Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Mel Gibson has agreed to make last minute changes in his new movie about the death of Christ, including acting in it himself. No longer will anyone be able to accuse the film of blaming the Jews. Gibson has inserted scenes and characters pointing the finger at completely different villains. These are rather a surprise, because none of them are mentioned in the official source. The actor-producer clearly resented being forced to make any changes, and shows that in a very petty way in his revisions.

According to the conservative web site Scrooge Report, the pressure on Gibson came from Presidential politics. George Bush, trailing likely Demagogic Party nominee John Heinz-Kerry, needed a success in foreign policy. He insisted that Israeli Prime Minister Sharon actually dismantle some settlements in occupied territories, to encourage Palestinian terrorists to negotiate. Sharon demanded a price for compliance. To distract extremists in his coalition, he needed to prove that he was defending Jews against attacks abroad. Bush had to agree to force Gibson to delete offensive parts of his new film.

An administration official called the actor from an undisclosed location and made it blunt. Alter the movie or be sent to Guantanamo as a domestic supporter of terrorism, on the grounds that he would be stirring up anger against one of our allies. Gibson fumed that in Hollywood, when a character was murdered, "Somebody had to take the fall for those murders." He turned to the obvious patsy, the Romans. Remnants of the Italian American Anti-Defamation League decided that might stir prejudice against them, but he refused their demand not to blame the Romans. Under the impression that Gibson was Australian, they left the severed head of a kangaroo in his bed. That was convincing enough. He not only made revisions, but added a disclaimer at the end: "No Jews or Sicilians killed, crucified, or injured anyone in the making of this movie."

Gibson has now cast himself as a main character. He plays a sinful imperial (but not native Roman) centurion, whose job is trying to police the desert against anti-Roman Jewish terrorists. (Danny Glover once again plays his partner, here named Mvrtavgh.) Mel is depressed by his wife's death, and in one scene he actually puts his own sword in his mouth and threatens to kill himself. He is stopped by the sudden appearance of a vision.

Standing before him is Anne Catherine Emmerich, a nineteenth century stigmatic German nun and author of The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which is one of the other sources for the supposedly anti-Semitic tone of the original movie. ("Among other things, Emmerich claimed that the cross on which Jesus died was built in the Jewish temple on the orders of the high priest.") In a major rewrite of her views, she tells Mel that he has been selected to play a special role, just because he isn't either Jewish or Roman. He is the one who must finally kill Jesus, by piercing his side with a spear. He expresses serious doubts about doing this, but she insists. When he finally refuses her demand, she douses him with water and then has bolts of lightning hit him again and again until he agrees. Gibson also uses this torture scene to push several points of dogma. She shouts at him "You will stab Him with a spear, won't you?" *Zap* goes a lightning bolt. "And you won't eat meat on Fridays?" *Zap* "And you will only listen to Mass in Latin, right?" *Zap*

Meanwhile the movie shows the ones it really blames for the death of Christ. This is a group of insidious plotters who want to restore the old Roman Republic. These traitors to the Emperor are supported by a group of wealthy merchants, led by Enronus, whose businesses Jesus had harmed by throwing them out of the temple. The leading subversive Republicans are two members of the Frutex family, Iorge and his brother Ieb. To get revenge for the merchants they sycophantically infiltrate the court of the Roman Governor, Pilate. When he asks the mob which prisoner they want to be set free, Jesus or Kenlaius, Iorge calls for a vote, and Ieb offers to count the ballots. Behind closed doors in a judge's chamber he throws out most of those cast for Jesus, and so Kenlaius walks free.

Mel finally does kill Jesus as ordered, but wears a mask so that no one will recognize him. It does him no good. A group of his fellow soldiers who are also Republican conspirators, named after a noted opponent of the Emperor, believe Gibson's spearing of Jesus may cause their future descendants to be blamed for murdering this innocent pacifist. They capture Mel and slowly disembowel him.

These changes to the script assigning guilt to new characters are pure spitefulness. Gibson got his fingers burned by the politically unfortunate timing of his film, so has become infected with the radical liberal idea of "artistic freedom". This piece of anti-Bush propaganda is just his way of opposing reasonable movie censorship for the national good. The whole thing might as well have been made by Michael Moore.

I have received an email advising me that an interesting site I hadn't previously heard of, The Moderate Voice, has selected me as its Blog Of The Day. Clearly this is a gratifying sign that good taste is spreading across the web. As one character put it "I have so many followers I brush them out of my hair."

Sunday, February 15, 2004

Can't you control your cat's-paws better than this? One of the cleverest parts of our plan to torpedo the Democrats this fall has been endangered through a mistimed leak against John Kerry by a conservative gossip columnist named Dredge, or Sludge, or something. None of us were fooled by your manipulating that saluting dupe Wesley Clark into starting the rumor for you. This isn't the first time you've put our long range schemes at risk just to help that C-student frat rat of yours. Fortunately, some of us have thought further ahead than you and made contingency preparations, but consider this a warning. If you can't follow the script, you too can be Wellstoned.

Let's review, Karl.

We wanted the Dems to nominate Howard Dean, because he would be the perfect target. But you got worried and arranged for Saddam to be "found" now, instead of waiting till next October. That quieted the anti-war sentiment too soon, and caused the Dems to look for some other candidate, not so tied to opposing Preemptive Democratization of Iraq. Let me make this very clear, Karl. If you get spooked again and reveal Bin Laden's corpse before Labor Day just to give W a jump in the polls, we won't have any last minute surprise left. Blow this one again and never getting to do lunch in D.C. will be the least of your worries.

(I will give you points in passing for that brilliant trick of yours after Iowa. Sabotaging Howard's microphones at his election night rally so that he would have to shout to be heard, and your spinners could then attack him for "The Scream", was highly original. Since he was already politically dead after his loss, why not have some fun mangling his corpse?)

Don't let pulling the campaign strings for our current version of Zaphod Beeblebrox fool you about your importance. Like that President of the Galaxy, W is only meant to distract attention from the people really making the decisions. That group doesn't include you, Karl, so we never bothered to tell you how hard we worked to set up Dean for a fall. No one suspected our hand when we got Vermont to pass civil unions, even though it has always been one of the most loyal Republican states in the union. ("As Maine goes, so goes Vermont", said Jim Farley after FDR won every other state in 1936.) That gave us a wonderful wedge issue against Dean. When his balloon was shot down by your early revelation of Saddam, we had to fall back on plan B.

Now we want the Dems to nominate Kerry, because he's almost a good a crash test dummy as Dean. But you blinked when the new JFK's war record restarted that "Where was George?" game about his national guard duty. Chill out. Remember Thanksgiving in Baghdad? Just wait until you see what he'll be doing this Halloween -- but that would be telling.

We've been getting ready for this for years. No one understood why we tolerated moderate Republican Governors of Massachusetts. As Nixon's indicted campaign manager and Attorney General put it, "Watch what we do, not what we say." Because of those Governors, all but one of the members of the appointed state Supreme Court there are Republicans. Following orders, they laid the groundwork for us by agreeing to hear a case about gay marriage. When Dean collapsed, thanks to your premature ejaculation of Saddam from his hiding hole, they declared that not even civil unions would be enough in their state. The Massachusetts constitution guarantees us that this will be an open wound to pick at through the election, because it can't be amended for another two years. Come fall, we'll be waving this K-Y jelly-stained jock strap at John Kerry across the country.

But that won't be enough for the many mealy mouthed moderate voters, who are increasingly of the repulsively tolerant view expressed by a radical traitor to his class (and a cousin of the Democrat who tried to steal back the 2000 Presidential election from Jeb and Kathleen) in a play and movie: "I don't care if my opponent enjoys carnal knowledge of a McCormick reaper." No doubt this was considered the height of improbability by the citified author, who had clearly never greased up a thresher's gear shift knob and experimented, but I digress--- That's where our other secret weapon comes in, the one threatened by this latest meme of yours.

Your minion Dirge, or Stooge, or whatever his name is, has muddied the waters by opening up Kerry's personal life too soon. Just like Cheney's foolish aides uncovering a CIA operative out of petty vengeance (which has now turned the Agency against us -- thanks a lot, Dick!), this may cause attention to (and suspicion about) another very useful agent of ours. Terry understood when her first husband had to be punished after he embarrassed Reagan by objecting to calling ketchup a vegetable. She acted like a good soldier when told to enthrall Kerry next. Now she's in position to help us shoot him down -- or to influence his administration if he pulls it out (or you mess it up for W).

It was, of course, easy to arrange. Democrats can always be entrapped by their profligate hedonism. You saw how we nearly brought down The Clenis through his liberal libido. An even bigger patsy was the original JFK, who jumped readily into bed with anything which breathed. He was sleeping with so many seductresses from so many factions, from the mob to the Company, that they cancelled each other out. Their collective testimony would have embarrassed too many for him to be impeached. When he let down the team by refusing to launch a first strike against Russia while we still could, he had to be "deprecated" instead. But again I digress---

We've already planted the seeds of this bitter fruit. Remember how that earlier Massachusetts liberal beaten by George's daddy was so out of touch he didn't even realize that the wife whose rape would not have angered him was addicted to prescription drugs? (Not that there's anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld and Limbaugh would say.) People thought Kerry was lying when he not only denied using Botox on his wrinkles (not that there's anything wrong with that *ahem*), but claimed he had never even heard of it, despite Terry's admission that she used it herself. Surely you can smell the setup, Karl? We ordered her not to tell him about it, just so he would remind voters of Dukakis.

The first supposedly favorable profile of her, actually portraying her as a hopelessly out of touch rich elitist liberal, has already been published (unfortunately not, it appears, on line). We extracted this from a safely sycophantic plutocrat worshipping writer in W's home state for a magazine called Texas Monthly. As months go by we'll be spreading it widely. The fawning author's gushing over Terry's (seemingly) unconscious patronizing snobbery should curdle the milk in the breasts of any working mothers who managed to learn to read despite their "public school educations". They should reject "Miss high and mighty" in resentful populist droves.

The article says "She's comfortable being one of the world's richest women. "I give money away," she said of her role as director of the $1.6 billion Heinz endowments. "That's my job."" And of course, we'll point out that she'll continue this bad habit, but now with taxpayer's money instead. "Teresa Kerry is extreme in the way Americans most admire. She's rich, smart, sexy and sophisticated. In other words, she's a high-wattage star." Does that reek of Cosmopolitan to you? Won't it provoke resentful envy by plain Janes holding down two jobs because daddy's not paying the child support? "Outspoken and opinionated, Mrs. Kerry shows that her husband is comfortable with volatility and can't be as emotionally wooden as he appears." Actually, she only shows that he is comfortable with rich wives who finance his campaigns. She's quoted saying "If I weren't opinionated, I'd just be silly and artificial." Agent Terry is going to make sure the voters condemn her (and therefore her husband) as all three.

We even get some extra gravy with her. Not only is she suspicious because she speaks French, but she is also foreign born. But wait, there's more!! Remember how you had to twist George into knots to dump Trent Lott with no fingerprints, when the Senator's praise of good old Strom risked reminding those moderates about the racists in our coalition? Well, this time we can be all but open about it while preserving deniability. We plan to denounce the Democrats for nominating Kerry out of their obsession with affirmative action, because his wife's birth in Mozambique would make her the first African-American first lady.

That's not saying she's black, but plenty of the dittoheads will just hear that phrase and assume she is. The Dems will be caught in a trap. If they denounce us for implying she is black, then they are saying there is something wrong with that, thus offending their base. If they deny choosing her husband for reasons of affirmative action because they only do that for racial minorities, they remind all those out of work white Nascar fans why they reelected Jesse Helms. Meanwhile every rant against us over this will remind voters where she was born.

You may wonder why we bother. Kerry could well self-destruct. His ambition is so out of control that even the dull Democrats are beginning to catch on to how he tries to please both sides at once. He keeps pulling stunts like voting for war then denouncing it (just like he fought in one then denounced it), after asking for proof that WMD intelligence was hyped up then ignoring it when presented, as Scott Ritter reported in "Kerry, Too, Needs to Clear the Air", or opposing a federal amendment to ban gay marriage but not opposing a state amendment to do the same thing, as reported in "Kerry Says He Could Support Constitutional Amendment", and a host of others mentioned in "Hail, Kerry: Senator Facing-Both-Ways". The answer is that we don't believe in leaving anything to chance.

Just to be on the safe side, since we no longer trust your sense of timing, we've also had agent Terry convince her whipped hubby to advocate things which will help future Republican Presidents if Kerry does win anyway. The most obvious is now on his campaign web site as "A New Army Of Patriots". This position paper says "High School Service Requirement -- As President, John Kerry will ensure that every high school student in America performs community service as a requirement for graduation." So it's take orders, or else drop out and stay poor. That's the kind of genuine choice our major corporations love to offer. Earlier in the paper he discusses what these "volunteers" would do, including not just more silly liberal indoctrination in altruism by carrying bedpans, but also "Protecting America's Homeland. America should enlist its young people to protect our nation from further terrorist attacks. First and foremost, these young people will be dedicated to extending the reach of our first defenders."

I'm sure you see how this can be used. Rummy is catching flack over his "involuntary extensions of tours of duty" of reservists. Right now he has to do that because recruitment is drying up, as those ungrateful Iraqians keep killing our liberators. The ultimate solution is obvious -- reinstate the military draft. But a whole generation of pot befuddled hippies would denounce us for doing that. Just like it has happened every time since the Civil War, the way to get a draft passed for foreign wars is to do it under a Democratic President. Appeasing Dems may not use the power this would give them, but it will still be ready for activation when Brother Jeb gets the White House back and needs more troops for Part 2 of the war against the Axis of Evil.

So don't worry, Karl. We've got it under control. Even if you do panic and urinate in the soup again, our long range goals will go ahead. But next time, you won't still be along for the ride.

Tuesday, February 10, 2004

More proof that Senator Santorum was right about the dire consequences of legal sodomy. Two male penguins in a zoo, no doubt having been told about the rulings by the Supreme Courts of the U.S. and of Massachusetts, have mated and are having gay sex. Worse, the zoo has encouraged gay adoptions by giving them an egg to hatch, according to "Central Park Zoo's gay penguins ignite debate". We should look at this as an opportunity for science. If this new baby penguin grows up to be gay like its "parents", then we'll know that homosexuality is a choice, not an echo of the genes. That would of course make all good reactionaries feel validated in their banning of gay sex, or at least the banning of gay sex among animals, or something like that. Leftists, in their usual unnatural way, misunderstood this opportunity. Instead, vile Liberal Coalition member Scout at And Then was inspired to start a campaign for a "Gay Penguin for President", even posting some sample ads. Go see how bizarre the literal animal lovers can get.

Strong man Russian President Vladimir Putin is showing how it can be done. The key is to treat liberals like the marginal ideological fanatics they are. Ivan Rybkin, Presidential candidate of the oxymoronically named "Liberal Russia Party" has been missing, possibly killed or kidnapped, for days. The state police are not investigating, claiming it is a publicity stunt. So far they have also failed to convict anyone for the recent murders of two other leaders of that party, perhaps seeing the killers as public benefactors. This policy of "open season on liberals" seems to resonate with the obedient Russian public. Putin "has a 70 percent popularity rate and is expected to win by a landslide. Recent polls showed fewer than 1 percent of voters supporting Rybkin." The missing candidate had denounced the incumbent for the war in Chechnya and for "curtailing democratic freedoms in Russia," according to "Mystery of missing Russian deepens". The strong response from the Kremlin has reduced the liberals below even Howard Dean levels -- now they're at the microscopic level of a Dennis Kucinich. Bush, Ashcroft, and especially Rove should all be watching and taking notes.

The notorious California State Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, a Democrat from San Francisco (of course), has introduced a bill to fan the flames of populist hatred of the rich by banning foie gras. Although he claims this is because of the cruelty involved in force feeding the geese to fatten their livers, he reveals the real truth at the end of "Foie gras flap spreads": ""I've eaten foie gras," he added. "It ain't my cup of tea."" Clearly this just shows how unfamiliar he is with it. Here's a clue, John -- if you're trying to drink it, you're not eating it correctly. Once again a liberal's personal prejudice is to be made the law, just to make people with taste suffer. If this bill (and a similar one in New York) passed, the only source for this delicacy would be imports from France. Is PETA getting money from the appeasers of Vieille Europe? Call Washington and tell Republican U.S. Senate leader Frist The Cat that he needs to start a federal investigation now.

Thursday, February 05, 2004

For those with any doubts left, consider this example of web site graffiti, pointed out by the infamous TBOGG. Senator Bill Frist, following the great Republican tradition of family values, wrote a book, "Good People Beget Good People: A Genealogy of the Frist Family". Vicious left wing radicals have taken advantage of its listing on Amazon to leave their scent marks all over this one. Just in case the Amazon people get complaints and rightly take down these examples of liberal cheap shots from its Amazon page, I feel it my duty to preserve the evidence of lefty mean spiritedness with a few quotes.

Under "Our Customers' Advice" some radicals have proposed also reading "Cat Owner's Home Veterinary Handbook" (which shows the stupid liberals are confusing Frist with his Republican colleague Senator Santorum) and Phillips's "American Dynasty" (a slanted cheap shot at the Bush family). Comments made under "All Customer Reviews" include this one: "Frist explains the intricacies of human reproduction in a way sure to confound, bedevil, and infuriate his natural constituency of Tennessee creationists. Good job, Bill." Another, showing again the liberal insistence on Nazi references to Republicans, is: "I rate this book five tortured and slaughtered kitties out of a possible five. It's sure to win the Mengele Eugenics Award at The New Republic's Gala Celebration of the 25th Anniversary of the Publication of "The Bell Curve"!"

In fact, ALL of the reviews posted now are by left wing snipers. Good conservatives should go add their own praise to this parade of attacks, just to show how much we really do love the good old boy from the big hospital chain. (No, you don't actually have to prove you've really read the book by taking a test. Use your imagination, just like these awful liberals did.)

Saturday, January 31, 2004

Perhaps the strongest evidence of the philosophical bankruptcy of our age is in the article Country May Decriminalize Theft for the Hungry. "Venezuela ... is considering decriminalizing the theft of food and medicine in cases where a thief is motivated by extreme hunger or need. ... Under [Supreme Court Judge Alejandro Angulo] Fontiveros' proposal to the Supreme Court, those who take food, medicine or inexpensive goods without using violence to ease hunger caused by prolonged, extreme poverty would not be punished." Clearly this is a leftist idea to polarize society.

In 1894 Anatole France wrote "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids both rich and poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." This Venezuelan madness would for the first time set up double standards. Only the rich would be prohibited from stealing food. Is that fair to our hard working upper classes? Why must they suffer from this radical form of affirmative action at the supermarket? This is rank discrimination, and I hope that some noble self-sacrificing tycoon will commit an act of civil disobedience by openly stealing a loaf of bread just to heroically test this terrible law in court. I suggest Ken Lay for this, and I'll even volunteer to wave pompoms at his trial.

It is praiseworthy that, in a spirit of Christian forgiveness, hopeless radical Natalie Davis at her blog All Facts and Opinions showed the thoughtfulness yesterday to wish her own Happy Birthday to Vice President Dick Cheney, and even to help him with his own family problems, by posting a link to the auction site where he is trying to sell one of his children (though there seems to be a typo -- I thought it was "ebay", but this sales item page says she's for sale on "egay", where he has a picture of "My Lesbian Daughter, Mary Cheney").

Now some good conservatives will no doubt accuse the Veep of hypocrisy because he is a Republican, and Lincoln's party's great claim to "human rights" credentials (though why anyone would want those I can't imagine) was ending chattel slavery. Nonsense. This is evidence that those White House Bible study groups the liberals love to mock have borne fruit. Cheney is reinstituting the earliest form of Free Enterprise, the sale of people. I'm sure he is doing so in accord with the holy words of Exodus 21:7, which says "And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do." Having spent so much to raise this offspring, should he not derive some return on his investment?

Friday, January 30, 2004

It's a Byrd brain, it's a Plame fan, it's a piece of premature anti-fascist propaganda.

Liberals thrive on comparing their enemies to Nazis, but they are often sneaky about it. Tireless conservatives had to stay up all night digging through over one and a half thousand entries in Move-On's ad contest to find the hidden two which tried to paint our Noble Leader as a cut rate Hitler. CBS, having burned its fingers with its attempted trashing of Saint Ronald, has far righteously refused to run any Super Bowl ads from this radical group, even if they don't mention the late Fuhrer. But TV is not the only outlet the leftys have. They hide a lot within popular genre fiction -- especially SF.

Science fiction is inherently subversive. It is based on asking questions about "What if things were different?" Once a person starts such wondering, they are on that infamous "slippery slope" that the ACLU keeps ranting about, sliding toward doubt about everything. Soon they may adopt the slogan of that revolutionary Frenchman Voltaire that "all things are possible", and be wallowing in all of the worst predictions of Senator Santorum. Voltaire himself notoriously attended an orgy of the Marquis De Sade. His refusal to repeat it, saying "Once is curiosity, twice would be perversion", does not lessen his bad example.

This genre of fiction began in a bad way, predictably enough with a Frenchman who wrote about a pirate (the Unabomber of his day) making war against modern civilization with his invention of a submarine, and his English follower, an admitted socialist, proposing Santorum's worst nightmare -- interspecies genetic manipulation. Things could only go downhill from there.

The three so-called Grand Masters of modern science fiction all had suspicious left wing leanings. I have written before (in The Zeroth Commandment) about how their Russian-American icon positively oozes Marxist sociological determinism in his series about a secret conspiracy of "psychohistorians" trying to overthrow the legitimate Galactic Empire. The only native-born American of the trio actually began as a supporter of Upton Sinclair's socialistic "End Poverty In California" campaign, then tried to hide his true colors by years of writing fiction that was patriotic, even pro-military, before uncovering his real hidden agenda, with mystical Sixties "free love", hedonistic sex change operations, and even incest. And the less said the better about that British third world hermit of unknown sexual predilections and recurring sacrilegious themes.

While their most promising inheritor at least teamed up with a good saber rattling computer geek to write of interstellar aristocracy, this was an aberration. (It wasn't even typical for them. They showed their real liberal prejudice by condemning the man who made the trains run on time to their mockery of hell.) Far more representative was the noted anthropologist's daughter's explicit anarchism.

The movies are no better. Someday I may post a long dissection of how Hollywood leftists corrupted the vision of a good former policeman by the explicit anti-individualist collectivism and hatred of reason shown in the sacrifice ending the second film about NCC 1701.

And television? Don't get me started on those wildly slanted propaganda fables of that Emmy-winning hack whose own widow admitted his secret leftist agenda in (of course) a PBS special: "He had said, 'You know, you can put these words into the mouth of a Martian and get away with it'.... If it was a Republican or Democrat they couldn't say it. I mean, he wanted to deal with the issues of the day. We're looking at bigotry, racism, prejudice, nuclear war, ethics, witch-hunts, loneliness. All of these things were verboten."

What reminded me of this catalog of subversive rubbish was a short story some lefty urged me to read. Oh, they gushed, it's beautifully written, and it predicts so well just what will happen here if the Bush administration is reelected. There'll be dictatorship at home and war with Old Europe, they said, and America will be hated around the world -- just like it is today with our Preemptive Self-Defense Actions (TM) and unrestricted incarcerations. Naturally, I had to check out any piece of swill which could provoke such an appeaser to this enthusiasm. (Such sacrifice is a dirty job, but someone has to do it.)

Carefully, I checked out the biography of the author first. You will be astonished to know that his radical background is openly posted on the web, since the liberals figure no one will bother to look. He was born in that socialist hotbed, Canada, and started his subversion young, kicked out of high school for "Red" ideas. It was no surprise that he worked for that taxpayer-funded FDR propaganda tool, the Soviet style Federal Writer's Project. Nor was the short story in question his only piece of traitorous fiction. He may have thought like a commie, but his first priority was always to hate the United States, so his best known novel has the South winning the Civil War. You can find the truth about this dangerous lefty's life here.

The story is forty years old, but that doesn't stop Bush haters from claiming it predicts tomorrow. In this tale's imaginary and absurdly impossible world, the U.S. has been taken over by a fascist dictatorship (led by the typically cutely named "Defenders of the Constitution", as though the Second Amendment was a bad thing), and their agent uses all the usual leftist scare phrases like "Sure, they lynched a few coloreds and booted out a few Jews, but what's that between you and me?" The Americans, in a typical leftist fantasy, have already lost a war with Europe after trying to conquer other nations, as though the wimps of the old continent could ever defeat anyone. As a U.S. spy says well, "The U.S. isn't a two-bit country to be policed. If there's policing to be done, we do it. Policing nations, Third Force! Who do they think they are?"

It should be a giveaway of the writer's intentions from the very first that this story is set in France. He shows how those snail eating haters of us because of our Freedom from their decadent innovations like month-long vacations were filled with gall (yes, that's a pun, just for those who claim I have no sense of humor), even back when the first French-speaking wife of a rich white male liberal U.S. Senator from Massachusetts who sought the Presidency was supposedly almost as wildly popular there as Jerry Lewis. But I digress.

The author does correctly depict the sort of muddled thinking typical of liberals who like to play Hamlet. The protagonist is a woman whose husband was killed by the dictatorship, and the U.S. agent is trying to get her to spy on other exiles. Yet when an America-hating French mob (in what really is a good prediction) tries to get her to spit on a U.S. flag, her old emotional ties to that term of mockery for left-wingers, the Homeland, resurface again. Silly radicals can't even be consistent about their own national self-hatred.

The whole story is just the kind of thing leftists use to scare each other with and reinforce their paranoia. They will claim it is chilling and moving. Good conservatives will know very well that this really "can't happen here". To spare you the agony of starting to read this, only to discover how treasonous it is, you should be aware of where this story is posted on the web, just so that you won't be fooled into even beginning it. Beware of the thankfully dead radical author, Ward Moore, and this particular vile tale of his, called It Becomes Necessary.

Saturday, January 24, 2004

You have to be on guard all the time about loony leftists mocking their betters. Turquoise Waffle Irons in the Back Yard, a member of that vile radical conspiracy the "League of Liberals", is pointing their deluded readers to an uncompassionate list of suggestions for ways Howard Dean can demonstrate that he really is capable of Presidential leadership, found at August J. Pollak's Helpful hints for Howard Dean. As you might expect, it's really an excuse to make snide cheap shots at our Noble Leader in the White House now, with items like "Dress up in a crotch-accentuating flight suit and land a jet on an aircraft carrier." (Does this remind anyone else of penis envy?)

I can't sit back and let one of these points escape unscathed. Pollak includes "Trade away Sammy Sosa." This is so wrong on two counts. First, the lefties delight in claiming Bush's ownership of the Texas Rangers baseball team was really only a phony front, set up by wealthy friends of his father to make our Leader rich and make him famous so he could run for Governor. If that's true, then he can't be blamed for a bad management decision. You radicals can't have it both ways!!

Second, if he really was calling the shots, then trading away Sosa should be seen as one of the most long range far thinking steps he's ever taken to Clean Up Our Nation's Locker Rooms (TM). As he said in the recent State of Union address, performance enhancing drugs are one of the greatest blights on America. The terrorists can't serve as bad role models for our youth -- only star athletes can do that. Just look at those musclebound homer swatters like Smashing Sammy. Do you believe for a second that is all just from scarfing down several prime ribs a day?

No, George even then knew he would prefer to lose playing clean instead of encouraging one more minority to be a victim of the hedonistic drug culture, so he punished the player by exiling him to a team where he would never, ever, have a chance to be in a World Series. Take that, you epicurean applause seeker!! George did this even though he knew it would hurt the chances of his own team to make a future series. And he was right -- they've never come close since. Greater love hath few men than a team owner who will throw his chances in the trash just to make a point for puritanism. Our Leader should be applauded, not condemned. Silly liberals just don't get the point.

Tuesday, January 20, 2004

Why the surprises in the Iowa caucuses? Why did the liberal media's anointed darling Howard Dean come crashing to a third place loss? The simple answer is that Democrats there are (1) illiterate, (2) wimpy, (3) doddering, (4) sore losers, and (5) pig farmers.

(5) Iowans grow lots of hogs. Kucinich never got off the ground because any vegetarian is automatically suspected of trying to put the pig farmers out of work, so Shorty was never in contention there. His stunning rejection won't bother him, since the urban public power promoter is really only running to publicize his search for a power groupie mate. The profligate liaisons of JFK, imitation of which nearly did in the Clenis, still tempt promiscuous leftys.

(4) Democrats have never gotten over Gore's failure to steal the election in Florida. These sore losers are still insanely angry over that at Al's intended victim, George Bush, because he's the one that got away. They also rage at him because of his brother Jeb's Preemptive Election Fraud Prevention Program (TM), which purged voter rolls of any possible felon under the theory that "it is better to deny fifty thousand innocent people the right to vote, just to make sure that five hundred guilty ones don't illegally cast a ballot for traitors like the Clenis's vice man".

Dean skyrocketed to the top last year because, out of all the candidates, he expressed the most anger at Bush. He collapsed within the last two weeks because of the heavy media attention just before the caucus. Suddenly the voters saw just how much Dean and Bush were alike as people -- both born in the northeast to wealthy Wall Street families, both Yale educated, both carpetbagging migrants to more rural states with more easily manipulated voters, both reformed drinkers who became teetotalers, both Governors of their states, both better at expressing anger (at liberals by Bush, or at Bush by Dean) than at being positive, both with brothers involved in mysterious activities which brought them crashing down.

Unfortunately for Dean, the Iowans, ignorantly unaware of the Wall Street parallel with Bush's grandfather, were reminded of it just before the vote by publication of a new book, Kevin Phillips's American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush. (This book pushed the usual liberal spin about how the founding Bush's bank was seized by the U.S. government during World War II for trading with Nazi Germany. The truth, of course, is that it was confiscated by that sneaky socialist FDR as part of his ongoing anti-business crusade.) The timing was terrible for the would-be Robespierre from Vermont. Not wanting to vote for anyone so much like the hated Bush, the pig farmers looked to other contenders.

(3) Iowa has a large number of older voters. Dean himself said this week that the biggest export of both Iowa and Vermont was young people. (He also spoke unfavorably of the only Presidents from those two states, Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover. Actually those two gave America a still unappreciated gift -- a huge reduction in wage costs and a buyer's market for cheap labor. Democratic demagogues, not seeing the great opportunity this presented for factory owners, denounced this as a so-called "depression", and proceeded to artificially prop up wage rates with dangerous laws forcing owners to negotiate with evil Labor Unions. Fortunately Reagan and the two Bushes have so packed the NLRB with management advocates that those laws are largely dead letters now. But I digress.)

This doddering electorate, bordering on senility (or they wouldn't be liberals), caring only about cashing as many government checks as possible, was ripe for the heavy attacks on Dean by Gephardt for his old criticism of Medicare. Those ads, typically (for a Democrat) misrepresenting the doctor's actual position, helped drag him down. Unfortunately, they failed to help the man from Missouri because of the next factor.

(2) Democrats are wimps who always prefer to run from a fight, as they showed over Vietnam and Iraq. Even though Dean was anti-war, he was forcefully anti-war. He looked suspiciously like he might stand up and fight back. This bulldog truculence scared off the pacifists. After all, what if Saddam were set free by those appeasing international courts and once again attacked the rebuilt World Trade center like he did on September 11? Someone like Dean might actually go to war again instead of turning the other cheek. Better not take the chance on him, or on a scrapper like Gephardt either. Better to find someone who doesn't attack other Democrats, thus showing they are really a spineless pacifist at heart when it really matters. Why not that new guy who refused to run negative ads, John Edwards? On caucus day the Iowans awoke to find the truth about Edwards in a Boondocks strip which revealed that, if the Democratic candidates were the characters in the old Justice League comic book, then John Edwards was Wonder Woman. That was all the wimpy Democratic voters needed to hear, and the man from Carolina bolted to second place. But why not first?

(1) Over and over conservatives keep warning how the Democrats try to appeal to the ignorant unwashed masses who have no idea what economic nonsense their candidates spout. (To paraphrase Emerson, a foolish balanced budget is the hobgoblin of small minds.) Many of those illiterate voters, victims of our failed "public" schools which Bush is thankfully defunding as quickly as possible, can just barely mark an "X" in order to vote. They suffer from liberal propaganda passing as history, including the myth that JFK, that adulterous tyrant who had his agents wake up steel company presidents in the middle of the night when they raised prices (yes, our memory is long), was a great President. Hardly even conscious of who holds office, they only noticed that one candidate was a rich white male liberal U.S. Senator from Massachusetts with a French-speaking wife and named John K-something. That was close enough for them. Isn't he the one our teachers told us is such a wonderful leader, they thought, and signed in for John Kerry.

Let me say that I knew John Kennedy (or at least I saw him on TV). John Kennedy, despite being a liberal traitor to his class, was a hero of mine (for giving us a great war in Vietnam and a huge corporate subsidy with the space program, which Bush is now trying to imitate). If I'd been past the age of puberty and anywhere near him, I'm sure I would have been bedded by John Kennedy, like everyone else in his sight. And Senator Kerry is no John Kennedy. The Democrats have made their bed with illiterates, and now they will have to lie in it with (as well as to) them. Karma does come back in politics.

Sunday, January 18, 2004

Trust those socialist Scandinavians to try this silly liberal experiment. In Nuuk, Greenland, inmates of the prison are not even locked up. "The jail has no fences and no bars, but plenty of television sets, DVD players and computers. Inmates hold regular jobs around town, earning about $2,800 a month, a living wage in this country of 53,000 people. In the summer they're given shotguns and allowed to hunt reindeer and seals. The only requirement for such hunting trips: They must be accompanied by armed guards, says Soeren Soedergaard Hansen, chief judge of Greenland. "And they cannot be drunk." There's little incentive to escape. "Where can they run?" says Joergen Nord, the Danish head of Greenland's prison system. "It's cold outside." Well, at least their gun rights are protected. Maybe Charlton Heston could hide out from Michael Moore there. Read more at Doing Hard Time In Greenland Isn't Really That Hard. "Do you want me to send you back to where you were, unemployed ... in Greenland?"

Who knew? One of the heroes of all far right thinking Americans, a principal architect of the wonderful new doctrine of Preemptive Self Defense (TM), the Prince of Darkness himself, is an author!! "Richard Perle's out-of-print 1992 novel, "Hard Line," is notable for its chastity. There is no sex at all -- which is merciful, since this is the most thinly veiled of romans clef. ... But it prefigures, in detail, the Bush administration's rationale for the invasion of Iraq. ... It describes an imaginary arms-control summit in Helsinki, where Waterman/Perle prevents the dim, genial, and unnamed president (Reagan right down to the California ranch and the 3x5 cue cards) from being suckered by the Soviets." Of course we'll have to excuse his youthful prosaic license in dumbing down the sainted Ronald just to make his protagonist look good. He does focus on the real enemy. ""And do we get to screw the exalted Department of State?" "Whenever possible." "Then it's irresistible."" Just ignore the columnist's snarking in passing at the soft core S and M in Newt Gingrich's novel ("Tell me or I will make you do terrible things."), and enjoy the review at Perle's pulp fiction.

"US officials here on Saturday stated that the country’s military presence in Georgia will now become permanent as the American military has been training and equipping the Georgian army since the spring of 2002." Well, I'm sure we can expect to hear liberals denounce this, but we simply can't abandon one of our major states to terrorists or Democrats. As far as I'm concerned our good Republican generals settled this issue on July 22, 1864.

"A US Air Force fighter jet dropped an inert training bomb by accident last week over a sparsely populated area of northern England, causing no damage or injury, the British Ministry of Defence said." Maybe this is Rumsfeld sending a justified warning to the Brits. If you won't let our snipers have free fire rights to protect our visiting Noble Leader, you can't expect us to be too careful about strapping down that extra armament. Fair is fair. (I utterly reject the theory, no doubt popular among the appeasers at the Vatican, that it's all a message from even higher up to George's doggedly loyal Tony Blair about Matthew 26:52.)

It is good to see that President W. wants to spend one and a half billion dollars for "programs trying to increase marriage rates in poor neighborhoods. "The president loves to do that sort of thing in the inner city with black churches, and he's very good at it," a White House aide said." I'm sure they'll love him there. After all, he's giving them a helping hand, just like the Australians are lovingly acting to control wild unchecked population growth in their eucalyptus ghettoes.

Of course, there are leftist doubters in one of our most socialist enclaves. "The state's $5 million abstinence-only sex education program isn't working, according to an independent study commissioned by the Minnesota Department of Health. The study found that sexual activity among junior high kids at three schools where the program was taught doubled between 2001 and 2002 -- a pattern similar to that exhibited by kids statewide -- and that the number who said they would probably have sex during high school nearly doubled, as well." You know what really happened. Those hopelessly liberal Scandinavian bureaucrats probably sabotaged the abstinence program with comments like "Don't try this position from the Kama Sutra, because it delays orgasms and stretches them over a longer period, so that you might get hooked on that evil sex." Could this have possibly been a fair test?

And the need is urgent. Senator Santorum's penultimate warning is already coming true. Not "man on dog" yet, but legal group marriage. "A civil rights attorney challenged Utah's ban on polygamy Monday, citing a Supreme Court ruling that struck down a Texas sodomy law. The lawsuit says Salt Lake County clerks refused a marriage license to a couple because the man was already married to another woman, who had consented to the additional marriage. In denying the marriage license, the county violated the plaintiffs' First Amendment right to practice their religion, attorney Brian Barnard said in the complaint ." They are always calling for polygamy, but never for polyandry. Why aren't the liberal feminists up in arms over this call for sexist unfair treatment? Where's their consistency?

Despite the traitorous claims of that turncoat Paul O'Neill, that "Bush was already planning to oust Saddam within days of taking office", our Noble Leader has admitted that it was really all the fault of the Clenis (TM). ""The stated policy of my administration towards Saddam Hussein was very clear. Like the previous administration, we were for regime change," Bush said." Meanwhile, we can hope O'Neill has been added to that non-existent No Flying Allowed list by the minions of Tom Ridge. We wouldn't want him to flee the country before his unfortunate accident.

Good conservative Americans have been embarassed by the failure of our law enforcement organizations to protect those noble delegates meeting here for globalization conferences in Seattle and Miami. Of course the liberals have the gall to claim the failure was in not protecting the protesters from what in 1968 was termed "a police riot". Those bleeding hearts even stole a perfectly good conservative insult like "globaloney" and misused it for their own purposes. Now we have a chance to see how the other half wits live. One hundred thousand deluded fools have been meeting at the World Social Forum, appropriately among the slums of India, to gushing reports from the usual suspects, like Amnesty International [sic]. Notice there are no riots, no looting, no violence at all. Why would the radicals disrupt their own? But the lefties show their hypocrisy when they are the ones in control. Half a hundred activists in wheelchairs showed up holding candles to chant "Shame, shame, shame" for not helping the handicapped even more. Guess they've got bare feet of clay in Mumbai.

They got in plenty of licks though, unleashing a leftist prize winning writer, Arundhati Roy, to curse The Great Satan Bush in what she hoped were scathing terms, saying "she hoped President George W Bush would share the fate of the captured Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "If Saddam Hussein deserves to be humiliated and have his fillings counted and his hair checked for lice on primetime TV, then so does George Bush ... Saddam Hussein surely ought to be tried for crimes against humanity. But so should all his accomplices in the US and Europe," she said. "To applaud the US army's capture of Saddam Hussein and therefore justify its invasion and occupation of Iraq is like deifying Jack the Ripper for disembowelling the Boston Strangler," Roy said." Later in this same Times of India story the reporter reveals how typically disorganized these sewer-eyed idealists are. Roy's words were not even said to the WSF itself, but to a splinter group at "'Mumbai Resistance', an alternative convention in Bombay of around 2,000 leftists who view the World Social Forum as too moderate." The mind boggles.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com