Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Save Reunion on FOX

There's nothing worse than a whodunit with an "it" and no "who." Well, maybe advanced syphilis, but that's off topic. FOX has a pretty cool show called Reunion, each episode of which takes place in a successive year of the lives of a group of friends—one of whom was murdered by one of the others. The series was set to last one season, with the last episode taking place in 2006. Alas, they've made it to about 1990 and FOX is going to pull the plug on the show.

Which one is the murderer? How did that guy become a priest? Won't it be funny to see the characters live through the grunge era? If you want to know, you're going to have to sign this petition. It'll be your good deed for the day.

Bush Leads March to Victory

In a bid to counter criticisms from the Democrats and from members of his own party, President Bush released his "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq" today.

Details are sketchy, but I was able to get a copy of the document from my ultra top-secret double-deep background triple-dog-dare source at the White House. Without further ado, here it is:

I feel so much better now that this long national nightmare will soon be behind us. Just hold on to your underpants.

Sunday, November 27, 2005

Xians Decry War on Xmas

Now that Thanksgiving is over, 'tis the season for insufferable bitching and moaning. Yes, conservatives and assorted wackos everywhere are stocking up on green and red ammo and manning the trenches in defense of the Savior in this, the annual War Against Christmas. Perhaps this year will be the War Against Christmas to End All Wars Against Christmas, insha'allah.

This annual rite of the holiday—whoops, that's offensive to Christians, I meant Christmas—season is officially inaugurated as soon as a FOX News pundit releases a book on the subject. Thanks, John Gibson! Game on! Then it's time for the most privileged people on the face of planet Earth—namely, members of America's socio-religious overclass—to parade across our nightly news screens whining about how their rights are being cruelly trampled by wiccans and the ACLU (as if there's a difference, right?). "The guy at Wal-Mart said 'Happy Holidays' to me. America is clearly falling apart at the seams. Who cares about made-up holidays like Kwanzaa and Hannukah, anyway?" Heaven forfend!

Lo, the signs of the apocalypse are everywhere. For instance, Darlene's mom couldn't buy Catholic-themed stamps at the post office. How her Christmas cards will ever find their way without the supernatural help of the virgin and child is beyond me. I wish them Godspeed, nonetheless. This post is particularly notable for the highly dramatized retelling of a conspiratorial conversation with the post office worker. Great Dan Brownesque stuff. Of course, this would all be so much more meaningful if it were remotely true. Have a look at the United States Postal Service web page and, gasp!, there they are, available in packs of 20 or 100. I just tried to order $37,000 worth of them with no problem whatsoever, so they are presumably in stock.

My personal favorite is when people get all bent out of shape over the use of 'Xmas' rather than 'Christmas'—apparently believing the former to be a callous attempt to "take Christ out of Christmas." It's my favorite because it is a theory so easily disproved that only the most dim-witted among us subscribe to it. But then again, the Internet wouldn't be nearly as much fun without the dimwits. Here's a greatest hits of moonbattery:
  • Who invented "X"mas? Why not C'mas, instead? My guess is that it was some twisted lefty from the heyday of communism in America. Someone who thought it important to X out Christ, not simply abbreviate.—One of the geniuses over at
  • An "X" cannot save you. An "X" cannot lift your spirit from the pit you may be in. An "X" cannot fill your soul with hope or change your life. An "X" cannot establish the path and direction of your life. An "X" cannot fill your home and family with peace and love.—from "Who Took the X Out of Xmas?".
  • It isn't Xmas, but Christmas/For that's the day Christ came./When you take Christ out of Christmas/You cross out life's best name.—from "Keep Christ in Christmas," perhaps the worst poem ever written, author unknown and likely embarrassed.
  • I can't remember when the very name of Christmas was so reviled. In the '50s that dreadful "Xmas" popped up but it was so blatant an assault on the name of Christ that it fell out of favor eventually. However, this did not stop the secularists.—from "Say It Loud And Say It Proud: Merry Christmas!" by Ann Huggett.
  • One often saw signs in stores offering "Merry Xmas" greetings. Today anti-Christ organizations such as the ACLU and the NEA have furthered their master plan....The liberal conspiracy to crush Christianity is reminiscent of Hitler's "solution" to the world's problems....The left-wing's "master plan" concerns itself with the elimination of what they consider the main threat to their agenda: Christianity. Liberals want abortion on demand, homosexual marriage, full government control of our children, the ability to censor any speech or thought with which they disagree, and a socialist nation that is part of (or preferably controlled by) a powerful One-World Government. Christians stand in their way, and therefore must be crushed.—from "Taking the Christmas Out of Christmas" by Tom Barrett
So, where do these homosexual atheist commie-Nazi perverts get off taking Christ out of Christmas? Well, they're not, actually. According to many, many widely available sources, including this one, the X in Xmas is actually the Greek letter chi which has stood as a representation for Christ in art and sacred writing for nearly 20 centuries, now. One of the most familiar examples of this is with the Chi-Rho or labarum symbol (right) that was created to be carried into battle as a military standard by Emperor Constantine I (of Constantinople fame) circa 325 AD. The Oxford English Dictionary traces the first recorded use of Xmas all the way back to 1551, years before the pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock, bringing with them the very Judeo-Christian values that their modern puritan counterparts so dearly treasure. Oh, by the way, the puritans banned Christmas as a wicked, pagan celebration of irreligious debauchery. Apparently it wasn't kosher to celebrate Christmas in the Boston area until the mid 19th Century. So much for tradition, eh?

Personally, I think the forced secularization of Christmas in the public realm is obnoxious and unnecessary. The only thing more obnoxious is Christians in America trying to come off like an oppressed minority. So someone at Macy's says "Happy Holidays" to you instead of "Merry Christmas." Big freaking deal! Is your faith really so weak that it must be reinforced by the nation's retailers and town squares so it won't disappear? Or are you more concerned that other people are exposed to the religious message of Christmas? If it's the latter, than in what way is that not about forcing your own beliefs on other people? That would be a pretty pinko-commie thing to do, don't you think?

Happy Festivus.

Thursday, November 24, 2005

The Worst People in America

On Nov. 2nd, Maj. Gerald M. Bloomfield II and Capt. Michael D. Martino were providing covering fire for a group of Marines caught in a battle with insurgents outside Ramadi when their helicopter was hit by enemy fire and crashed. Both soldiers were killed.

On the 11th, Bloomfield's body was laid to rest in Elkhart, Indiana. Unfortunately for family and friends, his funeral was besieged by religious fanatics—not Muslims angry at American intervention in Iraq, mind you, but members of the Westboro Baptist Church from Topeka, Kansas. They picketed the funeral, holding signs with wholesome Christian messages like "God Sent the IEDs," "America Is Doomed" and "God Hates You."

The church, founded in 1955 by "Pastor" Fred Phelps, is based on the following precept:
The only lawful sexual connection is the marriage bed. All other sex activity is whoremongery and adultery, which will damn the soul forever in Hell. Decadent, depraved, degenerate and debauched America, having bought the lie that It's OK to be gay, has thereby changed the truth of God into a lie, and now worships and serves the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever.
You can check out the Westboro Baptist Church website by surfing over to this charming domain name: (you knew someone had to own it, and now you know). According to the church mission statement, "GOD HATES FAGS"—though elliptical—is a profound theological statement, which the world needs to hear more than it needs oxygen, water and bread." It seems our brothers in Christ have spent so much time with their heads buried in the Bible that they haven't managed to crack open a dictionary any time recently. They should look up "elliptical," not to mention "profound."

Members of Phelps' church have been picketing military funerals around the country to drive home their point that every death in Iraq (plus Hurricane Katrina and the killer tornado in southern Indiana) are God's wrath visited on a country that deserves damnation because it tolerates homosexuality. They took a break for Thanksgiving (even bigots like turkey), but they're back at it today in Oklahoma City, picketing the funeral of Marine Cpl. Jeffry A. Rogers.

The anti-military angle is more fleshed out on Westboro Baptist Church's sister (sorry, ladies!) site—yep, you guessed it— On this site we learn that "The American Army is a Fag Army!!" Referring to a photo of flag-draped coffins coming home from Iraq, they write, "You worship at the fag altar, you get boxes draped in your fag flag coming home!" In case you're still unconvinced of their wingnuttery, there's this nugget:
Hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, earthquakes, IEDs, and more—we pray daily for more outpourings of God's justice and wrath on this evil, hateful nation. It is a sin NOT to take pleasure in the wrathful out pourings of God's justice on this nation.
So, if God is love, they must be praying to a different God.

In fairness, the good Baptists don't spend all their time slandering American troops. They also reveal that God Hates Sweden ("Sweden is a land of sodomy, bestiality, and incest. ...THANK GOD FOR ALL DEAD SWEDES!!!") and that Pope John Paul II is burning in hell alongside Ronald Reagan (because he was friends with Rock Hudson, natch) and Reggie White.

All of this prompts one central question: Really, seriously, what the hell is wrong with Kansas? First "Intelligent Design" and now this? Is there something in the water there that turns people into religious dingbats? If we really want to look for a sign from above, I'd have to conclude, based on the number of idiots he put there, that God doesn't hate fags, He hates Kansas.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Feds Get Down & 'Dirty'

He's the "dirty bomber"! He plotted with Al Qaeda to blow up American apartment buildings! He's raiser?!

After more than three years in a military prison, held as an enemy combatant without charge and without access to counsel, Jose Padilla was finally indicted on federal charges yesterday.

When this former gang-member-turned-terror-suspect was picked up in 2002, the sensationalist allegations were that he was planning a radiological attack on an American city. In 2004, the Justice Department suggested that the so-called "dirty bomber" also planned to use natural gas to blow up American apartment complexes.

Neither of these allegations surfaced in the indictment of Padilla that was announced by Attorney General Gonzales yesterday. Instead, he is being charged with "being part of a violent terrorism conspiracy rooted in North America but directed at sending money and recruits overseas." Don't get me wrong, that doesn't sound too good, but a dirty bomb it's not. The Bush administration may like to sex-up intelligence reports, but they don't seem to mind leaving the indictments homely.

So, why only this after three years? Is this really all we got? Here's an eyebrow-raising paragraph from the Washington Post:
The Bush administration hopes that the indictment will effectively derail the possibility of an adverse ruling from the Supreme Court in the Padilla case, which could decide to limit the government's ability to detain U.S. citizens as enemy combatants.
Now it makes sense! The Bush administration is coming up with these (comparatively) bland charges not because they think Padilla has the right to a trial, but because they want to ensure that they can deny the same from any other U.S. citizen they might happen to charge as an enemy combatant in the future. Pretty sneaky, sis!

As soon as the charges were filed, Gonzales argued that because Padilla "has now been charged in a grand jury in Florida, we believe that the petition [to the Supreme Court] is moot and that the petition should not be granted." This is yet another example of the government fighting tooth and nail against any limitations (or even scrutiny) whatsoever on their treatment of terror war detainees. But they're treating them just fine, mind you. We can take their word on that (and have to, thanks to the veil of secrecy).

And what of the value of holding Padilla in the brig nigh these three years as an enemy combatant?
The new charges rely on evidence gathered separately from Padilla's confinement and interrogation in military custody, meaning the government does not have to worry about the admissibility of such evidence in civilian courts, Justice officials said.
In short, nada. Whatever our government "learned" from him during his controversial incarceration is not part of this indictment—in part because it may not be admissible in court. And yet Bush wants to make sure that this option—one that has obviously proved so useful—is still open to him.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch is guardedly optimistic about this turn of events, proving once and for all that they're totally incapable of putting two and two together.

Saturday, November 19, 2005

Racing Days

There's a festival atmosphere in the air and I half expect to see ladies walking down the street in finery and fancy hats, sipping mint juleps. Everybody, it seems, has got a horse to bet on.

Sure, the Kentucky Derby's long gone and the stakes in this race are somewhat higher. I'm talking about everybody's favorite spectator sport of late: the Iraq war. I turn on the TV or open a newspaper and I'm so depressed at what passes for informed debate in this country.

On the one hand, we have a group of people (and quite a large one at that) who say we should pull out now. We were lied to and deliberately misled into a war that we had no business fighting in the first place. Cut and run. It's not our problem. Unfortunately, to adapt a phrase from the other side, you face the present with the past you've had, not with the past you'd like to have had. Even if Bush and Co. really did deliberately mislead the American people, that doesn't change the fact that we did invade Iraq and we have massively destabilized that country. Even if we came in under false pretenses, to leave now may actually be worse than to never have come in the first place. If, as this side would have it, we are guilty of a moral failing, then certainly we can't correct it with yet another moral error.

I should say that I fully support the investigation into the pre-war intelligence fiasco, and if any of this was deliberate subterfuge as opposed to massive incompetence, heads need to roll. The timeline for the Iraq war, however, can't be based on that. (It is worth mentioning that almost everyone, including President Clinton and most foreign intelligence organizations, believed that Saddam had WMDs.) That said, some sort of timeline might be nice...

On the other hand we have a callous group of people who are so supportive of the Bush administration that they accuse anyone who criticizes the government of treasonably undermining the troops and the war effort in general. They do not ask the president for a coherent plan because that is, or has become, a partisan request. They're so concerned with winning a political argument that they now openly advocate torture and the contravention of the very Geneva conventions that we were instrumental in creating in the first place.

Orthodoxy is the flavor of the moment. The problem with orthodoxy is that it leaves precious little room for actual thought. People in this country—on the left and the right—are so busy pulling for their horses that they forget to pay attention to the jockeys. Politics is just another brand choice and citizens are increasingly relegated to cheerleading duties.

This war is a complicated issue that desperately requires thinking, yet it seems to be provoking less and less of it with each passing day. Even worse, anyone who does attempt to look at the situation as it is rather than as they want it to be gets shouted down by the braying masses. It's as if people have forgotten that the horses are supposed to be the ones with the blinders.

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Metal Health Will Drive You Mad

Mike at Tear It Down invites you to take the ultimate death metal test.

25 band names—seven are fakes. Can you guess which ones? Could anyone have actually named their band Christ Puncher? How about Angelgrinder?

The heavy metal gauntlet has been thrown down. Are you man enought to pick it up...and bash someone over the head with it? Rock on!

P.S. If you score really well on this test, I don't want you anywhere near my house.

Monday, November 07, 2005

Bush Sweet Talks Nation

While touting free trade agreements and dodging anti-Bush protests in South and Central America, our president was able to take a moment to address growing fears that the United States government is engaged in widespread torture of War on Terror detainees.

Here—more or less—is what he had to say:
We are at war with an enemy that lurks and plots and plans and wants to hurt America again. And so, you bet, we'll aggressively pursue them, but we'll do so under the law. We do not torture. Really, I swear. We don't. C'mon, I'm trying to be serious here! Hey, where are you going? Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. No, that's not Dick Cheney. He's at our top secret CIA prison in Bu—eh, I mean he's catching up on paperwork in Washington. Yeah. Washington. Why am I threatening to use the first veto of my presidency to nix legislation that would outlaw torture at the same time that I'm saying we don't do that kind of thing? I'm glad you asked. You see, a veto is like the shotgun you keep ready and loaded in the hall closet. Every so often, you just gotta take that baby out and make sure it works for when you really need it. Since we already don't torture people, we technically don't have a need for the law, so it's a good one to practice on. Plus, you can't beat that inflated sense of self-esteem.
I don't know about you, but I feel so much better now. I also have a strange urge to go skeet shooting.

FOX on the Horns of a Dilemma

***FOX News Internal Memo***

From: Roger Ailes, President
To: Brit Hume, Managing Editor

Brit, we've got a serious problem here unlike any that's ever confronted the FOX News family before. Frankly, it presents an ideological paradox that threatens to rip the brain trust apart at the seams. Hannity has stopped taking solid food and poor O'Reilly just stares out of his window for hours at a time muttering "A Current Affair" over and over again (although I could swear I heard him say "stop the War on Christmas" once during Fox and Friends).

I am speaking, of course, about the Muslim riots in Paris. On the one hand we've got crazy, violent Muslims doing that crazy violent Muslim thing they do. On the other hand we've got the dirty, cowardly French, who once had the gall (get it? gall! heh heh) to criticize American foreign policy.

Up here in the corporate offices, we just can't figure out how to cover this one. Should we have sympathy for the Muslims or the French? (God, I've had nightmares where I've had to answer that question!) It doesn't help any that the Muslims have deviated from the script, here. What I wouldn't give for a homicide bombing or two. That would clarify things.

I suggested to Rupert that we just send someone over there to get both sides of the story and let the viewers decide, but he's not really comfortable with the fair and balanced angle. "Don't change horses in midstream," is what he told me.

So, we need you guys to work up some talking points that don't threaten O'Reilly's boycott but also don't give aid and comfort to the enemy (either one, in this case). Any chance we could work Harry Reid or Chuck Schumer into this? See what you can work up and we'll talk after you go downstairs to let Colmes out of his cage for exercise.

Yours in trepidation,


P.S. Don't send Shepard Smith to cover this story, whatever you do. That whole Katrina debacle proves that he's a little too sympathetic to the unwashed poor. Sure, everyone loves an underdog story, but let's maintain our focus on kids who can't sing "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" in school because of the ACLU. People seem to eat that kind of crap up. Maybe Shepard could do with a few more weeks at the FOX News "Corporate Retreat."

How the Liberals Stole Christmas

Well, it's getting to be that time of year again. A tell-tale nip is in the air, there's an exaggerated frenzy at the mall, and the hysterical claims of anti-Christian bias are emanating once more from Fox News (doesn't it seem to start earlier every year?)—yes, it's the Christmas season and anyone who says differently is going to hell!

World O'Crap has a fantastic post (under the priceless title "'War on Christmas' POWs to be Held in Secret CIA Prisons") about Fox News anchor John Gibson's new stocking stuffer of a book, The War on Christmas: How the Liberal Plot to Ban the Sacred Christian Holiday Is Worse than You Thought.

Apparently, under the guise of "tolerance" and "diversity," godless, heathen liberals are undermining the very fabric of society in their tireless quest to crucify Jesus for a second time. For shame! The minions of Satan announce themselves with the evil greeting "Happy Holidays" (which means "secular humanism is better than God" in Arabic, by the way) rather than with those holy words spoken by Jesus Christ himself, right after the knee-slapper he told about the meek and the peacemakers: "Merry Christmas."

They do this not because they can't be 100% sure you're a Christian (and there's something a bit off about you, I've noticed), or because there actually are other religious and secular holidays around the same time (New Year's, anyone?), but because their communist rat brains won't rest until the concept of God has been wiped from the face of the earth, one sinister non-denominational greeting at a time.

It's nice to see someone like Gibson finally standing up for the rights of persecuted Christians who, at last count, made up about 84% of the U.S. population. It's always important for journalists to give voice to the voiceless. It is also nice to see Gibson's choice of artwork for his book's front cover. What better way to underline the truly sacred nature of this holiday than with a Douglas fir decorated with electric lights, just like the ones known to cover the hillsides of Israel in the time of Jesus. John the Apostle wrote lovingly about these sacred trees in his lesser-known gospel, Santa Claus or Satan's Claws—Why Liberals and Hebrews Want You to Join Them in Hell.

So, listen up to Fox News. It's time to get into crisis mode. The War on Christmas threat level has been raised from evergreen to tinsel. And, for God's sake, say "Merry Christmas" to someone before it's too late. Otherwise, you're bound to wake up one day to find that your kids are gay and married and speaking French. And they won't be saying joyeux noel, that's for sure.

Friday, November 04, 2005

Brownie's Soul, Inbox Laid Bare

In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, many observers were baffled when President Bush told his inept FEMA chief, "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job"—a claim that was, on the surface at least, demonstrably false. Now, it appears that a series of revealing emails written by Mike Brown may shed some light on what exactly the president was talking about.

Of course, this is all speculation since Brown and Bush didn't communicate with each other via email—perhaps preferring the intimacy of the hand-written mash note, a la Harriet Miers—but Bush's plaudits make a whole lot more sense if we assume he's just referring to the fact that Brown found him a top-notch dog-sitter, loaned him his 10% off card from Nordstrom, and introduced him to the best—and least crowded—crawfish joints in all of Baton Rouge.

Come to think of it, that is a heckuva job, and it's one Brownie didn't have to roll up his sleeves to accomplish.
Listed on BlogShares