Tuesday, April 30, 2002

Jeff Jacoby

On Jews in Europe.
Flight 93

Let's just name a state after them.

Will play in a decisive Game Five on Thursday, since they lost to the Raptors yesterday.
A Kook Opines On Smallpox

Okay, so Hackworth is a kook. So what? He still brings up some good points.

A smallpox attack could kill millions, maim tens of millions, and crush our current economic recovery. The fallout from such an attack would likely be the use of nuclear weapons by the US against the assumed perpetrators, and all the ensuing global instability that would bring.

If our government is unwilling to immunize our citizens against such an attack because of the potential side-effects for a few, then how can we even bother to pretend that our nation's security is of the highest concern to our elected leaders?

Interesting column here.

I find myself somewhere in the middle. I dislike both Eurocrats and Le Pen about equally. It seems as if the Europeans have no great leaders among them. Which, of course, is all the more reason to ignore them.
Kent State Redux

For Pam?

Part of a column :

Revealing exchange with an INS employee at my oath ceremony last week. There were 2,000 of us in a huge hall at the Javits Convention Center in Manhattan. They seated us by blocks, and were keeping track of who sat where, so they could hand out the naturalization certificates expeditiously. "A miracle of organization." I remarked to the INS man seating us. "Nah," he said, "it's all f****d up. Typical INS!" Derb: "Oh, come now, let's show a little institutional self-esteem." He: "You must be joking." Derb: "What, is morale bad, then?" He: "You can't imagine. Hey, I'm looking for another job." At times like this you realize that these government bureaucracies, for all their waste and follies, and for all we — especially we on the Right — love to scoff at them and criticize them, are staffed with ordinary people with the ordinary person's need to feel useful and valued. If that fellow was right, and morale at the INS is deep in the pits, that cannot be good for America.
Another Good Read

From V. D. Hanson.
Great Column

Dinesh D'Souza breaks down why we should defend pro-Western dictators far better than I could.
More on Pigs

Reason #312 why I never joined a frat.
Brief Movie Reviews

Watched "Angela's Ashes" last night on video. Very long, but worth watching. 4 stars out of 5.

Also saw "The Green Mile" again the other night. As above, very long but worth watching. 3.5 stars out of 5.

Why the half-star difference? "The Green Mile", having seen it several times now, seems at points to be somewhat contrived. "Angela's Ashes", being a memoir, neccessarily rings realistic. Also, Tom Hanks' face, after watching extreme close-ups of it for around three hours, has a tendency to morph into something disturbingly pig-like. Hence it loses half a star.

Monday, April 29, 2002


Even normally sleazy network execs won't take filthy Saudi money.
Quote of the Day

The Afghanistan theater has been the first one, but it won't be the last. It is a place where you are setting an example for how this battle has to be conducted, and there's no question but that Afghanistan is indeed a proving ground.

It's a momentous time. You have a momentous mission. You have been commissioned by history to play a key part. It's dangerous; there's no question. It's difficult and the American people know it and the people of the coalition countries know it. They know it because they see it on television. They know it because they see some of your comrades coming home dead and wounded.

The coalition, this coalition, stands on the front line between freedom and fear. You stand against an evil that cannot be appeased, it must not be ignored, and it certainly must be defeated.

You've done a magnificent job, each of you, and I am proud and I am grateful and I know that your families are proud and grateful. They worry about you. And they too sacrifice.

And when this war is won, and it will be won, you will be able to say that I fought with the coalition in Afghanistan against terrorism and you'll be remembered for it.

--Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, speaking to US and coalition forces in Bagram, Afghanistan
Strippers and Cripples

There is no God.
Red China

More reasons to hate that vile regime here.

Sunday, April 28, 2002

Will We Fight?

Read this for why we should.
The difference between capitalism and communism?

Black and white.

Compare countries with free markets (The US, Western Europe, Japan) with countries wallowing in socialism or communism (Cuba, North Korea, most of Africa).
"Bariffs and Terriers"

Un-free trade.
Pistons were losers last night

Will try to finish off the Raptors tomorrow.

Saturday, April 27, 2002

Wings Win!

Hello, 2nd round...

Too Little, Too Late for ANWR

"Savage" Attacks


Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth, socialism the equal distribution of misery
Reparations Wackiness

1.4 trillion? Is this a typo?
Sex, Lies, and ... South Dakota???

The sad story here.

Sickening quote from the article :

"One [woman] supposedly had 70 contacts. I don't think it's normal for anywhere."

Now that's one nasty little hose-hound.
Heroism and Savagery

A story.
Jewish Republicans?

It's possible.

Friday, April 26, 2002

Screw the EU

Ignore the UN

Here is why.
It's Pat!

Who woulda thunk that Pat Buchanan would become a terrorist-symp?

Just wrote a 1,500-word research paper on suicide terrorism. 25% of my English grade hangs in the balance!

Thursday, April 25, 2002

Canada Hates Canadian Heroes

This is twisted.

Anthrax found in Connecticut postal facility! Is this a leftover of the bio-terror attack from last year, or is it something new? We'll find out in the coming days...

Funny Column About France


Red Wings win 4-0, take 3-2 series lead.

Red Winds lead 4-0 in the 1st period!

And we call these guys our allies???

Wednesday, April 24, 2002

Good Soup

I highly recommend Wolfgang Puck's line of soups. Good stuff. I mean, how can anyone dislike a guy with "gang-puck" in his name? Though, I tend to stay away from his cream-based products...
European Statistics

Here's a quote from Economist.com :

"Despite his renegade status, Mr Le Pen came second with 16.9% of the vote in the first round, not far behind Mr Chirac, who only managed to win 19.9%, and comfortably ahead of Mr Jospin, who received just 16.2%."

Huh? Being behind by three full percentage points is "not far behind", but beating someone by 0.7% is indicative of being "comfortably ahead"? Is this metric or something?

Hell, yeah. It's 2-0, headed to Canada. Pack your sweater.
Commentary From A Dick

Must-read stuff here.

Red Wings won 4-2 last night to even their series with Vancouver at 2-2. Pistons play Toronto tonight.
Pitchfork Pat Weighs In On Le Pen

And, since they are ideological brothers, Pat doesn't have much bad to say.

Tuesday, April 23, 2002

Two-Headed Toad!

Not really.

Canadian heroes get the shaft from their own government.

Depressing poll results here.
Thankless Bastards

Click here.

Puerto Ricans receive all the benefits of US citizenship without having to pay the taxes other Americans do, yet they still flip out over a little military bombing range on the island of Vieques. But when given the chance at independence or statehood, they choose the status quo.

I say screw 'em. Declare that their leper colony is no longer a part of the US in any way, shape, or form. In 20 years they'll be worse off than Haiti and begging to rejoin us, with all the military bases we want.

Monday, April 22, 2002

Those Wonderful Palestinians

From The Corner :

"More interesting is this article from the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram (hardly known as an Israeli mouthpiece). In an interview with a bomb-maker from Jenin, we learn that it was the Palestinians who basically were responsible for blowing up most of the buildings and for destroying the primary water-main. "We cut off lengths of mains water pipes and packed them with explosives and nails," he explains. "Then we placed them about four metres apart throughout the houses -- in cupboards, under sinks, in sofas." He continues, "We had more than 50 houses booby-trapped around the camp. We chose old and empty buildings and the houses of men who were wanted by Israel because we knew the soldiers would search for them," he said. The ambush of the 13 Israeli soldiers was achieved by sending women out to surrender and say that the men were out of ammunition."
European Politics

Great stuff from Libertarian Samizdata :

Jean-Marie Le Pen is not President of France and is unlikely to become President of France but I don't think that is an exaggeration to say that his success in the first round of the presidential elections is already sending shockwaves across Europe and maybe the wider world.

Why? Anyone who has been following events in Europe over recent months cannot help but have noticed Nationalist politicians of the Le Pen variety notching up stunning electoral success all over the continent, including Holland, Denmark, Austria and Italy. The success of Le Pen, in this context, is not so much an eruption as part of an ongoing pattern. Something is radically changing in Europe and the ruling jacobin elites have no idea how to respond much less stop it. They are worried. They are right to be.

The settlement of post-war Europe was a centrist consensus built around an all-encompassing welfare state where high taxes and generous benefits were seen as a type of 'enlightened' self-interest; people happily paid into the system to help their less fortunate neighbours and friends in the sure and certain knowledge that the system would care equally well for them as and when the time came. But, whatever we say about the inquities of tribalism, the fact appears that those same people were less enthusiatic about providing such bounty to strangers from faraway lands with whom they felt no affinity or kinship. Is this an admission of racism? Well, yes, it most certainly is. Why try to invent anaesthetising euphamisms for it?

The massive third world immigration into Europe in the last twenty years or so has seen the system stretched to breaking point resulting in a surly, resentful and thoroughly balkanised polity that is starting to express itself through people like Le Pen in France and Pym Forytun in Holland. The ossified Eurocrats are starting to reap what they have so blithely sewn.

But it isn't just the Napoleonic welfare-state which is to blame. The post-war political class was shot through with post-colonial guilt and haunted by the horrors of Nazi Germany to the extent where they saw 'European culture' as something which had to be curbed, repressed and, preferably, phased out. Europeans were required to open-ended 'tolerance' while immigrant communities were required to do quite the opposite. It was an appallingly misconceived and damaging bit of social engineering that may yet have terrible reprecussions.

There are those who will point to 9/11 as a turning point but that would not be entirely true. These tensions have been fomenting in Europe for years. What may be true is that both 9/11 and the Israel-Palestinian conflict have further radicalised the large Muslim minorities in much of Europe, particularly in France and Holland. How many Europeans have visualised, rightly or wrongly, homicide bombers devastating the pavement cafes of Paris or Amsterdam and shuddered? Failing to find comfort in their mealy-mouthed and morally relative incumbents, have they turned to other sources for their salvation?

Of course, this could all just be a protest vote rather than a long-term trend but the former sometimes has a knack of of morphing into the latter even if nobody meant it to. I have a sense that the world is shifting in tectonic ways and moving the plates of history around under our feet.

Fun With Georgia Politics

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney is insane. Her primary opponent is incompetent. Rather odd "fundreasing" strategy to promote events that happened over a month ago.

To paraphrase MTV, in this contest it's "Choose and Lose".


Sadly, someone let Ms. Majette know that her spellings and dates were all wrong, and her site has been corrected. Oh, well. She's now moved from incompetent to semi-competent. Hey, considering the alternative, she's got my vote!
More on the French Election

A somewhat prescient article from The Economist, the best magazine in the world. Except for Maxim. And maybe Hustler.
Congressional Crazy

Hell now has the same climate as ANWR. Slate actually gets something right.
Red Wings Win!

Final score : 3-1. Still down 2-1 in the series. There is hope.

Unpunished Hate Crimes

Imagine the opposite of this event occurs. Imagine 300 "whiteys" get together and lob missiles at black motorists while screaming racial slurs. Don't you think that would merit more than a three-inch mention in the local paper? Why the double-standard?
More Blank Panther Fun

The Old Black Panther Party

Mostly dead or in jail. What a doggone shame.

Sunday, April 21, 2002

Weird Series

Lidstrom just scored the go-ahead goal from center ice! 2-1 Wings, end of the 2nd period.
Sports Update

Pistons big winners. Red Wings tied 1-1, but short-handed 5-3 as I write.
Short Movie Review

I saw "The Scorpion King" this afternoon. Pretty good flick, particularly if you like non-stop violence and endless scenes with half-naked ethnic women (who doesn't?). I'll give it 3.5 stars out of 5.
The French

A French right-winger? Isn't that an oxymoron?

Check this out. Take a gander at the photograph. Study the chick on the left. Seriously, if she had an AK-47 in her hand, she'd look like an extra from Platoon.
Isn't He Dead Yet?

A disgusting little piece from Michael Kinsley. This article is so grotesque, I hardly know where to begin. Some lowlights :

- Bill Clinton's innumerable lies are given all of one paragraph. President George W. Bush's "lies" are given eight. This, even though Clinton was in office a full eight years, and was impeached by the Congress for, among other things, lying under oath, while GW has been in office little over a year and enjoys the unprecedented trust and admiration of the American people.

- The so-called "lies" of GW's subordinates are attributed to him.

- Kinsley insinuates that President Bush is a ninny countless times, though he was smart enough to humiliate Al "master-debater" Gore in three consecutive presidential debates and win the election.

- Kinsley gives himself away as the hard-core leftist he is when he sides with the dictatorial Castro- and Saddam-loving Hugo Chavez over President Bush, even commenting that Chavez was elected more democratically than GW. Strangely, Kinsley neglects to mention the unsuccessful coup attempt Chavez led a decade ago, or the peaceful protestors he ordered shot at a little over a week ago, or his silencing of the media.

These are just the major horrors of his brief column. One must certainly give Mr. Kinsley some credit : He has a real knack for filling such a small space with such a mammoth amount of shit.

Saturday, April 20, 2002

"The Nation" - As Disgusting As Ever

Commentary From Another Blog

The Sarge has some great stuff today. Here it is :

Pack it up, pack it in, let me begin I came to win, battle me that's a sin I won't ever slack up, punk you better back up Try and play the role and yo the whole crew'll act up... -House of Pain

I used to have a quote at the top of the page that went a little something like this:

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight: nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety: is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions and blood of better men than himself

Quotes are nice things. They are words that reveal profundities we feel, but could not express as eloquently as those who said them. Yet they are not a substitute for deliberate thought and meditation. You cannot hang a belief system or worldview upon them, for they are pointers towards deeper personal reflection and understanding of our world and how we live in it: a portal or rabbit hole that invites exploration and discovery.

Yet I see quotes and pithy phrases thrown about like so much confetti. People use them as a substitute for thinking, or think that the quote, once used, should end all discussion and debate once and for all. They become a crutch that hobbles the mind, until all the person can do is string together some buzzwords and catchphrases together into a semi-coherent thought, bereft of any real meaning.

"Killing does not justify more killing." Yes, it has a nice ring to it, but does it have weight? Can you roll it around in your mind and feel its heft? Does it point you towards deeper understanding, or is it merely a phrase that sounds nice, but is really a mere phantom; a void without any form? You cannot build a philosophy on nice soundbites. It's akin to eating a Snickers bar. It tastes good and it'll fill you up, but it offers no nutritional value to your body. It is merely an object you ingest to experience a brief moment pleasure. Which is not to say that Snickers bars don't have their place in the world. It is nice every now and then to experience empty pleasure, but man cannot live on candy bars alone. He must already be nourished by a balanced diet.

And so it is with the nice, short quotes. They cannot nourish your mind and soul. You can't build your beliefs upon them; else your mind will be malnourished. They make for the occasional well-placed plant in the house of your mind, but your mind cannot be a mere collection of flora haphazardly scattered about some empty ground.

Let's take the phrase "Killing does not justify killing". What does it mean? More importantly, what are the consequences of this belief and is it morally acceptable?

It seems like a perfectly reasonable belief, but at the outset I can see problems with it. I don't doubt the genuine motivations behind the belief. It is good to have the interests of your fellow man at heart. No one in his or her right mind likes to see killing or deal with the aftermath of the act. Human life is precious, and peace is precious as well. Good people like to see their fellow travelers in this world live a fulfilling and peaceful life, free from the evils that men can do.

The problem is that this belief is based on a feeling free rational and logical thought. It is a good feeling, but feelings that are not balanced and reinforced by reason lead to horrible consequences. You cannot have one without the other, as imbalance breeds disaster. It is tragic that while the belief of "killing does not justify killing" comes from a genuine desire to eliminate suffering, it actually leads to the reverse, as all those who believe it have absolved themselves of their responsibility to their fellow man, because it does not address the world as it is. It only addresses the world as it should be. It is the goal, the destination that we should be striving for, yet those who believe it treat it as the starting point from which a just world will be achieved. It is backwards.

It negates one's commitment to the welfare of their fellow man, because it does not take into account that there are those who do not wish for peace. They are fueled by rage, greed and a need for power at the expense at those who unfortunately stand in their path. They are the flip side of the emotional coin; the exact opposite of those who want to see everyone prosper. These people do not care about anyone else's welfare but their own. They will kill, plunder and enslave if it means attaining their goal of personal power. To them, people are merely objects to be used and discarded as the situation warrants.

It's hard for those on the other side to comprehend the dark hearts of their opposites. This is natural. Pacifists are true optimists. They tend to focus on what is good about humanity, and in doing so lose sight of what is bad about it. They want to believe that all people naturally want to do what is good and right, because that is what they believe as well. You need only work the Scrooge over and remind him of his own humanity and in the end he will see the light. Unfortunately, they see humanity as it can be, not as it is. There are those who will do ill because they can and no amount of wishing or cajoling will change their ways. The pacifists, though, will not, and probably cannot comprehend this basic fact. They will rationalize an evil man's actions. They will look for any way to redeem him. It cannot be so with some of the dark ones of this world.

"Killing does not justify killing" absolves one of their responsibilities to their fellow man because it means that those who mean ill can wreak havoc on everyone else and can continue doing so because you will not do anything to stop them. Thousands die and you do nothing. Hundreds of thousands live squalid lives of misery and pain, yet you will do nothing. It is a safe thing to believe, because it requires no more action on your part than to sit there and believe it. Belief unbalanced by action is meaningless and requires no more courage than to convince yourself of your own rightness. The humanity that you would like to see live in peace and prosperity is butchered and abused by those whose ambitions are unchecked. Those who do not take action will consign their fellow man and their descendents to ugly, brutal suffering at the hands of those who care merely for themselves. Of what use will your beliefs be then? How can the world you dream of be brought about if you take no action to bring it about, and is it morally correct to allow your fellow human beings to suffer and die while you do nothing? If life is so precious, do you not then have a responsibility to ensure that those who would casually take it be destroyed to the benefit of all? Killing is never justified, but could it be that it's sometimes necessary to perpetrate a little evil in order to prevent total and catastrophic evil?

Finally, we come to the question of how one can safely believe "killing does not justify killing", yet not have their contemporaries and descendents live lives under the brutality of monsters. It's because there are people who believe in keeping those monsters at bay or destroying them outright. These people, through the sword, allow pacifists to have a society through which they can comfortably propagate their belief. It is the balance of belief and action writ large, and it is only by maintaining this balance that we can secure the conditions necessary to maintain a peaceful world for others and our children. If the balance were to tip into pure pacifism, then we would open ourselves (and our descendants) to tyranny from without, tip too far over toward thoughtless action without a foundational belief in peace and we suffer tyranny from within. It is on the knife's edge that we must balance, else we all fall into chaos and darkness.

And so I think that we must all endeavor to not only maintain a balanced society as a whole, but also to maintain balance within ourselves as well. Balance does not allow absolutes, like "Killing does not justify killing" or "Kill them all, let God sort them out", which are unrealistic, unhealthy and ultimately disastrous beliefs. You must balance belief with action, optimism with realism and feeling with reason. Only with a balanced mind can you nourish your soul and work towards the benefit and betterment of others.


With the Red Wings apparently in the midst of yet another "unexpected" playoff collapse, and the Lions and Tigers (and Bears! Oh my!) the subject of late-night comedy, fans of Detroit's pro sports teams have one hope left : The Pistons.

Unfortunately, they face a red-hot Toronto Raptors squad in a short five-game series starting Sunday. Let's keep our fingers crossed that they don't wind up a laughingstock too.

Top 5 reasons to go to Long Island on vacation :
5 - There just are never enough obnoxious people at home.
4 - You were drawn to the area by the wonderful accommidations offered by the three hotels that actually appear to be in the business of renting out rooms to non-hourly rate guests.
3 - All flights to Israel and South Florida were booked.
2 - You have a thing for geese.
And the Number 1 reason to go to Long Island on vacation :
You need an excuse to take some time off from work, want to see your girlfriend, and want to try, ultimately unsuccessfully, to dispel your preconceived notions about the people who hail from cities like Islip and Ronkonkoma.
The Derb

John Derbyshire weighs in on what it will take to pacify the lunatics in the Middle East. I couldn't agree more.
Conservative Greens?

Well, kinda.
New Enemy in Afghanistan


Friday, April 19, 2002


5-2 Vancouver, final. Sick.

Goal! For the wrong team! 3-1 Canucks.

Goal! 2-1, baby!

Um, 2-0...
The Dead Things

Early 2nd Period, and the Wings are down 1-0. Not good.
Top Five

Top Five nice things to say about the Queen of Jordan :
5 - She's so much cuter than the average dictator's wife.
4 - She's not a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
3 - She takes her crown off during interviews.
2 - Her pet name for the King of Jordan is "Pudge".
And the Number 1 nice thing to say about the Queen of Jordan :
She don't eat Matzo, but she sure likes the bone.

Jonah's latest from TownHall.com is here.
Charles "MC" Krauthammer

Today's column here.

Hopefully after he's done being Sharon's de facto diplomat to the US, Mr. Netanyahu will regain his job as Israeli Prime Minister. If not, at least we can hope that the next PM isn't the squishy Peres.
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict column

David Limbaugh gets to the heart of the matter here. Here's a quote :

"If a gang of hoodlums attacked you with weapons, and in the process of beating their fannies you were able to confiscate their weapons, would you return those weapons so they could attack you again – especially if you knew that their gang charter required them to continue attacking you until you existed no more?

"Of course you wouldn't, unless you're a complete idiot. So it's a stupid question – a no-brainer – one for which the answer is embarrassingly obvious. Then, why is it, my fellow colleagues in discernment, that half the world apparently fails to grasp it?"

My only problem with this quote is the last sentence. It's not "half the world" that "fails to grasp" the situation the Israelis are in; it's more like 90% of the world. And that's what makes the present situation ever the more unbearable.
Pitchfork Pat

Patrick J. Buchanan continues to write columns that are little more than advertisements for his recent book, the best-selling "Death of the West". Now he asserts that the "death" of the Western world is being brought about by a "neo-Pagan" conspiracy against Christianity.

Hmm. Ever since Pat left the GOP for the Reform Party, he's been a little bit off-kilter. Maybe we should all pray to the Goat-God Zyxlybuk for the sake of the man's mental well-being. Heh.
Sicko to return to US

If you or I had done what he did, we'd be rotting in a prison cell right now. But I guess those with the means and inclination to flee to France receive a different level of justice than us peons.

Thursday, April 18, 2002


More McCain lunacy here.

The worthy site kausfiles breaks down the "McCain as Democrat" hysteria.

I doubt he'll run, and if he does, it'll either be in the GOP primary or as an Independent (where he actually might do suprisingly well). But, no matter what, having seen his shift to the left over the last couple of years, I am forever sorry for having supported him in the 2000 primary. Forgive me, for I have sinned.

Be sure to go to the Weekly Standard's Web site and vote in their "CAIR Memorial" poll.

Ann Coulter weighs in on ANWR here.
Elder Statesman

Larry Elder has another great article here. This one concerns taxes and spending.

Anyone who hasn't already purchased his book, "The Ten Things You Can't Say in America" should do so ASAP. It's chock full of stats that show just how dubious the liberal/leftist line is on any number of issues. Mr. Elder should be used in some capacity in the Bush administration. Maybe when Ari gets sick of being a media flak...
Quote of the Day

"Yasser Arafat is Osama Bin Laden with P.R." – Benjamin Netanyahu

Thanks to, uh, Neal Boortz.
Top Five

Top 5 headlines we aren't likely to see anytime soon :

5 - Ariel Sharon admits to torrid homosexual love affair with Chairman Arafat.
4 - Poll shows 80% support in France for US foreign policy.
3 - Saddam Hussein admits UN weapons inspectors, calls for elections, converts to Judiasm.
2 - Bill Bennett admits to torrid homosexual love affair with Chairman Arafat.
And the number 1 headline we aren't likely to see anytime soon :
Colin Powell proposes nuclear strike on Gaza; says he is "slavering for the blood of innocents".
Blowhard Boortz

I normally enjoy reading commentary from the radio talk-show host Neal Boortz, but he occasionally comes up with something so insane that it is worth pointing out and mocking.

Down near the bottom of an otherwise quality column, he writes of the 17th Amendment, "[t]his is the tragic amendment that turned the election of U.S. senators over to the voters instead of the various state legislatures". Huh? Why is increasing the rights and powers of the people a "tragic" thing? Why would Mr. Boortz rather have corrupt state legislators hand-pick sycophantic cronies for the upper house of Congress rather than the voters?

This comment is about on par in terms of lunacy with his recent attack on the large chunk of Americans who happen to smoke. He called them, if I remember correctly, "incredibly stupid people".

Now, he certainly has a right to his opinions, same as anyone else. And being a talk-show host, he has an incentive to be as inflammatory as possible in order to get more listeners. But these two comments are nothing more than examples of idiocy. Luckily, idiocy only comprises a small minority of his points-of-view. Let's hope those numbers hold.
Gore Commentary

Robert A. George writes about the former Vice-President's positives and negatives - and doesn't come to a conclusion one way or the other.

My thoughts? He's the front-runner in the Democrat primary in 2004, but he's just about the worst candidate the Dems could realistically nominate, with the exception of Dick "Howdy-Doody" Gephardt. Hillary has the Clinton name and the Clinton rolodex, as well as the support of Hollywood leftists and "soccer moms". Daschle is the highest elected Democrat in office, and his soft-spoken manner might play well with Midwestern voters. Kerry is a war hero. Lieberman is a centrist and sort-of a minority. John Edwards is telegenic and from the South. All of these people would have a better shot at the White House than Gore would. But none of them will likely get the chance. Hard-core Democrats (the kind that vote in primaries) are still bitter over Gore's narrow loss in 2000. They still think he won, they think Bush is illegitimate, and they want revenge. If Gore keeps waving the bloody shirt, he's almost guaranteed the nomination, escpecially given the fact that he has the most foreign-policy experience of any Democrat in the field.

But he won't win the general election, because the average non-hardcore-Democrat remembers him as a pedantic, sneering, condescending jerk. President Bush is none of those things. It's still very early, but the smart money is on "four more years" as opposed to "Gore's four years".
Today's G-File

Jonah Goldberg offers thoughtful commentary, as always, this time on Saddam, the history of the Middle East, and terrorism.
''Adopt-a-Godfather'' program goes horribly wrong


Wonderful. It's always heartwarming to see our elected representatives siding with the Persian Gulf dictators over the security of the American people. Now our only hope for some measure of energy independence in the near future is an unlikely conference committee compromise that would allow new oil exploration. I wouldn't hold my breath.

Wednesday, April 17, 2002

Ah, shit. The vile Canucks beat my Red Wings 4-3 in OT. Could this be the start of yet another playoff collapse for Detroit? We'll have to see.
Well, my prediction was close. The final score will be 4-3, not 5-3. Of course, I don't know who's gonna end up winning, since OT hasn't begun yet...
The Red Wings are about to face off against the Canucks. The two highest-scoring teams in hockey. Should be worth the price of admission.

Prediction : Red Wings 5, Canucks 3
Wonderful satire from the master here.

If Mr. Hanson doesn't win any awards in the near future, there is no justice.
Good ol' Walter Shapiro serves up some more of his tiresome anti-Bush blather here.

He seems to want the President to force America's only strong and steady ally in the Muslim world to hold elections ASAP. And what result would that likely have? Probably the American ally Musharraf losing power to some Islamo-nationalist, leading to increased difficulty realizing victory in the still-unfinished business in Afghanistan.

Let's try to remember that Pakistan is a nuclear power, with a highly radicalized population. A moderate general is currently in power, and is doing nearly everything he can to help us in our War on Terrorism. Democratic reforms do us no good at this time. Let Musharraf hold power until the war has been largely won, and in the meantime get him to secularize the populace. Eventually, the people of Pakistan will be ready for democracy. But now is not the time.
Michael Kelly has an article worth reading here.

His most interesting, and telling, comment is this :

"The United States is for democracy and order, not necessarily always in that order."

Not that there's anything wrong with that, as Jerry Seinfeld might say. We seem to be getting more support in our War on Terrorism from non-democratic regimes like Pakistan than bastions of democracy like France. And that's just fine. We find ourselves in a time in which we must be uber-pragmatists, though still remain anchored by certain principles. If a military dictatorship like the one in Pakistan is offering help, then we should gladly accept it. And after things have calmed down some, we can push for democratic reforms in that nation. But not prematurely. Success in our new war depends on an almost oxymoronic mixture of humility and boldness that was decidedly lacking in the Clinton Administration. Bush, so far, seems up to the task. Let's hope that continues for the duration.
This is a paper I recently wrote for my college Communications course. Enjoy :

The Gulf War, Part Two

Back before the terrorist attacks of September 11th, the great

debate raging in Washington was over which political party had lost the

budget surplus. Cable news program hosts were more interested in

Chandra Levy than foreign policy. Mexico’s Vincente Fox was the foreign

leader whose picture was most likely to appear on the pages of USA

Today or the New York Times. Not anymore. Now the great debate, both

on Pennsylvania Avenue and on Main Street, is about what to do with

Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi dictator. Though no decision has yet been made

(officially, at least), the answer seems clear : The United States must

destroy Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq.

The opponents of such an action have many complaints. They say

such a hostile move would fracture the world-wide coalition against terror,

especially with regards to the Arab and Muslim worlds, Russia, and

Europe. They say Saddam has been defanged by a decade of sanctions and

is no longer a threat. They say the potential for massive civilian casualties

is too high. They say Saddam would let loose weapons of mass

destruction, including chemical and biological weapons, and possibly a

radioactive “dirty bomb”, against US-led coalition forces and neighboring

countries. They say eliminating Saddam would either lead to someone

even worse taking over, or create a “power vacuum”, leading to chaos and

turmoil, and possibly strengthening Iraq’s neighbor Iran, which like Iraq is

a charter member of President Bush’s “axis of exil”. However, on each

and every point they are in error.

First of all, the argument that the coalition will break apart if the

US acts decisively in Iraq is the same argument that was made previous to

the war in Afghanistan. (Apparently, anti-war activists are strong

supporters of recycling...) This predicted collapse of the coalition didn’t

happen then, and it won’t happen if the US goes into Iraq either. Our allies

always urge restraint, regardless of the circumstances. If we made it

policy to wait for their full support before taking action, we’d still be

haggling over what measures to take against the Taliban, and the people of

Afghanistan would be living under totalitarianism to this day. If and when

the US decides to strike against Saddam, America's allies will make their usual

objections, but in the end will follow our lead.

Second, the idea that Saddam is no longer a threat to the US or his

neighbors is ludicrous. Saddam has a long history of aggression against his

neighbors, such as the eight-year war with Iran, the invasion of Kuwait,

and the unprovoked launching of Scud missiles at Israel. He also has a

long history of attempting to build weapons of mass destruction. He is

thought to have a stockpile of biological weapons, including anthrax, and

is known to have used chemical weapons against both Iran and,

sickeningly, his own people. He kicked United Nations weapons

inspectors out of his country nearly four years ago, in defiance of

international law and the terms of the treaty his government agreed to

abide by at the end of the Gulf War. In those four years, who knows what

hellish weapons his scientists have managed to build? A nuclear weapon

might not be too far off. As President Bush said, time is not on our side.

Third is the issue of civilian casualties. While such deaths are a

tragedy, they are largely avoidable by the use of “smart bombs”. The

majority of the bombs in the US arsenal are now classified as “smart”,

compared to three or four percent during the Gulf War just a decade ago.

Besides, as horrible as even limited “collateral damage” is, it is certainly

preferable to the wholesale slaughter of millions of American civilians that

would take place if Saddam gets his hands on a nuclear weapon. And those

innocent Iraqis who die will have given their lives so that their fellow

countrymen and -women could live free from oppression.

The fourth argument is perhaps the most compelling : Will Saddam

use all his hideous weapons of mass destruction on US troops and/or

neighboring countries if it becomes obvious he is about to lose power?

The answer to that might very well be yes, but this is a lose-lose situation.

If we attack now, he might use chemical, biological, or even radiological

weapons against us, but if we wait, he will most definitely use even more

destructive nuclear weapons against us. Hopefully the civilian populations

of neighboring countries will be issued gas masks and will be vaccinated

against some of the possible diseases Saddam might unleash with his bio-

weapons. US military forces will already have been equiped properly to

deal with such threats. The threat of a radiological “dirty bomb”, however,

is not easily prepared for. According to a recent issue of US News and

World Report, taking an iodine tablet immediately after an attack might

offer some protection from thyroid cancer down the road, and this option

should certainly be explored. Troops will likely carry radiation-detecting

equipment with them in order to be able to immediately identify this

situation, and therefore deal with it as best they can.

Finally, the argument is made that Iraq after Saddam will be in

even worse shape, either run by another brutal dictator, or fractured and

chaotic. A situation in which there is a “power vacuum” could lead to

Iran gaining increased influence in the region. That would not be a good

thing, as Iran is right up there with Iraq in the “axis of evil”. However, the

alternative is to wait, to allow the status quo to continue, and to let the

Iraqi people continue to live in misery. Quite frankly, it is unimaginable

that someone worse than Saddam could be found to take power. By

removing Saddam from power, we can nudge the new leader, whoever he

or she is, towards democracy. Not only is that good for Iraqis, but it would

serve as an example of how other nations in the Arab and Muslim worlds

can be governed by the people, not an elite few.

The coalition against terror will survive. Saddam still poses a threat

to the rest of the world. Civilian casualties will be minimal in any military

campaign. Saddam’s regime is getting closer to acquiring a nuclear device

every day. Democratic reforms can be instituted in Iraq for the benefit of

its citizens and as an example to the world. The answer to the dilemma

facing the nation today is clear : The US should topple Saddam from

power, and do it soon.
Top 5 things never to say in response to "How are you?" from your girlfriend's father :

5 - "I'd be feeling a lot better if I had remembered to pull out."
4 - "Pretty good, for someone in the late-stages of syphillis."
3 - "Better than you, you fat old waste of skin."
2 - "Great! I finally got accepted into the Hell's Angels!"
And the number 1 thing never to say in response to "How are you?" from your girlfriend's father :
"Huh? Sorry, I wasn't listening. I'm still basking in the image of your daughter finally doing bukkake."
Well, Roblog is finally up! Enjoy!