smacks of shootin' irons, rope, and dead mexicans is the kind of vigilante action Warner would love to get in on, the fact that these websites have been set up to out various jerks is obvious cause for worry around casa Huston. After all, right-wing jerks are the most marginalized and descriminated-against minority of them all!

How should we, as freedom loving Americans, react to websites where people are tattled on, spied upon, or "outed" as the bad guy?

Previous experience in these matters derived largely from the Valierie Plame CIA outing case and the Bushco warantless wiretapping program provide the logical right-wing answer I fear.

The libertarian reaction might be to confront the website's creator and ask them who the heck they think they are by publicly airing other's dirty laundry?

Because as we all know, Libertarians loves them their muzzling of free speech, yes they do (actually, come to think of it...)

Still others would applaud the website because they get to jeer the "jerks" of society who cannot seem to abide by the rules.

And thus intrinsically appeal to Warner Todd Huston who longs for the golden days of yesteryear when women were subservient, cattle was money, and justice came out of the barrel of a gun.

Which is right? Which is the more "American" reaction to these snoop's websites? Curiously enough, both are.

Ahh! HERESEY! Flip-flopper!

There has long been a presumption in the United States that anyone can do anything they like.

Provided they have the lawyers and political connections to cover it up. Just look at the Bush dynasty.

That everything is fair game, as long as what one citizen does doesn't harm anyone else, violating another's rights.

And by "anyone else," we are referring to the 18th century definition of the term: landowning white males within a certain income bracket.

Americans have always prided themselves that primogeniture and Royal privilege do not exist in the USA.

Unless of course your name is Bush. In which case you earned everything you have and don't owe anything to your President father, Senator grandfather, or governor brother.

Of you fall into that one percent of Americans who are victimized by that most loathesome of all taxes, the estate tax.

The lowliest citizen "born in a log cabin" can become president, any poor boy with the drive and an idea can become a captain of industry. For the most part, that has always been right, too.

Of course, the better-educated, more-stable, well-rounded individuals in this country stopped believing in that fairy tale around the same time they realized that the tooth fairy didn't actually exist and that Santa was really mom and dad. After all, the median income of African Americans is only 65% that of nonhispanic whites, there is only one county in the entire United States where the net worth of Black residents is higher than that of White residents, blacks have much higher unemployment rates, a poverty rate of close to 25%, have a life expectancy 5 years lower than that of whites, and numerous examples of inequality too extensive to list here. But hey, as long as Oprah Winfrey and condi Rice are still around, I guess Huston and his ilk will keep pointing that out.

American exceptionalism holds that we can do or be anything and we can do it our way on top of it. We Americans feel we do not need anyone's permission to do what we feel we need to do.

hu-bris
n. Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance: "There is no safety in unlimited technological hubris" (McGeorge Bundy).

[Greek, excessive pride, wanton violence; see ud- in Indo-European roots.]

But fuck that! We're Americans!

We are a proud and stubborn people, bound and determined.

And stupid. Mind-numbingly, paste-eatingly stupid.

For some, though, they take this tradition and try to stretch it to cover boorish behavior. They imagine that their status as an American means they can "say what ever they want" because of "freedom of speech." The courts have, for the most part, agreed with them.

This- taken to its logical conclusion- of course tends to result in spectacularly bad miscalculations.

So, at some level we have a somewhat accepted "right" in our laws to act like a jerk. That would make the websites that spotlights the jerks seem like a bad idea and perhaps posit that it is the website creators that have the "problem" and not the jerks who are highlighted there.

In other words, the morons who tend to think that freedom os speech and freedom of action also means the freedom to suffer any consequences as a result of that speech. Sure, you can splurt out whatever foul, racist, hate-filled slime crosses your pathetic excuse for a mind, but don't act the martyr when suddenly people go out and brand you as a racist. Just sayin...

On the other hand, a society has every right to define what is and isn't the "proper" way to act in public.

Poppycock! We all know that the Bible and our Judeo-Christian morality is the sole arbiter of what is and is not acceptable in today's society, m'larkey!

Or at least, that's the line he's going to tote whenever the local Gay-Straight alliance decides to have a gay pride parade in his home town.

A society has the right — even the obligation — to set up the rules by which everyone will be governed, to set up community standards. The proper comportment of an individual has always, until recently, been a very important consideration for Americans and anyone breaking the social contract was shunned.

You know I think Warner is coming dangerously close to advocating a set of laws and standards based on the will of the majority of the people and not on the primitive religious codes a a sheephearding tribe of desert-dwelling nomads. And as we all know, that comes dangerously close to advocating anarchy...

George Washington had his 101 rules by which he lived and books of etiquette have always been big sellers in this country throughout much of its history.

You wouldn't know it. Americans are by far and large contempible of such matters as proper dining protocol, sending out thank you cards, and giving up their seats to those in obvious distress.

From the books by The Earl of Chesterfield to Miss Manners, Americans sought guides on how to act, what to wear, how to speak, walk, eat and entertain.

Then given the popularity of reality TV shows, pop music, and what passes forpolite conversation in America, I'd say these two have a hell of a lot to answer for.

There was a time that ended not long ago when nether men nor women would step outside their houses without a hat on their heads and a jacket — or a shaw of some sort for women — across their shoulders. There was a time when curse words would never be uttered in mixed company[...]

Unless of course you were a sailor...

[...]when to be seen as upset in public would be a sign that you are uncouth and unintelligent.

They also tended to believe that skull shape was correlated to intelligence, coal was clean-burning energy, dog fighting was fun, and that sex made you insane. Not exactly the sort of people I want to be taking my cultural ques from there, Warner.

Public virtue was something that concerned the Founding Fathers to a great extent. Many Founders worried that the people would not be able to sustain the Republic because of the tendency of man to allow standards to degrade while existing in a state of freedom.

Which is of course why they were so adamant that we overthrow the rule of parliament and replace it with an oligarchic caste of warrior-kings as per our hebrew ancestors.

Samuel Adams once said, "Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust must be men of unexceptionable characters." But those men of character cannot be found if the society doesn't produce them in the first place.

This of course being the sam Sam Adams who was described by his contemporaries as "the last Puritain" and referred to Massachusetts as "our Christian Sparta on the bay." Not too sure we should be taking our cultural ques from him either.

This requires that the people observe certain customs and rules of comportment in themselves as well as their elected officials.

I.e. staying the fuck in the closet, J. Edgar Hoover, Mark Foley.

It comes down to a uniform sense of morality.

Here it comes! Now just remember a few paragraphs earlier he argued that Society has a good and just role in determining what is and is not acceptable behaviour...

As Teddy Roosevelt said, "To educate a person in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society."

Wait for it...

And before Roosevelt, the great orator Daniel Webster also delved into the question when he said, "Liberty exists in proportion to wholesome restraint."

Wait for it...

Unfortunately, today we have people that make a living by ranting in public like angry, petulant fools and our "celebrities" make their name by acting like selfish, infant terribles.

So, while a live and let live Libertarian might say that people have no right to intrude on others the way the "outing" websites do, those interested in public virtue and a uniform public moral code might stand up and applaud.

GOAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Idiocy

2007-02-08T14:56:00.000-05:00

Normally I say something sharp and witty right here at the beginning of each article I review. On the other hand, work is kicking my ass, I'm falling sick, and the electrical fire at my appartment friend my personal CPU. I'm so frustrated I'm not sure I can even finish this sen-

An Eye (Contact) for an Eye
By Suzanne Fields
Thursday, February 8, 2007

And if you thought that this was going to be about the horrors of big pharma and disgusting fungal eye infections due to getting a bad batch of Renu, you'd be sadly, sadly wrong.

The men and women who shake us down at the airport are getting a crash course in Muslim culture.

'bout freaking time. Five bucks says she won't make it to the end of the paragraph without working in a dig out how liberal panzies are so worried about hurting Muslim feelings and want to sing kumbaya with them rather than doing what any good red-blooded American should: gunning them down where they stand.

A training DVD that runs for 45 minutes tackles such "sensitive" questions as why Arabs often avoid looking someone in the eye.

Or why it's extremely rude to touch anyone or any of their posessions with your left hand only (here's a hint: toilet paper), or how it's also very rude to show the soles of your feet at someone while sitting down. You know? The kind of stuff that we go out of our way to avoid doing so as not to piss people off? (Here's another hint. Men searching women. Big no-no).

An agent of the Homeland Security Administration questioning a suspected terrorist, for example, may regard dropped eyes as evidence of suspicious behavior, suggesting the suspect is hiding something.

A reasonable statement. And no doubt only included in order to stoke the fury of the mouthbreathers even further as they tear at their ears and shout "NYARR!! You in AMERICA! YOU act like AMERICAN!!"

But now he must confront his own ignorance. He's told that Arab culture considers it impolite to stare. (So does ours, as any toddler is told, again and again.)
And here I was thinking education was a good thing. Silly me.

Such sensitivity may be polite, but it may blind the officer to his own intuition and the sum of his experience.

Because having a team that includes people who actually speak the language and understand the culture is the last thing you want to do in such a situation. They might be compromised!

We've come a long way from the heroic mythmaking of "Tales of the Arabian Nights," of Scheherezade and Lawrence of Arabia, and that's no doubt good in its own way.

No fucking shit! I'm glad that Suzanne Fields believes its a marginally positive thing that we have started to move away from the themes and cultural dominance and exoticism which have comprised her (and others') narrative up until this point. Yes, Suzanne. Aladdin is not real, Baghdad is not inhabited by genies, and you can bet your ass that Saudi princesses do not dress like Jasmine. And yes, the 9/11 Hijackers used jets. Not magic carpets.

Where are the flowers and sweets?

Nevertheless, looking for insights through cultural relativism is exercising what President Bush might call "the soft bigotry of false expectations."

In other words, trying to find similarities and a certain degree of commonality between our two cultures is hopelessly doomed to fail because they're just so...different. And adorably romantic! So what's the point really? Now when do they sing "I Can Show you the World"?

"The reason we prepared [the DVD] is because our front-line officers were asking for training on how to interact with people from the Arab and Muslim world," says Daniel Sutherland, the agency's officer for civil rights and civil liberties.

Pah, what a bunch of limp-wristed metrosexuals, being concerned with other peoples' cultures and shit. Ther's only one way to deal with these folks, as any good, red-blooded American knows. And that's with belly full of lead!

He insists that the motivation for this sensitivity training is protecting the nation, not the feelings of terror suspects.

AND HERE IT IS!! The never-ending, omnipresent narrative ever so thoughfully crafted by right-wing strategists years ago and given voice in varying degrees of subtlety and cleverness by their operatives. The liberals, far from being the well-endowed, straight-shooting, killer psycho macho men we all know conservatives to be, they really just want to give the terrorists hugs and ice cream. "emocrats want the terrorists to win. Democrats care more about the feelings of the [insert mild to offensive racial epiphet here] instead of the dead Americans on 9/11!" Etc.

tly, people like Fields and Cheney always remind me of that totally insecure jock you knew back in middle school. Remember? The one who made it perfectly clear that he was only participating in the dance class as part of P.E. because he had to and if you ever even paused to wonder if he was actually enjoying it, he'd pound you later. Only in this case its "sensitivity training" instead of modern dance and the vice president instead of a socially inept, boorish, perpetually sneering twit. Or rather, it's still the same guy, but now he actually has power.

A federal prosecutor says he learned through his investigations that interviewers elicit more information by making nice, such as calling him "sir" rather than showing antagonism, like "barking orders." This sounds like the familiar good cop, bad cop routine, except that there's no "bad" cop when we really need one.

Because as we all know. Any Muslim at an airport is a terror suspect by default. Thank you Suzanne Fields for telling us what you and your ilk really think.

Such superficial approaches may reap occasional rewards[...]

Like stopping terror attacks...

but such approaches rely on stereotypes that brush experience aside and cloud good judgment.

Judgement and experience which is, in this case of course, woefully inadequate and irrelevant. Kind of like cracking a passenger over the head with a nightstick because he's reading from the Koran and finger his rosary beads before jumping on the plane. Or arresting a bunch of imams for praying before getting on the flight, because that's exactly how the 9/11 terrorists acted. Are you really this fricken dumb?

What we need is not a DVD but a better, deeper understanding of Islam without the politically correct lecture if we're really serious about containing jihad[...]

In other words, replacing one set of "stereotypes" (which are in most part useful cultural clues to facilitate interaction with muslims, like "Don't speak to a woman directly in the presence of another male as it's highly provocative" and "Try to keep your bag of pork rinds out of plain sight") with another, more virulently right-wing set of stereotypes (Like "All Muslims are commanded to take over the world by launching a violent Jihad in the name of their prophet" and "the more foreign they look, the more religious they must be and therefore the more suspicious you should be as well.").

Not only did the prophet say, "There is no god but Allah," but he ordered his followers to insist, at the point of the sword, that everybody else say that, too. Blah blah blah yoink whadda whammo!

See? Told you so.

Our fathers and grandfathers were not so politically correct.

I'll say.

The ashes of Nazi war criminals executed at Nuremberg were scattered to the wind, and the bunker where Hitler died is unmarked in Berlin, under a parking lot. There would be no shrines. But whatever is left of a suicide bomber is frequently sent to his or her family, and the Muslim authorities encourage shrines to inspire more suicide bombers.

Dear Transportation Security Authority

Be advised that until you stop mailing the remains of suicide bombers back to their families and Muslim authorities stop encouraging shrines dedicated to them, I regret to inform you that I will refuse to fly. Ever again. I'll keep writing shitty columns though and try to piss you off.

xoxo
Suzanne

The six Muslim imams who were taken off the USAir flight in Minneapolis have become Islamic heroes in our own country. They insist the airline "discriminated" against them for merely reciting their prayers.

I wonder if they'd do the same thing to Pentesoctal worshippers who felt moved by the spirit. But that's different, because they're white.

Airline employees[...]

I.e. the people who might soon find themselves out of a job...

[...]say the imams were shouting their prayers, as if trying to frighten and intimidate other passengers.

Which of course explains why they were released without charges five hours later. They were, however, praying in Arabic, a language which has been known to cause even the bravest of red staters to feel the early surge of "adrenaline" running down their legs.

Western historians once described life for religious minorities in the Ottoman Empire as a "golden age" of freedom. This romantic idealization clouded our understanding of Islam for decades. Now we learn that Jewish and Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire suffered humiliation under the "dhimmi code," where they were "free" to worship as they pleased as long as they pleased the Muslim authorities, who drew up tortuous legal restrictions.

Which as we all know was so much worse than the Crusading pogroms of 1096 in Germany. And Edward I's explusion of them from England in 1290. And the time King Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabelle of Castile ordered all Jews deported in 1492. And of course Manuel of Portugal's 1496 forced conversion of them all to Catholic Christianity. And the Goa Inquisition of 1552. But hey, anything is better than having to pay slightly higher taxes, right?

The new confrontation between East and West, like confrontations in the past, is not necessarily "a clash of civilizations." Rather it is what the historian Daniel Johnson describes as "the attempt to impose a theocratic religion upon a secular civilization."

And we all know who's side people like Suzanne Fields, Jerry Falwell, and Dinesh D'ouza are on that one.

Jihad is an obligation, to be pursued by different means, including speech, dress and the sword. This is the kind of war for which we are completely unprepared.

Well, some of us were atuned to the possibility. Like after the Khobar Towers Bombing or the U.S.S. Cole. But I can't imagine Suzanne would remember that. She was probably too busy screaming "No War for Monica" the last few times Clinton tried to kill Osama.

Foolishly avoiding eye contact, which will be perceived as an act of cowardice, along with other "sensitivities" that will send signals of weakness, will have a crucial impact on whether we win or lose.

In other words, if we lose it will be because we didn't act quite as prickish as we should have. The end.

A whop bop a lou bop

2007-02-05T16:51:00.000-05:00

Today's featured column comes from our good friend and venerable recording artist (pah, who are we kidding?), Pat Boone! In case you are wondering who exactly that is and find that name slightly familiar, please take a moment to watch the two video clips below and refresh your memory.

Little Richard, "Tutti Frutti"

The same song, covered by Pat Boone

Notice anything different?

Yeah, I thought so too. Yes ladies and gentlemen, we're dealing with that Pat Boone. The glaringly incompetent, painfully white "artist" who made his bones in what can only be described as the last hurrah of segregated America: by ripping off decent black music, cleaning it up, sanitizing it, and playing it for white audiences too uptight to let a black man's voice in over their airwaves, much less through their front door, and laughing all the way to the bank (I mean, the guy had a top 20 single entitled "Gee Whittakers!" fer Christ's sake..)

In any case, the ages have not been kind to Mr. Boone. After trying his hand at acting in a memorably atrocious "inspirational" film about gang violence ("The Cross and the Swtichblade, gleefully taken down by World O' Crap here), and at a very straight laced and serious rendition of Metal tunes (a la Richard Cheese, only so much worse because Boone wasn't trying to be funny) and getting kicked off of his slot on Gospel America, Mr. Boone has spent the last few years trying his hand at motivational speaking and writing really shitty columns for Townhall.com. At this rate, drug addiction, destitution, life as a conspiracy-toting, alien-probed homeless derelict can't be far off. Readers in Nashville are advised to keep their eyes open.

Poor Darwin's false religion
Posted: February 3, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Considering the fact that Little Richard later wrote songs extra fast and tongue-twisted just to make sure Pat Boone couldn't cover them, it's safe to say that Boone knows a thing or two about things that are false. Just look at that orange tan and hair.

There it was, glinting in the sand, something catching the searing sub-Saharan sun.

Given that Boone is something like 200 years old, I'd say there is a good chance that this story is semi-autobiographical.

The half conscious, desperately thirsty British airman first thought he was hallucinating.

The thought he had talent? Nah, even the sun won't make you that brain-baked crazy.

As he staggered toward the shiny object, he prayed it was something liquid, something that would cool his parched throat. But it wasn't; as he grasped it in his hand and shook the sand away, he realized he was holding a watch.

A watch!

This is the part where Boone's chracter rubs the lamp and the magic genie comes out, only to recognize Pat Boone and grant him the sweet release of death he so desperately longs for but hasn't the courage to ask about.

And not just a watch; soon after, when he'd been rescued and returned to England, he showed it to his superior officers and then to scientific experts.

Probably after having hidden it deep inside some filthy biological recess and thanking the lord that the Bedouins, unlike the Afrika Korps, don't believe in cavity searches.

At first, no one could identify the maker or even how old the timepiece was. Nothing quite like it had ever been seen. It was fashioned of finest 24-karat gold, the design magnificent, the face a gloriously transparent crystal, the wristband intricate and obviously very expensive.

And evidentally one of the only reasons why he was still around to tell the tale instead of spending the rest of his life with a chain around his neck, mining salt rock with his bare, bloody hands outside a Tunisian quarry.

And the most amazing feature: The sweep second hand was moving gracefully in one fluid motion around the Roman numerals – keeping absolutely perfect time – and it seemed to need no winding or even motion to keep it running!

Yes, not only did this magical device not require winding, but it's second hand was able to move without motion, evidentally powered by some kind of cold fusion or gravity cascade modulator. Clearly this device had been left behind by the ancient astronauts who helped build the pyramids and accidentally forgot to clean up all evidence of their influence on humanity.

DOH!!

Eventually, Darwinian scientists concluded that this exquisite artifact had not been manufactured; it had evolved, starting as a primitive sun dial from prehistoric times, swept and carried along and burnished by howling winds and-

Yes, just in case you were wondering, Mr. Pat "Gee Whittakers" Boone is about to take us on a rip-roaring rendition of the so-called "watchmaker anaology" of the universe. You know, the one in which ignorant and easily impressed humans point to some pretty and/or complicated bit of science and say "Behold! God must have made it, for there is no other explanation!!"? Yeah, that one. We're going to skip ahead here, as I assume you've heard it before. It was already someone discredited before Darwin bothered dropping the 8-ton anvil that was "Origin of Species" on it.

Anybody gullible enough to believe that sappy saga? No? Well, how about one even more farfetched and absurd?

For those of you amongst the audience familiar with these family-reunion types of conversations with semi-senile, long-winded senior citizens who can't remember what day of the week it is or how old you are but insist on regaling you with the story of the time they lost the keys to the Chevy Deville: this is it. Time to politely interrupt, start coughing, and then run and hide in the bathroom.

The vast universe, operating in such dependable precision we can confidently send human beings a quarter million miles into space, all the way to the surface of the moon, and back, safely. Our earth, moving in quiet orbit around the sun, so perfectly placed that life of all kinds flourish, while just a little distance closer or farther away, and the globe would not support life at all.

...A scientific community sufficiently respected and well-endowed financially speaking to actually do its freaking work without having idiots like Boone's ancestors yelling "ye hereticks! All the world knowes that ye sun doth revolve around the earthe and that ye moone is the largest of the planetes! Burn the witches!"

And all of this just "happened." No blueprint, no design, no intelligence, no creator or creation process. Just blind chance, and something called "evolution."

Well actually a single cosmic event known as the Big Bang which created the universe as you see it (complete with a few billion other observable planets, all of which have proven to be uninhabited thus far). This was of course followed by about 3 billion years of the earth just kind of sitting there, followed by another three billion years of life (beginning with the first naturally-occuring enzymes reacting to each other in unexpected ways, forming into more complex compounds, and then finally into single-celled organisms). If you doubt this, please make sure to have your appendix removed and stop taking modern antibiotics. Circa 1922 penecilin should be fine.

So in other words, Pat Boone's analogy would actually make sense if you added one condition: the British airman inhabited a world in a parallel dimension in which giant hordes of watches littered the land, mated and reproduced with each other, and the various naturally-occuring watch parts existed in abundance, constantly combining, recombining, and falling apart based on natural laws.

As absurd, as nonsensical as this concept is[...]

I agree. It's right up there with flying machines. If God wanted us to fly, he'd have given us wings and hollow bones.

[...]it's being swallowed whole and taught to our kids by college-educated, highly intelligent professors, encouraged by the National Education Association and militantly defended by the ACLU.

You know, people like Einstein, Pasteur, Mendel, Crick, Watson, Fleming, Hawkins, and the like. A bunch of yahoos who have never contributed anything worthwhile to society.

Not one of these Ph.D.s can explain what started it all, where the mass and energy (the basic ingredients of which all things consist) began or came from. They posit a "primordial ooze," little one-celled organisms, some cataclysmic "big bang" explosion from which our unfathomable universe was created, and buy into a fantastic theory in which millions of life forms "evolved" into what we now see all around us – and apparently on only this one relatively small rock in all of space. Nowhere else.

I agree. Because as we all know, the founding principle of western scientific thought, as so neatly summarized by Descartes and Occham is this: "if we can't explain it, blame God." What is Dark Matter? The will of God. What is Dark Energy? Satan's flatullence. How do galaxies form? God does it. Is there life beyond earth? Only if God created it. Are there other universes? If there are, God will let us know.

And not one Ph.D. I've ever heard – totally aware of one of the basic laws of science, "every action creates an equal and opposite reaction" – can hope to explain what the "action" was that created the "equal and opposite reaction" we call matter.

"How did matter form?" God made it.

In his wonderful book, "Darwin's Black Box," author Michael Behe details the current "biochemical challenge to evolution."

In which he also brings up the watchmaker's arguement, only with much more style and scientific cover material. Again, while Behe can attempt to mount challenges to pure Darwinistic evolution based on biochemisty (including some rather embarassingly disatrous canards he attempted to hide behind until he was made the laughinstock of the scientific community), but the fundamental problem remains. Arguing from ignorance is not solid science, nor philosophy. Example:

I come in Monday morning and there is a red coffee mug on my desk. "How did this get here?" I wonder, looking at the mug. I've never seen it before. It's not mine. I'm usually the last person to leave the office. I distinctly remember locking the door before leaving Friday night. The only possible explanation?

THE GHOST OF MY LONG-DEAD GRANDFATHER MUST HAVE PUT IT THERE!!!!

Hey, it's been known to happen. I suspect him in the dissappearance of the DVD remote as well.

As true science has developed and modern technology is ever more able to peer deeply into the whirling universe of subatomic particles, the concept that life marched forward, mutation by mutation, from "simple" cell to complex organism has been knocked into the proverbial cocked hat.

Well, maybe it was proverbial back when cocked hats were in fashion (c. 1775), but I'm not sure that still applies today.

The more powerful and probing our microscopes become, the more diverse and dizzyingly complicated the simplest building blocks become; each is a tiny pulsing universe in itself!

Besides, if you look closely into an electron microscope, you can see miniature angles assembling complex organisms from raw materials. It's true!

Consider this. In 1925, in the infamous Scopes "Monkey Trial," ACLU attorney Clarence Darrow took the position that it was bigotry to teach just one view of human origins!

Well considering the fact that at the time the Dayton, TN legal statues made it illegal to teach anything other than classic 7-day creationism, you can sort of see his point.

He was defending the right of the science teacher to offer the theory of evolution as an alternative to the long-accepted account of creation. And now, that same ACLU is instituting lawsuits all over America wherever anybody dares to offer Intelligent Design or any other alternative to the theory of evolution! What blatant hypocrisy!

They supported Evolution when it was legal and continue to support it today, no matter what crackpot religious theory lab-coated reverends come up with to challenge it. Freakin' hycoprites!

Likewise, I fully demand the ACLU defend my right to teach the less well-known (but equally valid) "flood theory" to explain the appearance of rainbows after thunderstorms. If they don't support my challenge to the commonly-accepted (but highly atheistic) "color spectrum" theory of rainbows, they're nothing but a bunch of lying two-faced cowards!

Here's one more pertinent consideration, never reported by the most devoted Darwinian: Charles Darwin's own statements, especially as he approached his own demise. Earlier in his life, he openly acknowledged "the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe … as the result of blind chance or necessity." His subsequent disciples evidently dismiss that thought. Doesn't fit the "theory."

Because as we all know, Darwin was like Jesus. If he changed his mind about something, that immediately invalidates everything he ever did or said on a particular subject.

But in a fascinating book, John Myers' "Voices from the Edge of Eternity," we find the detailed personal account of Lady Hope, of Northfield, England, who visited the aging scientist often at his bedside during his last days. It's too long to recount well here, but she tells of the Bible he was reading constantly and of the worship services that took place regularly in the summerhouse in his garden[...]

"Blah, blah yoink, wadda Darwin was very religious honk, honk, booga, recanted on his deathbed, snook wizz kerbunk!"

Because...
1) Lady Hope is a liar
2) Even Creationists accept that Lady Hope's tales were highly fictionalized, and perhaps even made up out of whole cloth (some 33 YEARS after Darwin's death),
3) Darwin's recantation would not change a single thing. If Einstein recanted the theory of relativity on his death bed, it would not make a jot of difference, except insofar as his biographers would be concerned.

Charles Darwin may have birthed flawed theories, but in this case he proved prophetic.

Now, Dr. Jonathan Wells states flatly, "I think in 50 years, Darwinian evolution will be gone from the science curriculum. People will look back on it and ask how anyone could, in their right mind, have believed this, because it's so implausible when you look at the evidence."

The only thing that bugs me about the sentence is that I will have to wait 50 years to burst out laughing and sending Dr. Jonathan Wells taunting e-mails. Although by he will no doubt be dead by then, and I'll be busy trying to get it on with the hospital staff.

But 50 years could be enough to destroy the faith of two generations of our young, enough to replace it with a bankrupt false religion. Will we have the courage, the gumption, to make sure that doesn't happen?

Yes ladies and gentlemen. This is Pat Boone. Please, stay way from the horrors of rock and roll, for the good of your soul!

Carry on, Sergeant!

2007-01-31T09:30:00.000-05:00

Critiquing columns is a lot more work than it seems. After all, it takes time and effort. You have to upload new pictures, come up with witty punch lines, hone and sharpen devastatingly apropos turns of phrase, and carefully select the right victim, while being sure to match the right set of tools with the job. In many ways it's kind of like dumpster diving near the Hiltons' and Trumps'. Yeah, you're mucking around with their shit, but face it: their shit is about 100 times more exciting and valuable than anybody else's shit on the market.

Now normally I carefully inspect the latest entries at the various slaughterhouses around the intertubes, carefully choosing my next victim. In this case, however, the choice almost literally jumped right out of the monitor, grabbed my by the shirt, and screamed "do me! Do me! Do me!" while desperately glancing around over his shoulder, ever fearful that the men in lab coats and monocles would drag him back to their Sanitas UFO and subject him to more hypnotherapy. That man? Doug Hagin. The colmn? Well, read on.

If you missed the "peace" proests[sic]

Doug Hagin
January 30, 2007

On a side note, I do find it mildly amusing that we haven't even gotten past the title yet, and Doug Hagin's spittle-flecked rage of impotent anger has reared its ugly head, manifesting itself in the form of embarrasingly bad grammar.

The "peace" marches or protests or whatever you wish to call them certainly showed us a whole lot about the left in America didn't it?

The lack of consistency in the use of the singular or pulral form in the above sentance certainly does teach us a lot about what Doug Hagin does whenever those little green squiggly lines appear under his sentences in his Word document.

Yes, I would say the scenes and sound bytes from this weekend's "peace" protesters did a very good job of showing which side the left is on.

And that side, ladies in gentlemen, the side that the left is on is on the...left...side...wait. My left or your left? Left side of what? Fuck this!!!1!11!! Fuck you!!1!!!!!!1! Fuc...hhhuhhh...ck...yo....need...puffer!

Moreover, believe me kids; it is not the side of the troops!

Which are on my right side...unless of course I'm facing them. In which case, they're on my. Wait, I remember this one.

This sentence fragment wins this week's award for most confusing use of a semi-colon this side of a Johnny Tremain book report.

* My, my Johnny! "Moreover" and a semi-colon? "A" for effort!
* Shucks, thanks Mr. Keyes!
* But I'm afraid I still have to give you an "F" for actual content.
* Gee whizz...

On my website http://gatorsense.com/id13.html , there are links to many pictures and videos of the leftist moonbats in all their glory. Everyone should take a long look at these images and hear, I mean really hear what these folks are saying.

Oh please, do go visit! This is if you don't mind the...

1) Shameless web-site plug...
2) Which wouldn't be so bad, if it didn't look like it had been designed by a 6 year-old on a Robitussen binge
3) TWO pictures of the Statue of Liberty, an American Flag, a Bald Eagle, and a tough-guy .wav file from the movie tombstone (because as we all know, if Doug ever met a real life terrorist, he'd totally whip out his six-guns and shoot down the varmint right where he stood and stuff, and not cower in a corner and beg for his life like so many other right-wing turds).

In short if you missed the protest, and have not witnessed or heard any of it, let me share some high, oops, I mean lowlights with y'all.

Whoopsies! Slip of the tongue! There's to telling what that wacky Mr. Hagin will do next!

If you missed the protests, you missed the return of Hanoi Jane[...] How about a new name for Fonda? I deem her Jihad Jane!

Right, and if Doug had any friends or readership outside of myself and his mommy, maybe that would have a snowball's chance in hell of sitcking. I'd even be generous an add an editor to that list of readers, but I think everyone with two brains cells to rub together would see right through that claim.

You also missed Dennis Kucinich imploring his fellow Neo-Marxists to find out the truth about 9-11! I guess Kucinich thinks it was an inside job, that rationale seemed to be in abundance at this protest.

Either that or Doug was in the company of protestors who had actually cracked the spine of the 9-11 Comission Report. Unless of course Dough has reversed course and suddenly no longer believes that we should accept whatever the President says uncritically and without question (that 28% of America that approves of Bush's job performance...right here folks).

Of course Kucinich has accused this country of deliberately targeting Afghan civilians so, this kind of wacky 9-11 was an inside job business is right up his alley.

Yeah. Because it's not like the United States Military has ever targeted civilians before.

When asked what we should do about Iran's professed aim to build nuclear weapons, and their threats to use them, [Sean] Penn answered that we should understand Iran's concerns that WE have nuclear weapons. See, AGAIN, it is America painted as the bad guy.

File under "Yeah, but that's different because we're Americans." Also see "Missile Defense Shield" and "Non-Proliferation Treaty."

Sarandon, displayed her true leftist compassion when she was asked if she thought more civilians would die if the US pulled out of Iraq. She replied that 650,000 had died already. 650,000? The Brookings Institute estimates the civilian death toll, as of last July, to be 59,000. The United Nations, estimates a total of 150,000 civilian deaths in Iraq. So exactly where Sarandon gets her inflated numbers is anyone's guess.

That would be the study conducted by MIT, which calculated that 655,000 more people had died in Iraq after the Coalition had invaded than would have otherwise died had there been no invasion. Ie. mostly violent deaths due to combat, increased crime, the insurgency, and the like, but also includes factors like the inability of people to get clean water, diease, and lack of trash collection. While it doesn't mean that US troops have single-handedly killed 655,000 Iraqis, it certainly does make you scratch your head, considering how during his entire reign, Saddam was responsible for about 200,000 to 500,000 deaths (including the figures from the Kurdish repression but not those of the Iran-Iraq war) over a period of some 25 years.

When a question was posed to Robbins that forced him to examine the possible consequences of his aims, he chose to run away from the challenge by attacking the reporter. Robbins, like all Leftists, is an ideological coward, afraid to debate and intellectually defend his values and beliefs!

Hagin: bring it. Any day, any time, anywhere, any format.

If you missed the protests, you also missed many interesting signs. There were the usual signs comparing Bush with Hitler, and the signs calling the war a war for oil, American imperialism, blah, blah, blah.

Yeah, all that Freedom of Speech stuff is pretty demoralizing when you get right down to it, so to prove my fairness and open-mindedness, we'll just skim.

There was one sign at the rally in San Diego that said support for the troops was support for genocide. There were of course signs decrying our loss of freedoms, exactly which freedoms, the signs generally did not say. Of course, I have yet to hear any Leftist actually back up that claim, so there you go.

This will get you started:

"Sneak and Peak"
"Warantless Wiretapping"
"Opening Mail"
"Library Records"
"Medical Records"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act_controversy

You also missed several Communist groups, and people displaying open support for Palestine, and wearing head scarves generally seen being worn by Jihadists and terrorists.

Not to mention about an eighth of the world's population. Incredile how well that dovetails.

You missed cretins who defaced the Capitol with spray paint, you missed miscreants who spat on a US veteran who lost a leg in Iraq as well.

You know? The incident that never happened during the Vietnam war and was commonly used as a smear against left-wing war opponents? Yeah, apparently he claims he was spit on by an anti-war protestor, even though no one there witnessed it besides himself. On the plus side, this has put him at the top of the list of minor wingnut celebrities. Although apparently in Iraq they shoot you for that shit.

Is that what the Left is about? Gangs beating up one-legged men?

Hellz yeah! We're all about the half-ass kickings!

So, see, you missed a whole lot. A lot of Communists, Leftist, radicals, anarchists, thugs, morons, miscreants, punks with cans of spray paint Hollywood elites, bullies, America bashers, and terrorist sympathizers! In short you missed the very worst elements of America. You missed those leeches who use the freedom America gives to try their best to destroy America!

I'd write more, but this has gone on enough. In any case, as a picture is worth a thousand words, here you go:

He likes his milk lukewarm, and his rage impotent.

Shorter Renew America

2007-01-26T12:53:00.000-05:00

But I guess it's just the price I pay, destiny is calling me. Open up my eager eyes, 'cuz I'm mr. Brightside.

Shorter David Hines: Congress claims it wants to give working class Americans a "raise"? Hah! They're not even cutting the paychecks themselves!

Shorter Steve Kellmeyer: We need more Catholic bloggers to defend priests who have kiddie porn on their computers. After all, compared to having an abortion, that's a minor crime.

Shorter Felicia Benamon: While we're on the topic of 2008, the only problem I have with W running for a third term is that he doesn't hate Mexicans enough.

Shorter Sher Zieve: Beirut is starting to look a lot like Paris back during those riots. Shit, how long does this thing have to be? Time for another Long Island Ice Tea!

Shorter Michael Gaynor: The Duke Rape Case, part XXXVII. This time, with more Shakespeare!

Shorter Selwyn Duke: Don't get me wrong, I love Muhammad Ali. Did I mention he's an America-hating, racist traitor?

Shorter Barbara Krails: Save me Obi-Ben Kenobi. You're our only Pope!

Shorter Mary Mostert: The problem with a democracy is that everyone thinks they have a say in how our divinely-appointed leader should rule us.

Shorter Matt C. Abbott: The great thing about being a conservative Catholic is that there is zero room for interpretation or error and everyone knows their place. Now, here's what I think the Pope was trying to say.

Shorter Bryan Fischer: The only thing worse than trying to remove the Pledge of Allegiance from the public school system is forcing us to say it in more than one language.

Oldy but goody!

2007-01-22T13:54:00.000-05:00

When I saw this column last Friday tacked up on the bulletin board of Alan Keyes' crack den (otherwise known as Renew America.com) next to yellowing NY Post articles on Elizan Gonzalez and Jeff Gannon's Business card (hotmilitarystuds.com), I just knew I had a small flake of wingnut gold on my hands. Unfortunately, that hobgoblin of otherwise productive minds known as "werk" interferred. Fortunately, the shackles have now officially been cast off and I am in teh bases fragging d00ds. For r0xor!

Trembling for my country because God is just
Planned Parenthood, ACLU column ignores baby's right to life

Bryan Fischer
January 19, 2007

A pro-abortion column appeared in the Friday, January 19 edition of the largest circulation newspaper in my home state[...]

A clear sign that the so-called "first ammendment" is clearly an arcane, irrational concept that has no place in the modern world and only interferes with the President's superhuman attempt to defeat the enemies of womb-babies everywhere!

They argue, of course, in support of a woman's right to destroy innocent human life in the womb, relying on the so-called "right to privacy."

Destorying the womb babies before the womb-babies can destroy them is the number one goal of the freedom haters. Clearly we must find a way to fortify and beef up security in these rich and fertile lands, lest more of our precious innocent lives be snuffed out in another anti-blacocyst offensive! (I'm thinking a no-bid contract to KBR or Halliburton to implant every woman's uterus with a fail-safe force-field generator. Or maybe set up a system where every third pregnancy is in fact a womb-dwelling velociraptor in disguise. My my, won't that give the baby killers something to think about?)

The heart of their argument is that "the decision whether and when to become a parent is among the most private a person can make," that we must "keep the government out of your home and out of your decisions about the way you raise your family," and that our society must protect "a woman's right to choose and control her own reproductive destiny."

This is the only part of Fischer's column that makes any sort of sense. Oddly enough, it relies almost entirely on other people's quotations (shocker!)

But surely the ACLU doesn't believe that any act must be protected as long as it is done in private. Rape is done in private; domestic abuse is done in private; child sexual abuse is done in private; murder is done in private. Not even the ACLU would argue that the right to privacy protects anything and everything an individual does as long as it is done behind closed doors.

Shorter Byran Fischer: The fact that the ACLU cites a "right to privacy" in their defense of abortion, but doesn't support murder is a clear sign of the internal inconsistency of their laughable ideas.

This means the question for our friends at the ACLU and Planned Parenthood is straightforward: is that a baby in a woman's womb, or not?

Hah! Trick question! (You know, actually...I think I may have a point there.)

If it is in fact a baby, then suddenly we are no longer talking about a woman's right to do whatever she wants with her own body. We are now talking about whether she has the right to do whatever she wants to someone else's body.

Well, considering the fact that something like 97%+ of all abortions occur in the first few weeks- if not days- of pregnancy, I'm not sure a speck of cells the size of a period (.) on your screen is much of someone else's body. Especially considering the fact that it is entirely dependent on the mother's body for all of the nutrients and environmental controls it will require to continue its development...

And don't even get me started on the fact that most child psychiatrists do not believe children are self-aware until mid-childhood, well you get the idea ("Hey lady! Did you know that my pet chimpanzee is more human and has a greater emotional range than your screaming toddler over there? Just saying.")

We are no longer talking about the state invading her privacy, but about her invading the privacy of another human being, dismembering her, and tossing her remains into a garbage bag as if she was medical waste.

Which is the standard proceedure for almost all amputations (until of course its burned to ash in a medical incinerator and used for fertilizer down the line). For more information, see the X-Files episode "Leonard Betts."

Right now the most dangerous place in American for a female is not the inner city but the womb of her mother.

Because as we have already established, a mother's womb is no longer private property, but part of the sovereign nation of the United States of America.

That's why Planned Parenthood and the ACLU can never, ever, despite abundant evidence to the contrary, admit the humanity and personhood of a baby in the womb. For were they to do that, they would be forced to admit that that baby has rights just as much as anybody else.

Including the right to vote, own a car, sign a contract, and purchase a firearm (if only there was a way to convince the arms companies to make fetus-sized assault rifles!

The Judeo-Christian tradition, on the other hand, affirms equal rights for unborn women, unlike the ACLU, which only appears to believe in equal rights for women who have been lucky enough to get themselves born.

But being women of course, their rights will only be equal to those of other women and thus inferior to those of men, including blasocyst-men. Thanks, Judeo-Christian tradition!

As for the traditional Talmudic approach to abortion, see the excellent article at Religious Tolerance, as well as this article on the history of abortion in the Christian tradition (unsurprisingly, the attitudes towards abortion are contradictory and often in opposition).

Because of their commitment to allow the unimpeded extermination of the unborn, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU must refuse to look at evidence provided by the latest advances in medical technology that demonstrate the humanity of babies in the womb.

We'll get to that in a sec, but it boils down to this: look at the pretty pictures and tell me that's not a baby!

New 4D ultrasound technology (one step beyond 3D)[...]

Ladies and gentlemen, prepare to enter....the FOURTH DIMENSION!!!

An artist's conception of the human womb, c. 1982

[...]has made it possible for us to view 'real-time' video of babies in the womb as they move. A new National Geographic documentary features the work of London-based obstetrician Professor Stuart Campbell, who is the pioneer of 4D scans in Britain.

In other words, the miraculous technological breakthroughs embraced by pro-life activists and ignored by the evil pro-abortion ACLU supports consist of...pictures that move. Take a moment to catch your breath. I'll still be here.

Videos he has produced of twins and triplets in the womb

HOLY SHIT PEOPLE!!!! They have pictures that fucking MOVE!!! Surely our cause is lost now.

[...]are described by a journalist this way[...] "This advanced technology has allowed scientists to capture the development of foetuses (sic) like never before, including twins and triplets jostling for space in the womb while grasping each other's hand and even faces."

Siblings slapping, grabbing, and beating the shit out of each other before they even leave the womb. Proof positive of their unmistakable humanity.

The journalist goes on to observe that the videos show the "fetal bodies" developing in minute detail — it was even possible to "see their eyelids opening" — and even showed unborn siblings "grasping each other's hands and even faces" as they "jostl(e) for space in the womb."

You know, I do believe that the last 4 or 5 versions of Microsoft Word have built-in grammatical features that check for rdundancy. But I guess that software hasn't been made typewriter-compatible yet.

Notice how the left slips and unwittingly acknowledges the humanity of unborn babies when they forget for the moment about the issue of abortion.

Sometimes, the left has been known to stop talking about abortions altogether!

Although the doctor is careful to use the word "foetus" — he slips once and calls them "babies" -, the reporter can't help herself: she uses words like "twin," "twins," "triplets," "sister," "siblings," and words like "cheek," "hands," and "faces," instead of the words and phrases she is supposed to use, like "tissue" and "products of conception."

Evidentally this doctor went to left-wing medical school and drives a solar-powered Jaguar. Hippy.

It is a monstrous thing that we live in a society which elevates the destruction of babies in the womb to the level of a constitutional right.

Not to mention a good old-fashioned televised sporting event as well! At least, I think it is. Like in Japan or something.

Ah well, that;s enough for today. I have a headcahe. Time for another fetal milkshake!

Your Friday video update!

2007-01-19T15:57:00.000-05:00

This week's video brought to you by Timberwoods Handcut Nails: When it absolutely, positively needs to be hung right. And by Lil' Sosstruppen Mustache Wax: Because you can't be a fritz without the frizz!

http://www.broadcaster.com/video/player.php?clip=6679

Your moment of zen...

2007-01-18T11:27:00.000-05:00

It's official. Virginia has the most retarded State Delegate EVER!

It's Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. That means, it's time to...

1) Tell the African-American citizens of your state to "get over" slavery

2) Compare apologizing for slavery to demanding an apology from Jews for killing Christ

3) Apologize, and tell Jewish colleague that you're sorry his people have such thin skins.

Priceless. Disgustingly, disgustingly priceless.

Banging on the Tabor

2007-01-18T11:18:00.000-05:00

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I love Nathan Tabor, in much the same way I love the slightly retarded runt in the hyena pit at the zoo. No matter how often he gets bitten by the other hyenas, no matter how often the warden has to hit him up with the spray bottle, not matter how many times he gets kicked off to the side of the pack during feeding time and has to content himself with chewing on bare chain-link fencing until everyone else is done with the evening meal, you can always count on him to bounce right back, baring his teeth and growling in a ridiculously cute snarl. Because no matter how many times you point out to him the fact that he is a semi-retarted, malnourished runt and embarassment to the rest of the pack, he's always there, comically daring you to say it to his face. Wether this is a sign of stupidity or stubornness, I can't say. Though I will at least give him this much credit: it takes a brave man to run for congress twice and at the same time claim that you're a "small business owner" because your mommy forced your successful older brother to let you join in on his successful menopausal soy products. This is of course after having been arrested destroyed a neighbor's wheat crop at age 19 while four-wheeling. But hey, I hear he takes good care of his family and is a loving husband. Anyway, let's begin.

Calling all conservatives
Nathan Tabor
January 16, 2007

I know you're busy earning a living...chauffeuring your kids to soccer practice...fixing the leaking faucet in your bathroom.

[...sitting at home, watching the teevee as the dividends keep rolling on in]

As much as I'd like to think Nathan is referring to either the liberation of "stay at home" moms who are finally being recognized for the invaluable services they contribute to the hearth and home, or (alternatively) the thousands of latina immigrants working as maids and servants in the affluent households of rich, white conservatives such as that of the Tabors', something tells me I'm wrong. Horribly, horribly wrong.

And I know that it's not that you don't care — but that you care so deeply that it's hard for you to even think about what's been going on in this country this week — it's just so painful.

Our friend Nathan here is of course talking about Monday's federal holidy: Martlin Luther King, Junior Day. Because as we've all seen in previous columns, we know what Nathan's views are when it comes to civil rights for minorities.

But, if you're a conservative, I think you'll need to park the mini-van long enough to call up your local talk radio talk show and vent.

If you're a liberal, on the other hand, you'll have to ask the conductor to pull the bus over. Or alternatively, the Yugo (we're a pretty diverse group).

After all, you deserve it, since it's your hard-earned dollars that are paying the salaries of the designer-suited politicos who not only want to take the aforementioned hard-earned money away from you, but destroy all the values you hold dear in the process.

Being a failed congressional candidate, I think we can trust Nathan's insight on this one. At least, insofar as suits and the desires of the elected officials representing us are concerned. When it comes to one's "hard-earned money" on the other hand, I think it's safe to say Nathan is pretty much making it up as he goes along.

It's time for conservatives to rise up out of their cul-de-sacs and take back control of their country.

Well, at least he's brave enough to admit that conservatives are generally people who
1) Own mini-vans
2) Listen to talk radio
3) Have kids that enjoy soccer practice, and
4) Live in the safe, rich, white, upper-middle-class burbclaves of America.

Um...nothing for me to argue with there. Although it is interesting to note that he chose to refer to conservatives as being in a "cul de sac," a term which is not only French in origin, but also means a dead end. Literally, the "ass of a bag." Or bag of ass. Whichever you prefer.

Or else our children are going to pay the price.

Yeah. Like that $360 BILLION war none of us saw coming. Just imagine how much worse it'd be if the Democrats were in charge!

Here's what the past week of liberal Democratic control of Congress has done for our nation:

Democrats summarily dismissed the President's new strategy for Iraq. Openly. Publicly. Enthusiastically.

But somehow when the President dismisses their advice and "new strategy in Iraq," it's ok, presumably due to the "President is King" segment of the unitary Executive Theory. But hey, that's all right. Bush did the same thing to the Iraq Study Group's finings a few months back. What goes around...

We are in the midst of a hard-fought war that is putting our sons' and daughters' lives on the line.

Well, not Nathan Tabor's sons or daughters, that's for sure.

We owe it to them to support them in the field. Yet, Democrats — and when did Nancy Pelosi go to War College? — claim the President's plan is unworkable.

Well hey, if we want to make military experience the benchmark of which political leaders are fit to be commander in chief, I can say with certainty that Bush's name isn't very high on the list, pal. That John Kerry feller, on the other hand...

Yet, they have no plan of their own. If you truly cared about winning a war...if you really wanted to safeguard national security...and you didn't care for the Commander-in-Chief's war strategy...wouldn't you at least propose a plan of your own?

Yes, we have a plan. It's entitled "Operation STOP FUCKING AROUND AND GET THE FUCK OUT WHILE THERE'S STILL TIME." Look it up.

Pelosi's 100 Days campaign is just more Democratic propaganda. The aim is not to advance this nation diplomatically, strategically, or scientifically. It's all just an effort to see how much Dems can get away with once they're in power. It's also an attempt to pave the way for the Democratic Party's next Presidential candidate to wage a take-no-prisoners campaign against the GOP.

While as everyone knows, all this time the GOP (Nathan Tabor included!) has been a model of civility and restraint when it comes to key campaigns.

As a fellow conservative, I don't blame you if you're fed up with scandal, corruption, and political gamesmanship in Washington. So am I.

Yes, after an entire week of Democratic control, Nathan tabor is fed up with the scndal, corruption, and political gamesmanship in Washington. Hey Nate, we feel your pain. Or did, for the better part of the last 14 years. Suck it up!

But if you care about this country's future...and the future of your grandchildren...you'll take action now. You'll write a letter to the editor...you'll call your Congressman...

...you'll slap another yellow ribbon on that SUV...

...you'll tell your children that country is more important than political advantage...that patriotism isn't a dirty word...that the best way to make money is to earn it.

By inhereting a family fortune and then lobbying and lobbying your ass off until you get that damned Estate Tax and Dividends Tax repealed! That there is hard work!

You'll stand up for the conservative values that your parents and grandparents instilled in you.

And you won't apologize for trying to reverse the course of Pelosi's 100 days.

Hehehehe. Have fun Nathan. To the rest of you: welcome to the new dark age fo the Republican Party!

Suppertime!

2007-01-16T18:05:00.000-05:00

Your daily dose of heaping melodrama for Tuesday, January 16th, 2007 has been carefully prepared by our master chef Helen Valois using only the finest of ingredients including (but not limited to) succulent hyperbole, delicious paranoia, and the finest-ground faulty reasoning. The side of snark was prepared by some guy named Marc, who probably cleans out the dumpster in the back of the restaurant and hauls off the barrels of kitchen grease every Thursday (at least, that's what his paycheck says). Anyway, bon appetit!

"Wear and tear on the guillotine" of today

Helen Valois
January 13, 2007

What has happened to Gordon Klingenschmitt and his family is certainly a shame.

Quick recap: Gordon Kligenschmitt (chorus: his name is my name too!) is- or was- a Navy chaplain of the aprticularly shoeless and wingnutty evangelical "Praise Jesus" variety. You know, the whole "non-believers in Christ burn in hell forever" thing and whatnot. Which is fine if you're an Evangelical Christian, but which might be just a wee slightly bit offensive to others if you're- say- a Jew or something.

Anyway, Gordon decided that the best way to testify and fufill his duty as a chaplain was to mention Jesus and pray in Jesus' name every time he had the chance, which included in "all-hands-on-deck-type" religious gatherings, public speaking events, the nightly ship's prayer (spoken over the PA system) and so on.

Well, it just so happens that apparently quite a few people on board the U.S.S. Anzio had a problem with Gordon's shall we say, less than ecumenical approach to religion and complained to the ship's commanding officer. The ship's commanding officer (and another onboard chaplain) looked into the matter and determined that Gordon was in violation of several Military regulations governing the roles and responsibilities of uniformed clergy, including a 1998 Navy policy instructing chaplains to respect the views of all Sailors and Marines by not preaching their doctrinal orthodoxy, especially during mandatory command fuctions, and another policy mandating that all public prayers at mandatory functions (outside of divine services) be non-sectarian in nature. In other words, if you're a Catholic priest or a Jewish Rabbi, you can pray and talk about anything you want during a service (ie. the importance of Confession or keeping Kosher), but at mandatory public gatherings such as a ships's evening prayer, you are politely asked to say something a little more broad-minded and non-doctrinal. Seems fair enough.

Anyway, Gordon made a huge stink about it and became something of a cause celebre amongst the evangelical right. After going on a hunger strike, disobbeying the direct orders of his superiors regarding his conduct, demanding a full court martial (instead of a less serious disciplinary hearing), and generally bitching about how he was a Christian being persecuted by the PC establishment (ie. the military), it looks like the hammer has finally come down. Anyway, on with the show!

This now ex-Navy chaplain, who stood up for his and others' right to pray in Jesus' name, has reportedly been relieved of duty — and of his means of supporting his family — because of his beliefs.

Technically, I would point out that he was dismissed not because of his beliefs, but because of the court martial. Which only occurred not because of his damned beliefs, but because of his refusal to follow military policy and shut the hell up about them.

Today's lesson. Actions and beliefs. Not the same.

"We are homeless, we are jobless, and we are in God's hands," says this outstanding man, who is not complaining. A million-dollar pension has also been sacrificed in the process of winning a victory for which both Christians and non-Christians must be very grateful.

Fortunately, while he is not complaining in the above statement, he has Helen to do all the complaining for him. Talk about delegation!

EDIT: On a side note, what's this about a million-dollar pension? Did the Navy reinstitute the policy of granting their crews prize money or something? This must be further investigated at once!

EDIT II: Wait. What's this about a victory? And why should non-Christians be happy about being told that they are hell bound every night at 6:30 p.m. over the ship's speakers?

EDIT III: Oh screw it. Beer o'clock is coming early today.

But, where is the outrage over this innocent family's fate?

It can be found at http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/valois/070113, among other places. As for the fate of the innocent family, I do agree that it is remarkably unfair that the man's poor wife and kids have to suffer under the weight of such an atrociously stupid man. There's no justice in this world.

Neal Boortz and all you doughty defenders of Keith Ellison's decision to take his oath of office on the Quran — why aren't you in high dudgeon about the necessity of recognizing religious liberty, where Christianity is concerned?

Yeah punks! And if I start my own religion which requires me to worship some fat, bearded Japanese guy and includes nerve gas attacks on the Tokyo subway as one of my sacrements, I certainly expect to find your hypotricial asses up there on a podium defending my religious freedom as well! Tools.

The fact that mainstream commentators do not seem upset about the defunding of the Klingenschmitts is an indication that their punishment at the hands of the powerful and bigoted is more than just a shame.

Following this logic, I also maintain that the ignorance mainstream commentators display with regards to my quest to buy a new Toyota FJ Cruiser is further proof that my situation is more than just a shame too!

It is a grave and disturbing symptom of the anti-life movement's waxing influence over a nation that can only be described as increasingly sold out to a concatenation of vacuous propaganda. Economic marginalization is a time-tested means by which tyrannies attempt to keep the uppity in line; the Klingenschmitts are not the first to suffer it and, if the deafening silence surrounding their plight is any indication, they won't be the last, either.

In other words...
1) Gordon's dismissal is a sign of...
     a) The strengthening of the anti-life movement
     b) The increasing selling of vacuous propaganda to our nation
     c) Economic marginalization (viz. his being fired for loudly disagreeing with the rules and then daring the military to court martial him)
     d) An example of the tactics used by a tyrrany keeping the uppity in line
     e) A media increasingly uninterested in focusing on the offbeat greivances of fringe whackjobs
     f) ...of things to come
     g) An evil conspiracy perpetrated by the Clinton administration, the UN, Old Europe, and environmentalists to aid ~~Saddam Hussein~~ Hugo Chavez in his attempt to acquire Vorgon Battlecruisers.

All right fine. In all fairness, I did make up item e). Gordon is not, in fact a fringe whackjob, but is in fact a fairly typical example of the type of person living in the vast wilderness of our nation, something the Republicans refer to as "the base."

There was a man living and working in Munich in the 1940s, named Kurt Huber. A quiet fellow, slightly crippled and with trembling hands, Huber was a university professor who taught philosophy, well.

Did he teach philosophy well? Or did Helen just end a sentence with a proposition? And does this sentence seem just a little fishy, to?

When the Nazi movement overtook his country like an ideological tsunami, Huber's keen intellect was not drowned; he refused to buy into the prevailing cliches.

Ideological tsunami? Oh, I think I can come up with an appropriate example. Granted, it was a hurricane, but the effect was much the same.

And to make matters even better, I beat Helen to the punch by calling her faction Nazis before she did. Score!

Some of his students — Hans and Sophie Scholl and their intrepid companions — launched the White Rose resistance group, spreading anti-Nazi leaflets throughout Munich and the surrounding area. Huber detected and joined them.

There were disagreements. The seasoned professor did not see eye-to-eye with the young firebrands in every particular, but in essential purpose they were unified.

The purpose of spreading fire-and-brimstone evangelical Christianity no matter what the evil politically correct Nazis might think!

What was this fine man's fate? Like the rest of the core membership of the White Rose, Huber was caught, "tried," and beheaded. Unlike most of them, however, he had a wife and family to leave behind, making the pain of his sacrifice the keener. For him, an authoritative historian elaborates, "to be arrested, accused, and jailed was a special torment. He was immediately stripped of his status as a university professor and civil servant, which cut off his only income, canceled his pension, and left his wife and children destitute."

Just like Chaplain Godron! Who after having been caught spreading the message of Bob Jonesism over the ship's PA system was tried, sentenced, stripped of his professorship, and keel hauled by the Navy authorities, leaving his wife and children as penniless outcasts. Right?

As a matter of fact, the Nazis highlighted the essentially vindictive nature of contemporary totalitarianism for us by going even further than that. Kurt's wife "Clara Huber was not only left penniless," the record states; "an official at Stadelheim presented Frau Huber with a bill for 3,000 marks for wear and tear on the guillotine in the execution of her husband!"

Just like in the case of Chaplain Gordon! Who not only so nobly sacrified himself for his religious ideals, in a purely selfless and courageous act, but whos family found itself destitute and unable to pay when the United States Navy presented them with a bill for the damaged rope which had been used in the keel hauling process (man, them barnacles are sharp!).

Gordon Klingenschmitt has not, thank God, been executed.

NO FUCKING SHIT!!!!!!!111!!!!

Still, the similarity between the fate of his family and that of Kurt Huber (not to mention countless other examples, from both the German and the American "night") is too striking to be overlooked.

One was a courageous professor who joined an underground resistance movement, was arrested, tried, convicted, beheaded, and left his wife destitute and humiliated by the Nazi authorities.

The other was some evangelical shithead who refused to abide by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (which he was sworn to uphold) despite numerous warnings and hearings, got himself court-martialed at his own request, was dismissed from the military, forced to surrender 5% of his pay and written off as a laughingstock and embarassment by the rest of the Chaplain Corps (yet managed to become a wingnut hero and martyr in the process).

Uncanny.

It should serve as yet another sobering warning of the direction — namely, headlong towards self-destruction — in which libertarian America is drunkenly careening. Economic retaliation against those who refuse to bend the knee to state-enforced neopaganism is a bad, bad sign indeed.

Ie. being disciplined for breaking the rules in the name of "Christianity."

God, washing the taste of this one out is gonna take forever....

Shorter Renew America

2007-01-10T14:46:00.000-05:00

Only wanna do what you think is right, close your eyes and it's passed, story of my life.

Shorter Sam Weaver: Much like Abraham Lincoln and FDR before him, President Bush should take us back to our Judeo-Christian roots by righteously hanging all of the taitors and critics in the mainstream media.

Shorter Selwyn Duke: The problem with running Mitt Romney in 2008 is that he's just too freakin' tolerant. That'll never fly with the base.

Shorter Chuck Baldwin: The breed of fascism being espoused by George W. Bush can only be countered by Michael Peroutka, the Constitution Party, and myself. I'm Chuck Baldwin and I appoved this message.

Shoter Jonathan David Morris: The great thing about global warming is that it's kind of like that line of Columbian Flake you snorted this morning. Sure, it'll probably kill you in the long run, but so long as we're enjoying ourselves now, who gives a shit?

Shorter Michael Gaynor: On behalf of all oppressed white male conservative Christians everywhere, I say this: vengeance will be mine, bitchez!

Shorter Paul Weyrich: It's not obstructionism when we filibuster, dumbass!

Shorter Marie Jon': The recent suicide of Spc. Michael Crutchfield in Iraq is further proof that those who oppose Bush's plans for a "surge" are troop-hating taitors.

Shorter Jeff Lukens: Withdrawing US troops from Iraq now would be like coaching a football team that wanted to quit while behind in the third quarter. After you told them the game was already over. And the referees had left. And all you had was a baseball. And most of the team was unconcious. In other words, inconceivable!

Shorter Nathan Tabor: Oh sure libs, laugh it up. But don't forget, we still control the White House. Which when you get right down to it, doesn't really need the other two branches to rule effectively. Or at all.

Shorter Carey Roberts: Women in power? How quaint. I haven't been this tickled since the ascension of Queen Victoria.

Shorter Frank Gaffney: Mr. President, in order to defeat terrorism, you must divest from Saudi Arabia, work with non-proliferation groups, and invest in electric cars. And swear that these are totally not cribbed from a liberal playbook.

Maybe if we close our eyes and wish really, really hard...

2007-01-10T10:53:00.000-05:00

From the United States Department for Really Alarming Facts People Like to Pretend Aren't True (U.S.D.R.A.F.Pe.Le.P.A.T. also known as the National Climatic Data Center ):

Last year was the warmest on record for the United States, with temperature readings pushing higher than normal during the last half of December[...]

Worldwide, the agency said, it was the sixth warmest year on record.

In December the Center had predicted that 2006 would be the United States' third warmest year, but unusual readings later that month pushed the year into first place[...]

The average U.S. and global temperature are both about 1 degree warmer than at the start of the 20th century, a change many scientists attribute to gases released into the atmosphere by industrial processes[...]

No state was colder than average in December.

Fortunately, certain anonymous aquaintances of mine are on the case:

It is warm in January. So the Global Warming freaks are all in a frenzy .The end is near. George Bush is making the globe warmer. People are stupid.

Well then, I guess I was overreacting a wee bit. It's not like the Polar Bears have been drowning much this year or anything. Though it will probably mean Coca-Cola ought to start looking for a new mascot soonish.

Star light, star bright...

2007-01-09T17:38:00.000-05:00

For today's exercise in Wingnut drama, we are happy to report the capture of columnist and author Gregg Jackson's Diary! While the miniature padlock on the front did prove surprisingly resistant to our picking attempts using safety pins and an old knitting needle, we can without a doubt say that the overcoming the initial resistance was well worth it. Especially considering this particular entry from Human Events Online in which our intrepid reporter takes a moment out of his busy day hawking Conservative Combacks to Liberal Lies to engage in delightful reverie over who would make the dreamiest GOP candidate in 2008. Take it away, Gregg (even as I wonder if the extra "g" at the end of his name alters the pronounciation in any way).

My Ideal GOP Presidential Candidate
by Gregg Jackson
Posted Jan 08, 2007

There has been and will continue to be a great deal of speculation surrounding which Republican candidate has the best chance of succeeding President Bush in 2008.

In other words, which potential candidate will take the least serious beating from Clinton/Obama in November '08. Can't say I'm thrilled with the prospect, but hey, if Alan Keyes' campaign taught us anything, its that republicans are fun when they implode.

Some Republicans have suggested that only a "centrist" Republican such as Rudy Giuliani or John McCain can win. If history has taught us anything, it has taught us that checkered pants "Rockefeller Republicans" don't win landslides. Reagan-style conservatives do.

Good Republican Candidate

Bad Republican Candidate

Not sure which is scarier to be honest. Although to give credit where credit is due, I can't see Big Boy choosing to flee from Lebanon anywhere near as fast as Reagan. Reagan was skinner, and somewhat more afraid of Middle Easterners, which Big Boy would probably have just stood there.

This past November, voters made it clear that the Republican Party had moved too far left, especially on entitlement spending and immigration.

Conservatives like to think this, therefby deluding themselves into the notion that the Left didn't "win" the election really, but rather that the Right chose to boycott the elections out of anger at Bush's leftist ways. While a fun bedtime story for the Reagankinder, this, like so much right-wing daydreaming, is quite simply

I believe the candidate with the best chance of winning a Reagan landslide would be solidly conservative both fiscally and socially and would be able to clearly articulate a bold conservative vision for America.

If by "a bold conservative vision for America" he means "staying in Iraq forever" and"enriching myself and my cronies at the expense of the nation," I can see why he might stand to be a bit disappointed in '08.

He (or she) would be 100% pro-life. He would propose a human-life amendment and would oppose embryonic stem cell research[...]

And if you or your significant other happen to be pregnant with one of these monstrosities, too freaking bad. You're gonna carry it to term, like it or not [WARNING: EXTREMELY DISTURBING CONTENT].

[...]and would fully recognize what Thomas Jefferson did, which is that government's primary role is to protect human life.

Which is why he would institute a strict policy of global non-interventionism and cut the military budget by half in 4 years or less. Yeah, that's happening.

He would echo the words of Ronald Reagan, who said, "America will never be whole as long as the right to life as granted by our Creator is denied to the unborn."

This was of course some 15 years after he had decided not to veto CA's abortion law, one of the most liberal at the time. But to be honest, he couldn't remember wether or not he had had anything to do with that "Arms-for-hostages" memo bearing his signature, or if he'd actually been in Europe during WWII, so I guess we should go easy on him.

No Republican president has ever been pro-choice on abortion. The pro-life movement is the heart and soul of the Republican Party.

See above.

He would be 100% opposed to same-sex marriage. We need a president who can clearly articulate to the nation why a federal marriage amendment is needed to protect marriage from activist courts and state legislatures who have attempted to usurp the legislative authority of "we the people" to define marriage.

This is of course in keeping with the GOP's deeply-held belief in the supremacy of the individual citizen and State governments (especially when it comes to Federal taxation and National Parks), except of course when it needs to eradicate direct threats to the Republic, (such as seculrism and gay sex).

He would be fiscally conservative and would propose bold tax and spending cuts. The American taxpayer is over taxed.

I couldn't agree more that in a society where 12% of the population suffers from hunger, 10% of the Baby Boom generation lives below the poverty line, 33% of the Eldery have no health insurance to cover their medication, and middle-class families can no longer comfortably exist on two full-time salaries that the greatest fiscal threat to the American public are taxes on the top 2% of the American population.

My ideal candidate would make the case once and for all for a flat tax. Even Iraq has one. It is absurd that our nation doesn't.

And we all know how well things have been working out over there with the Iraqi economy and all, don't we? Nothing like having a bunch of 20-something, homeschooled, Heritage Foundation Interns running your economy to get those free market juices pumping.

He would propose specific market based reforms for Social Security and education. He would not propose "saving Social Security." He would propose transforming it entirely so that younger workers could invest in their own private accounts.

As worked as wonderfully in Chile during the Pinochet years. You know, those great "investment accounts" that gave about an 80% return AT BEST on the original investment and in some cases resulted in the loss of the principal for the workers? But hey, at least the Wall Street guys got rich off of it.

He would also make the case for expanded school choice voucher programs and charters explaining how they primarily benefit the least advantaged minorities in our society and would dare Democrats to oppose him.

Hurrah for bipartizanship! :)

And when they did, he'd be all like setting his jaw and muttering "well then, I'll see you at noon at the corral. Bring your sixgun." and they'd be like, all scared, and stuff. Because he's so macho and tough. And it would be cool.

He would be 100% opposed to illegal immigration. He would call for the immediate deportation of all illegal aliens in our federal prisons and would demand that a security fence be constructed across the entire southern border—not just 700 miles.

This would of course coincide with the realease of the new line of General Motors/Halliburton Automatons who would do the same jobs as the Mexicans (currently: pulling lettuce, cleaning toilets, pumping your gas, cleaning your motel, and watching your kids) without demanding the exbobitant $2.13 and hour in wages. And much like the immigrants, when one of them broke down, you could just kick him to the curb and get a new one.

He would call on Americans to recommit themselves to the founding principles of our nation and would speak frequently about how fragile the unalienable rights that we enjoy are and that the most important purpose of our government is to protect life, liberty, and property not to redistribute wealth and provide cradle to grave welfare.

Unless of course you're a major corporation, in which case not only do you deserve every penny of welfare you get, but since you live forever, will never have to worry about giving it back or paying estate taxes on it.

Finally, my ideal Republican presidential candidate would speak unambiguously about the jihadist threat facing our nation and Western Civilization in general. He would make it clear to the American people and the world that we will never negotiate with terror states such as Syria and Iran and that we will not hesitate to pre-empt a terrorist attack on our nation with overwhelming force.

Which is odd really when you think about it. Reagan negociated with terrorists all the time and it never seemed to bother him any 9that is, when he could remember it).

He would also announce that we are the most tolerant country in the world but that the United States will never tolerate those on U.S. soil who preach jihad who call for the destruction of our nation and those who do will be jailed or deported.

Thereby violating their right to free speech and jailing those who dare say the "j-word" in public.

He would be unequivocal in his support for Israel and announce to the world that any attack on Israel would be considered an attack on the United States.

Thus engaging in an act of high treason against the Republic by putting the interests of a foreign land over those of his own nation.

Finally he would call on every American citizen to unite in the war on Islamofacism and ask each individual American to take part in the overall war effort by serving their country—not by "shopping" but by joining the military, sponsoring a soldier, or volunteering to assist deployed soldiers' families.

Which if of course why Gregg will be rushing out and joining the military immediately at the conclusion of this peice. Or his dream date gets elected, whichever comes last.

He would make it clear, as Reagan did, that no foreign power or hate filled ideology could defeat a united America.

Except for that one time in Lebanon in 1983, but that was totally a fluke.

A candidate who possessed these beliefs and boldly articulated these positions and repeated them every chance he could would, no doubt, win a Reagan style landslide in '08. Anything less in my mind results in President Hillary Clinton.

Wow. Let's recap. In 2008, Gregg Jackson's ideal candidate would...

1) Be a "real" Republican (je. from the NASCAR belt)

2) "100% Pro-Life," and in favor of a Constitutional Ammendment banning abortion in all cases, including rape, incest, extreme deformities, and in the case of the mother's life being threatened.

3) 100% opposed to same-sex marriage and in favor of a Constitutional Ammendment banning that.

4) Establish a flat tax and repeal taxes on inheritances of over $1 Million, repeal taxes on stock market profits, and repeal taxes on company payments to stockholders [ED: a real revolution for the masses!]

5) Abolish Social Security as an insurance policy and replace it with a stock market portfolio for every citizen [Thanks, H&R Block!]

6) Militarize and wall off the Mexican border

7) Deport all illegal immigrants immediately

8) Do his best to reduce and/or eliminate all welfare programs

9) Jail and/or deport those calling for Jihad

10) Greatly expand the military, militarize society, and perhaps even introduce a form of conscription.

I think I need a drink.

Of Sorrows and Soros...

2007-01-03T22:49:00.000-05:00

Today's column comes from Renew America columnist Erik Rush, who, according to his bio "is a contributor of social commentary to numerous print and online publications. Born in New York City in 1961, from 1975 to 1986, he worked as a studio, club, and stage musician and in biomedical research." If I was feeling snarky or small, i would probably add "as a crash test dummy" to the last sentence there, but there's no need to be cruel. Besides, I think the picture is already a dead giveaway without my having to point out the obvious. In any case, this week he has a column for us called "Where's our Soros" in which he laments the fact that even the TV Guide channel is no longer safe for viewing by his young ones. Let's take a look.

Where's Our Soros?
January 1, 2007

Are you familiar with the Channel Channel? Depending on the type of television service you have, it varies, with the digital variety being the most state-of-the-art.

Go ahead punk, map this sentance. I dare you, muthaf*cka. As an aside, who the hell calls it "The Channel Channel?" Well, besides Erik Rush of course. In my country, its the TV Guide channel, and before that it was the preview channel. Veediot.

It's the channel that shows the schedule of television shows being offered on the other channels to which you subscribe (and to quite a few you probably don't, or wouldn't with a gun to your head).

Somehow, I don't think he's referring to Vox or Lifetime. *Sigh*

Anyway, I came inside after shoveling lots of snow recently (contrary to what some of the troglodytes who flame me think, I don't have "people" for that)[...]

At least, not since he figured out what "el hefe muy gourdo" meant in Spanish. Oooh shit. You just got told, flamers.

[...]and the Channel Channel was on.

I too long for the glory days when there were only three networks, and they all signed off at 11:00 p.m. But nowadays, what with satellites and intertoobz, you never know what channels will available when you turn on the TV.

Now, on a lot of systems the Channel Channel functions as follows: Only the bottom half (or three-fifths) of the screen is occupied by (scrolling or viewer-scrollable) programming. The top half (or two-fifths) is reserved for distracting advertisements, short pop-culture features and celebrity news. Very highbrow...

When your columnist has to sit you down and explain (albeit in slight disjointed and confusing terminology) what the Preview Channel does and how it operates, you know you're really getting a top-notch glipse at the columns intended audience. Indeed, the fact that they are even able to trn on the computer fills this reader with awe...

"Methane Man" was a minute or so clip of a guy dressed as a superhero (tights, mask and so forth) who performed — in front of an audience and cameras — various "stunts" using his own flatulence.

Fascinating. Point, please.

On the Channel Channel. In the middle of the day. For my kids to see.

HOLY CRAP!!!11!!1!! Someone get Senator McCain on the line! There's a breach in the system!! The horrors that are fart jokes have escaped their top-level containment facility and are about to be unleashed on the world!! What will the unsuspecting public think?! Will no one protect the children from this insiduous menace??

As if the periodic mini-deprogramming sessions in which my wife and I have to engage as a result of our children attending public school isn't enough of a pain in the rear.

And after today's episode on the Channel Channel, I doubt we need any more references to the rear, Mr. Rush. That will do nicely.

Exposure to the intellectual, spiritual, and moral decay in America has officially become inescapable. Of course I've installed filtering software on the computer my children use, because even "safe" websites generally have advertising or other links that eventually lead to decidedly unsavory material.

If any of you out there had any doubts that Erik Rush's children are well on track to becoming the most maladjusted, socially inept moppets out there, consider them fully satisfied.

With regard to "Methane Man," all I could think of was the proverbial ET mothership hovering miles above Earth. As the occupants, monitoring our airwaves view this, their commander gives the order: "They're funky. Destroy them."

Unless of course its the P-Funk Mothership. In which case, I like to think George Clinton and the Parliament Funakedlic look down upon this episode and smile.

What puzzles me to no end is that the people who are transforming America into the Disunited States of Pigdom are a tiny minority. Despite Republican and Democrat "base" voters and Independents sliding elections results between 60%-40% depending on the way political winds blow, the majority of Americans do not want an ultra-socialist nation that is soft on crime, accepting of all forms of individual self-destructiveness, deviance and debauchery, tolerant of early childhood sexualization, unfettered abortion, pedophiles, and which projects weakness abroad.

In other words, Erik Rush's vision of what Massachusetts must be like.

The search engine Yahoo!'s Top Ten searches for December 29, 2006 were as follows:

1. Britney Spears (Pop singer with rapidly disintegrating morals)
2. Angelina Jolie (Actress, media hound and avowed bisexual)
3. Lindsay Lohan (Actress, singer, teen icon)
4. Beyonce Knowles (Pop singer, generic sex kitten)
5. WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment)
6. LimeWire (Music file sharing service)
7. Paris Hilton (Heiress and exhibitionist slut)
8. James Brown (Recently-deceased legendary Soul singer)
9. Pamela Anderson (Actress and exhibitionist slut)
10. iTunes (Music file sharing service)

All but three of these are, in my view, pretty scary results.

Quick! Which three do you think make Erik's list? You have 10 seconds...

James Brown is understandable because of his professional longevity, groundbreaking work and the fact that he recently passed away. LimeWire and iTunes are less threatening than the remaining seven, but still indicative of another example of social malaise: Our proclivity toward electronic isolation.

And our scandalous desire to rip off all the hard-working record companies from their justly-earned copyrights. Bastards!

[I]t's hard to credibly offer that the majority of people using search engines are simply morons, young and ignorant or far-Lefters. Yet, the values and interests promoted by the far Left political-entertainment complex seem to be permeating our collective consciousness quite effectively.

And what might those values and interests be? Well, sex symbols and vaguely homo-erotic "wrestling" matches being inflicted by beefy, scandalously clad rednecks. The first I happily take credit for as a member of The Left(tm). The latter on the other hand...

It's a matter of public record that between media and political interests, billions are being spent by the far Left in the name of social activism to promote a valueless, morally suicidal culture.

You mean by selling the United States public on a war based on a lie, perpetrated by the most corrupt American administration of the 20th century, and sold to a fear-cowed populace too afraid and misguided to ask the relevant questions?

So where's our Soros?

Mr. Murdoch, yes?

The AFA is out there, and the more well-known (and well-excoriated) Focus on the Family, and scores of Christian organizations who decry what's going on. Mustn't there be at least one frustrated, morally-grounded billionaire in America willing to put his or her money where their mouth is?

Mr. Murdoch, yes?

I've made no secret of the fact that given Soros' cash, my solution to fellows like him and Lewis might land me in the penitentiary. I say "might" because there are obvious and proven advantages to having that level of financial clout which might serve to neutralize the likelihood of incarceration.

Mr. Murdoch, yes?

Still, high-powered rifles aren't being used by the Left's billionaire benefactors in their attempts to completely disenfranchise most Americans, particularly the religious. So it stands to reason that the resources of an anti-Soros, similarly applied, could be employed with even more impact given that the majority of Americans are on the same page anyway.

Wait-wait-wiat...WHAT?!?! Did he just advocate the muder of George Soros?

Why hasn't it happened?

Because you're a bat-shit lunatic?

I have a theory: Fear — like so much of what of what motivates humanity. Let me offer an example: Believe it or not, I frequently work in the area of print and broadcast media advertising. It's on the production end, thank God, but there's a phenomenon I've noticed that is both disturbing and indicative of how successful the Left's propaganda machine has been.

I have a theory for you too, pal. it's called life imprisonment with a cellmate named Bubba. I'll let you mull that one over for a while.

Newspaper circulation is down nationwide, as are major television network shares. Yet the two top radio markets are country music and talk radio, both of which have a majority conservative audience. Still, intimidated advertisers pussyfoot around the issue of reflecting majority values for fear some Greens, gay activists or the ACLU will descend upon them and take a flamethrower to their business.

Or threaten them with assassination? I think you've got that one covered, Erik.

So-called experts (politicians, academics and diplomats) like to present social issues as complicated so that Americans will continue to defer to their "wisdom."

And presumably still respec their "advanced degrees" and "decades of experience." Tool.

If I'm to be a voice in the wilderness, I'm going to be an earsplitting, goblet-shattering, seizure-inducing one.

Most of the way there, chief. Most of the way.

See you next week, kids! Sleep tight...

Notes from the Asylum

2006-12-29T13:57:00.000-05:00

Today's column features a previously ignored author and new arrival to our site here at BTP, beacause if there's something we really love doing, it's broadening our cultural horizons. Her name is Melanie Morgan and despite the faulty logic and assinine writing style which seem to be her trademark items, she is not in fact related to a captain of the same surname (although she does seem to like to hit up a few shots of his product before launching into another diatribe. Not to mention the fact that it takes a very special brand of wingnut to maintain even at this late hour that the war, despite the elitist media reports, is going swimmingly, and indeed would be going even more swimmingly if it wasn't for the areforementioned liberal media emboldening our enemies and disheartening the American public at home. Or something.). Anyway, here goes.

Winning in Iraq despite the liberal media
Posted: December 29, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

I promised myself that this week's column would have nothing to do with the war, or our troops or the outrages that pass for news in this country.

But, this promise, like so many past New Year's resolutions has gone the way of all the others...lost somewhere amongst the bon-bon wrappers and spent wine cooler bottles. Carry on!

But, that was before I picked up this morning's newspaper and saw another egregious example of the liberal media trying to twist public opinion to their liking.

The latest outrage that's got me madder than a cat on a hot tin roof and sent my blood pressure sky-high was this headline: "U.S. Deaths in Iraq Exceed 9-11 Count."

Indeed. Journalism majors-ladies and gentlemen, take note. What is in the world of wingnuttia "another egreious example of the liberal media bias trying to twist public opinion to their liking" is often concurrently identified as "objective fact" in the rest of society. Those of you willing to placate your conservative readers are advised to change your headlines to something less troublesome and odious to their senisbilities. Something like "U.S. deaths in Iraq do not Exceeed 9-11 Count." It may not be true, but damn, it'll make you popular.

The Associated Press proudly proclaimed the banner news on Dec. 26, not even trying to disguise their glee.

"The U.S. military death toll in Iraq has reached 2,974, one more than the number of deaths in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, according to an Associated Press count on Tuesday."

The accompanying press photos included a shot of rows upon rows of body bags, adorable puppies, and a huge, full-color fireworks display with the caption reading "SCORE!!!!"

Excuse me! What a pitiable excuse for journalistic judgment. If I weren't so used to this slanted, biased, out-of-context information about the war in Iraq, I might laugh. But nothing about this countless recitation of so-called information is even remotely funny when American lives are at stake.

I agree with Stephen Colbert on this one. Indeed I too quivver with rage at the very though of these elitist Islamocommunist newspapers using the shield of the First Ammendment to advance their fact-based agenda.

Nor does this article do anything to illuminate the public about the war, why we are fighting it and why we are winning it. Yep. I said WINNING IT.

While I don't agree with Melanie on her assertion that we are winning the war in Iraq (with even George Bush having jumped off that ship a while ago), I do agree with her that we need more newspaper coverage in various underreported aspects of the war in Iraq. However exploring, documenting, and actually pinning down the exact reason "why we are fighting" Operation Shifting Rationale is more worthy of a multi-volume encyclopedia than a single newspaper article. I seem to recall there being some talk of Weapons of Mass Destruction, UN Resolutions, Iraqi involvement in 9-11, freedom of the Iraqi people, dominoes of democracy and the attempts of Saddam Hussein to aquire Vorgon Battlecruisers, but I could be wrong.

I did a cursory Internet search after that damnable wire story crossed, and allow me to be a bit presumptuous and rewrite today's repackaged propaganda that emanates from the dirty, cramped cubicles that most media occupy.

Oh that blasted media and its dirty, dirty cubicles! This message brought to you by Melanie Morgan and the Department for Factual Patriotism and Media Sanitation.

The headline should have read: "50,000 Iraqi Insurgents Dead, Caught"

That didn't take much work on my part. No, I didn't really even crack a sweat. It is an ACTUAL headline from the Washington Times dated July 26, 2005. The numbers now are undoubtedly higher. That works out to about a 17-to-1 kill ratio for our side. The side most Americans want to actually win this war.

Because if the Vietnam war taught us anything, it's that the side with the most casualties loses. In which case, the Iraqi civilians are the biggest losers. At an estimated 600,000, that makes the civilian to U.S. soldier casualty ratio 201:1, and the civilian to "terrorist" ratio 12:1. Ain't that a bitch?

Peter Mulhern, a conservative writer at the American Thinker, posits that there is this insane argument in the press today that Americans are using disproportionate force in Iraq, killing innocent civilians and not enough of the bad guys.

Oddly enough, all the article did to set you off was point out that more Americans have now died on a fruitless military adventure and vanity war in Iraq than were ever killed during the events of 9-11, the perennial piss-pants, trumps-all wingnut arguement to justify, well, pretty much everything. Tool.

Yet when numbers of dead terrorist insurgents are released, most of the media ignore it. AP is busy keeping count of American casualties but can't seem to find the number for the enemy killed or captured. The sad reality is that they are only looking for facts to support their liberal political position, not to inform the American people.

Yeah and I'm sure that if the Media had reported in 1973 that the NVA and Viet Cong had suffered close to 1.7 MILLION casualties (both killed and wounded), it would have totally reinvigorated the American public and given us just the dedication we needed to keep on fighting the war to the bitter end. Idiot.

The intellectual giants at the New York Times and networks want to have it both ways – too many American lives are being lost in Iraq AND that our troops are killing too many people. The liberals never make the distinction that these "innocent civilians" are oftentimes actually sympathizers or actively involved in blowing up those who stand with freedom.

Terrorist?

Terrorist?

Terrorist?

Terrorist?

Terrorist.

The plain truth is that al-Qaida has virtually been eliminated in Iraq thanks to the best-trained soldiers in American history.

Which is no doubt why they staged a large walkabout in Mosul in broad daylight last week, distributed leaflets, and generally made a ruckus of themselves before disappearing again. Or why 70% of Iraqi sheiks have pledged allegiance or otherwise offered them support.

The pockets of insurgents that hide in the shadows of Baghdad suburbs are on the run and resorting to cowardly mini-bombs they hide under concrete or in the roadside garbage in two provinces.

Which is kinda like saying that since nly two cities were attacked on 9-11, the incidents were fairly minor in the grand scheme of things and not really worth all the fuss.

Don't be confused by the unfortunate sectarian violence that is occurring in Iraq today. There is a battle between various factions for control of the country, and the effort to get Iraqis to abandon violence and use the democratic process is a difficult and necessary road.

Shorter Melanie Morgan: The fact that various Iraqi factions are fighting each other for control of the country only underscores the great job we've done in briging them freedom and democracy.

But the media and the Blame America First crowd have quietly changed their refrain from "we are losing the war to the terrorists" to "we can't stop a civil war." Wait a minute. What happened to our losing to terrorists? We didn't lose. We won. It is too bad President Bush can't put a few sentences together to explain it to the American public.

Melanie, please note. Losing to the terrorists and being unable to stop a civil war are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, one might even argue that a burgeoning Iraqi civil war is proof that we have already lost. And as for the president being unable to explain what exactly is going on in Iraq, I seem to recall that his best feature in the 2004 election was his being a strong a decisive leader. Not some wishy-washy flip-flopper. Ah well.

But the facts are pretty clear that we have won the war against a brutal regime that increasingly supported and aided the international Islamic terrorist network. With lots of oil money and weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a threat to American security.

1) Saddam had no connections to international terrorism.
2) Saddam couldn't sell his oil outside of the UN oil-for-food program
3) Saddam had no WMD and had abandoned his WMD project after the 1991 Gulf War.

Seriously, at this point, I'm about ready to freaking give up. And no, I'm not going to link to the 9-11 comission report or any of the other documents which prove the above facts. You can do it. Just fire up "teh google." You'll be fine.

The leadership in this country has failed to win the peace and has led us to a yawning precipice where just a gentle push by the left sends us tumbling into a catastrophic loss for the United States.

I thought the war was already won, Melanie, and that we'd only win if the damned liberal media gave it a rest. So are you backtracking now?

Tearing down Saddam Hussein's statue in the first weeks after the Iraq war began is a perfect metaphor for our inability to stabilize the region.

As was slapping an American flag over his face, much to the horror of the onlooking Iraqis.

Who can forget the live video as Iraqi civilians approached the statue, slapping their shoes at the man who oppressed them for over 30 years? Iraqi men and teenage boys soon swarmed the statue, clawing and tugging, pushing and prodding at the murderous dictator's likeness.

All happily bought and paid for by our good friend (and convicted fraudster) Ahmed Chalabi.

But it took the military might of a few American soldiers inside their Bradley tanks to crash the egomaniacal dictator's statue to Earth. The next live footage showed an American flag being hoisted and then, just as quickly, coming down, replaced with an Iraqi flag.

Whoopsies!

The generals back at CENTCOM were watching too and quickly sent out the order that the symbolism wouldn't play in the eyes of the haters of the United States, giving the order to switch those flags.

Well that, and it was freaking offensive as hell to the average Arab around the entire Middle East. Nothing says "we come in peace and brotherhood" to the entire Muslim world like a live Al Jazeera feed of American soldiers pulling down a monument and plastering it with an American flag. But hey at least you have the courage to sort of admit that the event wasn't as spontaneous and genuine as originally billed.

Politics, once again, triumphed over victory. If we are to prevail, one lesson that our leaders have to learn: We cannot back away from victory.

Oddly enough, that's exactly what I'm doing with this column. I only hope I left the back door open.

Some really good friends told me recently that I need to lighten up. Smile. Celebrate Christmas. Write about all the good news in the world today that might have been snubbed by our mostly liberal media. Yes, I thought, that is good advice.

Cheif Psychologist's Report, Belleview State Mental Hospital

I am happy to report that as of this morning, we have made some major breakthroughts in our study of Patient 18769. Although we knew from the very beginning that she was suffering from delusions of grandeur and utterly irrational, locked as she was in her fantasy world, Doctor Throckmorton's encouragement of "Melanie" to put her thoughts into writing seems to have paid off. Apparently "Melanie" fancies herself to be a successful, popular, well-paid conservative columnist and oftentimes mistakes members of the nursing staff for her "friends" and "admirers," while referring to Dr. Throckmorton as her "publisher" and the other inmates as members of the "liberal media elite." While these breakthroughs are fairly significant, I believe much remainst o be done before Patient 18769 is finally cured of her delusions, if ever.

I guess I'll just have to make a new resolution for 2007, because now I feel compelled to dive into the cesspool of liberal sanctimony.

Doctor's Report, Addendum

At approximately 4:26 this morning I received a call at my house from Dr. Lambert, the duty physician on staff at Ward A, reporting that Patient 18769 had begun another round of fecal obession and was even now being put in 4-point restraints lest she begin another episode of cropophilia. This is discouraging news to say the least, and I now begin to fear that Patient 18769 will never recover. Nevertheless, I will continue to do my best and check in on her progress as often as my busy schedule allows.

Cartoon fun!

2006-12-28T12:33:00.000-05:00

This just in from MSNBC.com.

SAN FRANCISCO - An advertising campaign featuring cartoon characters shaped like male genitalia encouraged more men to get tested for syphilis in San Francisco, according to a new study.

A picture of the cartoon can be found below.

I think I speak for a lot of men when I say that it is every man's dream to have a penis so large it can justify wearing a trenchoat and a fedora. Though I'm not sure about the sunglasses. Makes him seem a little suspicious to me.