Raging Right Wing Republican

For those of us who are politically informed, and therefore Republican.

Thursday, November 30, 2006

Orgasms for peace

Ah, the left. So imaginative in their protests, which always seem to involve:
1) Bad, distasteful nudity of the sort of people who shouldn't be permitted to be naked outside their own homes

2) Shocking (yawn) defiliation of religious icons

3) Public sex between people who shouldn't be allowed to have sex within their own homes
These geniuses have found a solution to all the world's troubles:
The Global Orgasm for Peace was conceived by Donna Sheehan, 76, and Paul Reffell, 55, whose immodest goal is for everyone in the world to have an orgasm Dec. 22 while focusing on world peace.
They even look the way these people always look like.

Their website: Of course they have one, and of course folksy acoustic guitar plays when you click on it.

Update, people. Update.
The intent is that the participants concentrate any thoughts during and after orgasm on peace. The combination of high-energy orgasmic energy combined with mindful intention may have a much greater effect than previous mass meditations and prayers.

The goal is to add so much concentrated and high-energy positive input into the energy field of the Earth that it will reduce the current dangerous levels of aggression and violence throughout the world.
I don't know, man... sounds good, but is there science to back up these notions?

There sure is, brother. There sure is.
The Zero Point Field or Quantum Field surrounds and is part of everything in the universe. It can be affected by human consciousness, as can be seen when simple observation of a subatomic particle changes the particle's state.

We hope that a huge influx of physical, mental and spiritual energy with conscious peaceful intent will not only show up on Princeton's REGs, but will have profound positive effects that will change the violent state of the human world.
Whew! For a second there I was worried this was some blend of hippy-dippy dreamsurfing and transgressive new-age pop neoalchemy. I'm glad there's a persuasive, scientifically robust explanation for how this will work.

Science.

So, looks pretty legit to me. I guess I'll have to retract my initial skepticism.

George swims

Anti-flying Green George Monbiot bragged that he hadn't flown in a year, and demanded similar austerity from his fellow environmentalists:
If even the leaders of the green movement are not prepared to live without flying then how can we expect that of other people?
He turned up in Vancouver to promote his new book. I wonder how he got there.

"Scientists believe..."

The New York Times reports a collapsed consensus:
Twenty years ago most scientists believed that deforestation was an inexorable result of industrialization and that the earth would soon be virtually denuded of trees.
Well, that's great; all those doomsaying scientists were wrong and the big trees are making a comeback. Yet the same people who so eagerly dismiss the presumably well-researched beliefs of experts just 20 years ago now view it as sacrilege to even try to question today's global warming alarmists.

Gun laws tighter, gun crimes up

In Sydney, only outlaws have guns:
Crime in the NSW capital is on the way up for the first time in six years - with a 71 per cent increase in gun crime in parts of western Sydney.
More laws might help! No; wait. They've already banned almost everything with a trigger. How the hell is this happening?

Semi-annual "UN peacekeepers raping kids" update

And here it is, straight from the BBC.

Back in '05, the sexual abuse in Haiti and Liberia drew this bold promise from one senior UN official:
"The blue helmet has become black and blue through self-inflicted wounds," Jane Holl Lute, a senior U.N. peacekeeping official who heads a U.N. task force on sexual exploitation, told a congressional committee investigating allegations that U.N. personnel participated in rape, prostitution and pedophilia in Congo. "We will not sit still until the luster of that blue helmet is restored."
A year and a half later and where are the new allegations coming from? Haiti and Liberia, of course. Fortunately, there was one senior UN official available for comment:
"We've had a problem probably since the inception of peacekeeping - problems of this kind of exploitation of vulnerable populations," Jane Holl Lute told the BBC.

"My operating presumption is that this is either a problem or a potential problem in every single one of our missions."
Mark your calendars for summer '08, when shocking new UN sex scandal allegations from Haiti and Liberia splash page A1 C29 of the New York Times.

There's bad apples in every military force, including our own. The travesty here is that the suspects are free to act without fear.
The UN said it had firm knowledge of only two concrete examples of sex offenders being sent to jail, although it believed there could be others it did not know about.
Why have only two sex offenders been sent to jail? Because much of the rest of the world takes a more, shall we say, sophisticated approach than us dumb simpleminded American folk:
At the time, the U.N.'s top official in Cambodia, Yasushi Akashi, played down the gravity of the allegations, saying, "Boys will be boys."
Boys will be boys!

Canada's finest

What exciting Canadian speaker did the Liberals pick to open their convention this week in Montreal?

Try Howard Dean. Chairman of the Democratic National Committee -- the American Democratic National Committee -- and former presidential candidate. Ring a bell?

Dean told the Liberals not to go all conservative or anything. He also promised not to scream, which was right considerate of him.


"My fellow Canadians."

No Iron Frist

In what apparently reveals the declining quality of what constitutes "news" today, Senator Bill Frist made headlines by announcing he won't be seeking the Presidency in 2008 after ineptly grooming himself for it over the last several years.

Woo-hoo. Get out and don't come back, failure.

I thought this was a joke

Then I learned that when a federal judge speaks, get ready for comedy!
WASHINGTON -- By keeping all U.S. currency the same size and texture, the government has denied blind people meaningful access to money, a federal judge said Tuesday. . . .

He said he wouldn't tell officials how to fix the problem, but he ordered them to begin working on it within 10 days. The American Council of the Blind has proposed several options, including printing bills of differing sizes, adding embossed dots or foil to the paper or using raised ink.
I mean, really. Give me a break. Somebody add this asshat to the list of judges to impeach in 2007.

Monday, November 27, 2006

Talking Turkey

One hesitates to write these words but Pope Benedict XVI asked for prayers Sunday for his visit to Turkey this week. According to the news summaries, the pontiff asked Catholics to pray not for his safety, but that the "pilgrimage might yield the fruits that God desires."

Let's hope God isn't in the mood for a holy war to end all holy wars. (On the other hand...) That's what could happen this time if a Turkish gunman gets off a lucky shot.

Global warming threatens to melt ice caps, drown us all

No, wait, it threatens to thicken ice caps and freeze us all.

Look, we don't know what the hell "global warming" is going to do -- we don't even know if it will "warm" us, necessarily -- but whatever the science, Jesus wants you to drive a Prius.

Just youths, throwing stones

Pebbles, in fact.

A Palestinian youth throws stones at Israeli army troops, not seen, in clashes during an arrest operation in the West Bank town of Ramallah, Sunday, Nov. 26, 2006. (AP Photo/Nasser Shiyoukhi)

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Pictures of animals, in the womb


A dolphin at 29 weeks.

The elephant one is even cooler:


Gloria Steinem just wrote to assert that this is "not an elephant life."

I'm always amused by the absurd semantic claim by pro-choicers -- that what is both "alive" and "human" is somehow not "human life." Like it's a platypus or something.

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Scarlett Johansson attacks President Bush


Her Cameron Diaz moment:
SCARLETT JOHANSSON has slammed US PRESIDENT GEORGE W BUSH for his staunch conservative views on sex, criticising the Republican for being too unrealistic in his opinions on the topic.
The LOST IN TRANSLATION movie star last month (10OCT06) boasted about being so "socially aware" she gets tested for HIV twice a year.
"Socially aware"? Back in my day they just called that bein' a good-old fashioned whore.

Apparently, Johansson is a feminist. This is pretty much all it takes according to the modern definition:
Johansson says, "We are supposed to be liberated in America but if our President had his way, we wouldn't be educated about sex at all. "Every woman would have six children and we wouldn't be able to have abortions."
Or they could, you know, just not run around having sex all over the place.

Abortions or six children? Isn't there a third option in there, somewhere? Oh well. At least she has that awesome rack.

And check out this stellar piece of reporting:
A staunch Christian, Bush is vehemently anti-abortion and is seeking to have the operation made illegal in all US states.
How did we all miss the Grand Anti-Abortion Executive Order of 2006, which attempted to bypass both the courts and Congress in its blatant abuse of executive power?

Monday, November 20, 2006

Greatest name ever

Jonah Goldberg:
A friend sent me an email from The Palm in DC. It says that the Executive Chef there is named Hoss Fuentes which, I think, every fair-minded person in the world can agree is the greatest name ever. It would work for everything from an ultimate fighting champion to a porn star to a general.

Update: Exactly! From a reader:
Knowing nothing else about the man, 90% of this country would follow a man named Hoss Fuentes to hell
and back.
Charge!

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

When believing Saddam had WMDs was cool

Funny what time does to people...


Ouch. That's going to leave a mark.

But wait! That can't be true! Bush lied, people died! THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED!

Apparently these WMDs only exist when the President has a "D" next to his name.

The real Donald Rumsfeld

We're lucky he's gone now, aren't we?

Republicans have learned nothing

They're not called The Stupid Party for nothing. Did you actually think they'd learn a lesson?

Apparently not. Big spendin' Republican Boehner will keep his position, and pro-amnesty affirmative-action flake Mel Martinez will lead the RNC, instead of Michael Steele.

More spending and amnesty -- a perfect plan to win back disillusioned conservatives in '08! They're charting a new way to fix the problems: more of the same people from the establishment that causes them in the first place!

Real or satire?

Here's a left-wing item so absurd you have to wonder if the whole thing isn't a right-wing joke, a la the entire content of The Nation:
Saddam [Hussein] had achieved almost universal adult literacy and Baghdadi meant "wealthy"in Arabic slang when his administration became a target for devastating sanctions and war. . . .

Iran has invested its oil wealth in universal education, healthcare, infrastructure bringing clean water and electricity to more than 98 percent of its people, and economic progress. . . . The social and economic achievements of the revolutionary regime in Iran in the past 25 years look quite progressive in reducing poverty and social inequalities. . . . Compared to rising inequality in the United States and Israel, ranked numbers one and two for social inequality among developed nations, the Iranians look pretty damn good.
Did somebody from The Onion write this?

This is the kind of thing left-wingers used to say about communist regimes, but at least in that case you could write it off as the triumph of wishful thinking over reality. Here, we have a lefty praising one of the world's most backwards and reactionary regimes for being progressive, at least when compared to the Great Satan the United States and its Little Satan, Israel. Or someone pretending to be a lefty making a hilarious joke.

AP: We have no honesty

The Associated Press reports that the Bush administration says that "Guantanamo Bay prisoners have no right to challenge their detentions," though they do have protections if tried before military commissions.

So according to this story, the administration is arguing that while the detainees don't have the right to file civil lawsuits, they do have procedural protections if tried before military commissions. In addition -- although the AP doesn't mention this, crucially -- all detainees receive a hearing to review their designation as enemy combatants, and each year they go before a review board, the equivalent of a parole hearing, to determine if they can be released without threatening US security.

Yet the AP headlines its story "Administration: Detainees Have No Rights."

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

In other news

Bush makes a laugh

His daddy, I mean:
[Bush] recalled a demonstration that was on hand for his arrival in San Francisco, describing it as big, and led by the "ugliest woman I've ever seen in my life." The woman approached his limousine with a sign and shouted "stay out of my womb!"

"I thought 'Lady, there's absolutely no problem," Bush said.

Monday, November 13, 2006

Party of "cut and run" wants to cut and run

Surprise, surprise: Democrats say will push for Iraq withdrawal.

That didn't take very long.

The Simpsons insults the troops

Oh, great. Now Matt Groening's crazy too.

Been a while since anyone called The Simpsons "the most conservative show on television," eh? Been a while since anyone called it "funny," either.

"Bipartisanship" means "doing what Democrats want"

As blatantly proven here:
The Bush administration is intent on overcoming Democratic opposition to U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, the White House said on Sunday, but top Democrats said Congress would not confirm the outspoken envoy. . . .

"Mr. President, if you really mean it, that you really want to cooperate and have a bipartisan (support) -- play by the rules, Mr. President. ... Send somebody else," Sen. Joseph Biden, a Delaware Democrat who is expected to head the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January, said on "This Week."
Evidently, there are "rules" to being "bipartisan." And coincidentally enough, they favor the Democrats' point of view.

Ephemism watch

As "undocumented worker" becomes increasingly widespread, keep an eye out for the open-borders crowd to see if they adopt the Canadian euphemism for illegal aliens: non-status immigrants.

Sunday, November 12, 2006

Germany to prosecute Rumsfeld for "war crimes"

Is this supposed to be some sort of joke? It should be a litmus test for who to laugh out of the room.

And here I thought that as an American citizen Rumsfeld was entitled to trial in American courts, which have yet to see him as a war criminal, which itself is hilarious -- although I suppose the Germans would know a thing or two about abusing their prisoners.

This is exactly why America should never submit itself to the authority of any foreign courts and the "international laws" that those noble bodies at the UN craft.

Et tu, Fox?

Fox is increasingly beginning to look like it's competitors. Even it now runs such headlines as "Violence Erupts in Baghdad."

No, volcanoes erupt. Violence doesn't just happen by itself. It requires perpetrators. The perpetrators of the violence in Iraq are Baathists, al Qaeda terrorists, and Islamist militias, both Sunni and Shia.

Since that's routinely glossed over, much of the world, including now many Americans, agree with George McGovern and Co. -- that is to say they believe it's high time those attempting to protect innocent Iraqis stop interfering with the killers.

Friday, November 10, 2006

The Late Late Show salutes Rumsfeld

This was actually pretty funny.

It's official: RNC asks Michael Steele to lead party


A brown person?

Wow, things are changing quickly.

Michael Steele is the man. This is a bold, smart, terrifying new direction for Republicans.

Karl Rove is against it, but who cares.

Then again, Steele still has a lot of potential for other offices, even though he lost, since he kept it so narrow even as he was navigating the Deep Blue in Maryland.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Dem victories: Part of Rove's master plan?

Since Bush and the Republicans clearly stole the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, are we to assume they threw this one?

The Dem "hit list"

A breakdown of "the first 100 hours" is here. Impeachment even gets a mention, like I expected. Maybe the Democrats really will be this stupid for the next two years.

Here's hoping.

A dramatic interpretation of the GOP's last two years

"I feel liberated"

Rush Limbaugh:
'I feel liberated... I no longer have to carry the water for people who don't deserve it'...
It's like being a lawyer with a bad client. Except the client is the Republican Party, which had become unmoored from its conservative principles. As its advocate, it's hard to make a compelling case for Republicans staying in power when they've done nothing to offer a reason to get re-eleced other than the fact that the Democrats could be worse.

Which is true. But when that's all you've got to work with, it's hard to conclude anything other than that Republicans got a good old fashioned drubbing -- which they earned.

The defeat was a setback, but it is also good not only for our party but more importantly for our ideas and ideals. We lost the "battle of ideas" because the Republican Party showed up without any ammo, namely, ideas. New leadership must emerge, leadership that understands our principles, can articulate them, and will not abandon them. A long overdue conservative reckoning must now begin.

That's the end of that

We got wrecked.

Oh well. All that we can do is prepare for the next election. What we can't do is fall into the trap that liberals fall in when they lose elections: blame "the people" for being dumb oafs who have to be led around by the nose. That's why despite losing election after election it never occurs to them that perhaps it isn't the idiocy of the people that makes them lose but what they're doing.

The Republicans have a chance to clean up their act and come back in 2008. The Democrats are going to have a chance to show America the effectiveness of their policies, and after that trainwreck is over, we'll be ready to go at it again.

And it wasn't conservatives who lost. It was Republicans. It was Republicans who decided that holding power was more important than anything else, like representing the principles that got them there in the first place. The only conservatives in the election were on the Democrat side.

Furthermore, liberals didn't win. Nobody is going to interpret these Democratic votes as votes for socialized medicine and retreat from the war in Iraq. If that was the case then Ned Lamont, Joe Lieberman's far Left challenger, would have soared to victory instead of crashed to defeat.

Historically, this election was no surprise. Traditionally, the midterms wreak havoc on the party in power, as has been the case since the end of WW2. What has been surprising is that Bush's team has avoided it for so long, giving Karl Rove an impressive track record despite this loss.

The election turned on weariness in the war, historical trends, and corruption, but most of all, it could have all been avoided if the Republican Party simply governed as the conservatives they campaigned as.

Rumsfeld resigns

The President announced it earlier during the day at a press conference. The reporters there were grinding on my nerves. Their normal haughty stature was replaced by a cocky and preening post-election ostentatiousness that could only be rivaled by John Kerry. They were needling the President at every turn, who looked off his game and bewildered, over issues that had nothing to do with the conference at all. If this is going to be the marker for a President Bush that's off balance, that's troubling, especially given the new environment he'll be facing in Washington DC.

In any case, Rumsfeld got bagged. There wasn't really any good reason for him to resign, especially now. If there were reasons for him to resign, then why now, after the election? Why didn't he resign before the election, when, you know, we could've gotten some benefit from it? Instead they waited until it was too late; another bungling in a long series of mess ups.

Let's examine the various so-called "arguments" as to why Rumsfeld should have stepped down. None of them except perhaps one have any merit.
ABU GHRAIB: Yes, Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defense in the Pentagon, but I'm assuming that when you assign blame to people you're going to do it on the basis of who actually did something to earn that ire. The despicable acts in Abu Ghraib was the handiwork of a few deranged individuals who no more represented Rumsfeld or American policy any more than a random criminal off the street does.

GUANTANAMO BAY: More reverberations of Abu Ghraib, except this time under the assumption that it's somehow going on under secret approval without anybody blowing the cover off of it despite the fact that it's the most transparent detention facility in history. Many cite so-called egregious human rights "abuses," but they're picking them up from gullible human rights groups who get those reports from the captive terrorists themselves, who are trained to lie and defame their captors. It's like asking a rapist if his victim was willing; of course he'll say whatever it takes to discredit the other side. Others simply are too queasy at the prospect of "coercive interrogations." To those I say: tough. We have to get information from the terrorists somehow, and the techniques we've used hardly qualify as "torture" in any sense of the word. If you count psychological stress as "torture," then the word has been stretched to the point of losing all meaning, and virtually any tactic whatsoever is off limits. Even "good cop, bad cop" falls under this umbrella because it involves pressuring the suspect.

What's perhaps most telling of the nature of Guantanamo Bay is that the detainees themselves don't want to leave once they enter, and that they gain 20 pounds, which is a first for a so called "concentration camp."

WAR PLANNING: This is where I can see legitimate criticism made of Rumsfeld's handling of the war. And yet, the most criticized aspect of it, the troops counts, is also one that isn't so cut and dry. When the decision was first being made, it wasn't so obvious which would give better results: a smaller faster army or a larger more conventional one. Since we didn't want to have a heavy American footprint in a country we didn't want to alienate under a crushing occupation, and because having soldiers everywhere would make us clumsier and more susceptible to the hit and run attacks the terrorists in Iraq excel at, it made sense to send a more maneuverable force into Iraq and to keep the peace.

It may turn out that having a soldier and a tank on every street corner may work out better, but this isn't some sort of example of gross negligence on Rumsfeld's part that his critics have made it out to be.
So aside from these reasons, if they aren't truly worth going after him over, why do people hate him so much?

It can be attributed to the military itself. It is one of the most firmly entrenched bureaucracies and institutions to ever exist, and by its very nature, is conservative and fiercely resistant to change. Rumsfeld was tasked with the job of modernizing the military and turning it from a mostly conventional army into a "shock and awe" lightning squad that could break the enemy's back with precision and efficiency. In this, he's succeeded, but as in any bureaucracy involved in violent shakeups, you will make many enemies along the way, as there are people in every sector who make a living doing the various tasks which may be considered outdated and unnecessary.

As far as I can see his resignation was for purely political reasons; the pressure after the election was about to break the Administration's back and they had to give something, anything, to get breathing time.

Still, it'll probably only embolden Bush's critics and encourage another headhunt. What a waste.

The election in a nutshell

DEMOCRATS: Had enough?

REPUBLICANS: It could be worse!

VOTERS: Let's find out.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Rush on Santorum

He was great today.

You know when they say there's a time for panic?

It's that time!

On the bright side, Lincoln Chafee, liberal Republican extraordinaire, is a loser. I mean in the literal sense, that he's lost the election. And Joe Lieberman beat Ned Lamont.

In perhaps the final piece of good news we'll have tonight, my dinner was especially delicious and that cat will get what it has coming.

The Republicans better win

Or there's going to be a lot of bets I'm going to be looking at to make up for...

We knew it was coming...

They're calling Santorum's race in favor of Casey. Santorum lost.

This wasn't unexpected, but what's a complete shame is the empty suit of a man that's going to be replacing him. How he managed to win over Santorum is what's truly puzzling. He got shredded in every debate, he ran an "invisible man" campaign and practically ran screaming every time the cameras showed up and he had absolutely nothing to offer. Casey tried to sell his pro-life stance as an alternative to Santorum for more conservative voters, even though he's already revealed that, well, he's not actually going to do anything pro-life. Any independent positions he holds are going to get quickly whipped into the party line once he enters Washington. He's practically in favor of amnesty for illegals, and is woefully ignorant of foreign policy and lacking in an approach to Iraq and Iran.

My only guess is that Santorum was so hated for his vigorous defense of Iraq and President Bush, as well as his stance on gay marriage, that it overrode everything else, despite the fact that he's Casey's better in every possible way as a Senator.

What really gets me is that the Republican in Mark Foley's seat -- the gay pedophile that tried to get at male pages -- is looking like he might win, but Santorum lost.

On the note of other races, don't pay attention to any of the exit polls. They're garbage. They were trash in 2004 and they're trash now. The same exit polls that are being used to forecast Democratic sweeps before the voting has even been finished were the same ones that said Kerry would take Pennsylvania by a whopping 20 points. Riiiiight.

In any case, the battle in Pennsylvania may have been lost, but the Republicans can still win the greater war throughout the country. Other Republicans are much better off.

The final stretch


I voted for Santorum. If he wins in the current environment it'll be an amazing victory. And yet no man deserves to win more than he does in this election season.

The GOP's made a last minute comeback. They went from 17 points down last month to 9 points down two weeks ago to a 4 point deficit a night ago. We're back in it! It's definitely going to be close; neck and neck 'til the finish. It's not going to be a Democratic sweep across the states, a "blue tidal wave" that the pundits have been gleefully predicting for months.

Meanwhile there's accusations of voter fraud flying left and right. I've already heard that voting machines across Pennsylvania are breaking down and there's even been some cases of assault. If it keeps going there's going to be another army of lawyers getting ready to go at it before it's over. The Democrats have been laying the groundwork for a "we won or they stole it" strategy going into the election, so it's only the beginning.

The only question now is who actually gets out and votes. Will the Republican get-out-the-vote-effort be as well oiled a machine as it's been in the past? I certainly hope so. The Republican turnout so far is higher than it was in 2004.

Karl Rove thinks we'll keep both Houses. He's yet to be wrong. I think we may narrowly lose the House, but keep the Senate, enough to prevent Democrats from exercising any effective control. But I don't want to jinx anything.

Monday, November 06, 2006

The election needs everybody's involvement

So what are you going to do tomorrow to intimidate Democrats away from the polls? I'm going to stand near the entrance to a polling place while wielding my baton and ask each person entering, "You're voting for Republicans, right?" If I don't get an answer, I'll keep pushing the person and persisting until he runs off.

Just old style intimidation; nothing fancy.

One final plea

If this doesn't make you vote Republican, then nothing will.

You should know that if the Democrats win the House and the Senate, I'll punch this dog:


Please vote Republican. I'm just a puppy and don't want to be punched.


...and kick this cat:


I probably deserve to get kicked, but vote Republican anyway.


So tune in tomorrow night, and if the Democrats win we can all cheer up by watching me punch that dog and kick this cat.

The big pre-election question

What's the biggest issue facing America right now?

The war in Iraq, of course. If we end that war in any way that can be construed as a retreat, I don't see how we'll recover. Vietnam is already an albatross hanging around the neck of any military operation, but there were over 58,000 Americans dead before we decided to call it quits there. If we give up in Iraq, and all our enemies know that the bar is lowered -- and will continue lowering -- on how much we can be hurt before we give up, that will only encourage them to hurt us all the more. Our enemies know weakness, and what would it take to teach them we mean business if we give up on Iraq? Probably a nuke, and nobody wants to go there.

At this rate, we won't want to have any deaths at all in the next conflict, and then we might as well isolate ourselves. And then the problems will just fester until they're knocking at our door.

My fear

I'm worried that if the Democrats get too much power, they'll try to turn us into Europe. I don't want to be like Europe. Europe is old and dying. America should be young and killing.

Europe, much like the Democrats, is really wussy on international issues. They say Saddam shouldn't be hung by the neck until dead because it's mean. We say Saddam should be hung by the neck until dead... because it's mean! We're mean -- mean to bad people, that is. Too much of Europe isn't mean enough. They should want to hunt down terrorists and laugh as they die. Instead, they just want a shorter work week and smelly old cheese.

So I don't want to be like Europe and I'll be very angry if the Democrats try to make us that way. I'll be so angry that I'll riot and burn cars. That intimidates people in Europe, so it should work against Democrats.

How well do hybrids burn?

Good noose from Iraq

Saddam's getting a short rope and a long drop; exactly what he deserves.
Jubilant men and boys poured onto the streets of Shiite communities across southern and central Iraq, despite a curfew imposed to try to prevent violent reactions to the verdict. . . .

A white-haired, gray-robed man in his 50s, who identified himself only as Abbas, walked among them holding up the swaddled bones of his son Hassan. . . .

On Sunday, Abbas had been taking his son's body for burial, but when he saw the demonstration, he stopped his car in the middle of the road. Soon he was jumping up and down among the crowd, holding up Hassan's bones for all to mourn.

"Saddam took my sons from me," Abbas said. He began crying. "What was the crime that my son committed? He was only 4."
Let's note that if the Democrats had their way this monster would have never been brought to justice, and would still be terrorizing the people of Iraq today. They would never have had the opportunity to participate in an electoral democracy or be given the chance to create a new life for themselves, if Howard Dean had his way. In fact, according to some, they were better off then! Try telling that to one of his victims.

It's amazing how quickly liberals, who have long prided themselves on a tradition of humanitarianism and standing up for the defenseless, have sold out on such sentiments in their all consuming pursuit of ravaging President Bush. Such idealism to spread human rights and democracy throughout the globe is apparently now a conservative position, while liberals have adopted a cynically Nixonian "to hell with them" realpolitik stance.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press "reports":
Lost in the drama of Sunday's death sentence was any mention of the failed search for the alleged weapons of mass destruction that [President] Bush said led the United States to invade and occupy Iraq in March 2003.
Lost in the AP story is any mention of John "botched joke" Kerry's suggestion last week that US troops in Iraq are uneducated failures. But of course there's no reason to mention that, since it's irrelevant.

Sunday, November 05, 2006

Seymour Hersh would like to see our troops spit on again

Support the troops?
If Americans knew the full extent of U.S. criminal conduct, they would receive returning Iraqi veterans as they did Vietnam veterans, Hersh said.

"In Vietnam, our soldiers came back and they were reviled as baby killers, in shame and humiliation," he said. "It isn't happening now, but I will tell you - there has never been an [American] army as violent and murderous as our army has been in Iraq."
Just another of the media's wonderful, patriotic, objective journalists.

Pray for rain

Because it turns out Democrats are fair-weather voters. Literally:
A new study of voter behavior confirms something political operatives have long suspected: rain hurts Democrats and helps Republicans. The study found that 1 inch of rain reduces overall turnout by slightly less than 1 percent and cuts the Democratic vote by 2.5 percentage points.

I want to become a painter


This is selling for $140 million -- the world's most expensive painting, ever.

$140 million.

For that.

Why the hell didn't I know about this earlier? It's time I hop on this gravy train. So I decided to make my own work of art:


It represents the chaos society has been thrown into from the moral decay imposed upon it by the Bush administration's fascist neo-imperialism.

Deep.

So, what's my first bid? $150 million? $160 million? C'mon people, my food doesn't buy itself.

Steele's opponent proves stupid; Kerry suggests he enlist in the military

Hilarious.

Cardin just tripped over himself and into the Grand Canyon by claiming the Patriot Act "predates" his election to Congress, thereby absolving him of any presumed liberal outrage that it passed. Steele quickly pounced with, "he's been there so long he doesn't know how long he's been there."

Cardin has served since 1987.

Now, I know I'm a forgetful guy sometimes, but I'm relatively sure the Patriot Act passed after 9/11, which, I believe, means Cardin placed the Patriot Act in the wrong century.

I know Maryland is ferociously pro-Democrat, but are they also ferociously pro-stupid?

Waterboarding

Steve Harrigan of Fox News gets the daylights waterboarded out of him, just like our soldiers do, on national television.

How does that even remotely resemble torture? If anything, we're not doing it enough.

To quote the commenters, "be the first on your block to do it! It's the new bungee jumping!"

Saturday, November 04, 2006

Four "military magazines" call for Rumsfeld's head, except they're not "military magazines"

Oops.

They're "military" magazines in the sense that they cover the military, but not in the sense that they're actually published by the armed forces.

The media is breathlessly reporting as if the Stars and Stripes had come out against Rumsfeld -- which would be so enormous it also wouldn't ever happen. (You can't criticize superiors, after all.)

So if you're imagining the actual military is in open revolt against Rumsfeld, you've been "inadvertantly misled" by our fair and balanced media. (By the way, Fox has been hyping this all day.)

Biggest story of the century: some guy you never heard of is a homo


Surprise?

According to the left, it's a very big story.

Because some guy you never heard of is also an Evangelist you never heard of, and making anti-gay statements you never heard of, while having gay sex with dudes you definitely never heard of.

But! It turns out he's a homo, so suddenly he's someone you're going to be hearing a lot about, and in fact, will become within 24 hours The Most Important Figure On The Religious Right In All History Of The Universe.

His name is seared -- seared -- into my memory, or will be, once I find out who he is.

Fundamentalist extremism on abortion

Not the sort of extremism the media typically likes to discuss, though.

Friday, November 03, 2006

Devastating wiretap ad


Whenever Republicans suggest that electing Democrats will have an adverse effect on national security, Democrats howl with indignant rage, as if the very idea that different policies will bring about different effects is beyond the scope of discussion. This is a perfect example of where the GOP and the Democrats will differ in how they approach the War on Terror. If you want the government to be able to listen in when somebody is talking to al Qaeda, then vote GOP. If you want your defenders to spend more time obsessing with the "rights" of people trying to kill us than actually defending us, vote Democrat.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

The arabs and the midterms

"Arab governments are looking for change in U.S. policy in the Middle East after the midterm elections," the Associated Press reports:
One thing they hope for is that a politically weakened President Bush would talk with Iran and Syria. They also hope he would show greater interest in the Palestinians and find a way out of the crisis in Iraq.
So if you want a politically weakened president cutting deals with terror-sponsoring dictatorships, vote Democratic on Nov. 7.

I love John Kerry

He said the other day, if you haven't heard by now, that if you don't study and work hard, you'll never get that cushy office job -- after all, who in their right mind would want to serve their country? -- and get stuck in Iraq. So I guess under the umbrella of idiots who don't know what's good for them by putting themselves into danger we can throw in firefighters and police officers to accompany the military, no?


Kerry.

The gift that keeps on giving.

What's ensued is a pile-on of monstrous proportions as everybody from Republicans to Democrats to Hillary to President Bush have denounced and distanced themselves from the remarks.


Even McCain has been body slamming Kerry over it, and he's not letting go, calling for an apology for his "insensitive and hurtful remarks."

Displaying his legendary political acumen, Kerry decided to take the shovel he'd been tossed and dig deeper by saying that he "apologize[s] to no one". He then turned that into an explanation that what he actually meant to do was insult Bush, and apparently now it's just a "botched joke."

He was for the comment before he was against it!

Howard Dean, an expert on devastating gaffes, dismissed it as a blooper. So I guess we know for sure now it's a wreck.

This is great. A week before the election, when all the non-committed voters begin to actually tune in, Kerry has tossed the Republicans the ultimate bone. I can already see the ads now. I can already hear "Democrats" and "the troops are dumb" playing.

And, really, isn't that what they believe? Liberals are always going on about how there's "class discrimination" involved with the military and how "they have no choice" and how they only serve out of "economic desperation," and what not.

This liberal analysis of the military was formed during the 60s, when it somewhat applied due to the draft, but it's outdated, and only serves to illustrate how out of touch the Democratic leadership and their liberal followers are with the military of today. The military of the draft looks far different than the military of volunteers, with the average military personnel having a better education than his civilian counterpart.

Kerry is representative of the Democrats; he was their Presidential nominee. If he isn't their flagbearer, then nobody is. What he did wrong here was say what he actually believed. Now everyone can see him and his fellow Democrats for the elitists they truly are.

Liberals, meanwhile, have pursued the dual track strategy of simultaneously denying Kerry would ever say anything so heinous -- despite the fact that he's done so his whole career -- and that everything he said was actually true, thereby validating the elitist charge.

Kinda gutsy.

Of course, the idea that it's somehow unheard of for Kerry to malign the troops is what's actually unheard of. He's built his entire career on top of it, from when he first stepped foot back on American soil upon returning from Vietnam, smearing the soldiers he fought alongside so he could launch his anti-war political career.


Dynamite.

And it was just last year that he alleged that American soldiers were bursting into the homes of Iraqis at night and "terrorizing women and children." And now we can add this to the long, long list. It's just par for the course. It's who he is. And that's the man who the Democrats selected to represent them. The same Democrats that are running against Republicans now.

As for conservatives, Kerry's done what weeks of GOP campaigning hasn't been able to do: focus conservatives on why this election matters, and why they put aside the same grievances they have today with the GOP to pull the lever for them in 2004.

I don't know how much Karl Rove's been paying him, but whatever it is, it's not enough.