You know, considering Osama isn't likely to cut a check to help his fellow Muslims in Indonesia, WTF is this Sri Lankan Oedipus expecting? (Hat tip: The Corner)
Thursday, December 30, 2004
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
A break from the heavyness for a moment to give notice to the "new" soundtrack to the Cartoon Network show "Hi Hi Puffy Amiyumi" that I got from Hermione for Christmas.
I was excited when they announced this show cuz I've been a fan of theirs for a couple of years, but let's just say that show stinks on ice. Awful bad terrible crap!!! (No wonder Godzilla keeps stomping Tokyo!) Lame Powerpuff Girls cartoon and the girls themselves only appear for about 15-20 seconds as bookends to the lameness. I turned off the tape halfway thru the second show. Pass at all costs.
BUT....the CD is a really good primer on their music, especially if you haven't obtained "An Illustrated History" (a hits comp to introduce them to America a couple of years back) or "Nice", cuz HHPAY recycles about half its tracks from those two albums, though there's enough good stuff to warrant another dip.
The Japanese lyric version of "Pure Asia" ( an awesome ELO ripoff) appears here as well as a remake of their creative guru Andy Sturmer's song from his old band Jellyfish, "Joining A Fan Club." It's hard to pinpoint what's duped by the track listing alone because "Invisible Tomorrow" on "Nice" becomes "Friends Forever" on "HHPAY". Stupid stupid stupid! (If I'd listened to "Nice" more in the last year, I'd prolly be able to spot more dupes.)
Sure the girls are cute, but their voices are nothing particularly special - they remind me of Bananarama - but the MUSIC is utterly brilliant. Their producers are incredibly clever in their writing and production as "That's the Way It Is" (HHPAY title - "Kore ga Watashi no Ikiruimichi" on "AIH") shows as it fuses a bunch of Beatles and Who licks that are simultaneously able to reference their inspirations without actually getting into copyright infringement. A neat trick.
Bottom line: Skip the show, get the CD or better yet, skip this one and get the previous two CDs. You're welcome.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 4:53 AM
I just went to Amazon and they have a big button to a page where you can contribute to the Red Cross.
In the time spent posting this, the contribution count has gone from 19279 donations totaling $968,231.00 to 19308 for $969,651.00 and this is the middle of the American night.
You know. That greedy, stingy, heartless country. (Must be the French visiting Amazon.com.)
UPDATE: In the 30 or so minutes since I posted this, the contribution total has increased to 19422 for $974,263. I'll check back at noon to see how the uncaring is going.
RE-UPDATE: Six hours later, it's up to 31920 donors for $1,758,650.04
So shameful. So stingy. So shameful.
< /sarcasm >
RE-RE-UPDATE: Another half-dozen hours, another million-plus bucks. 49457 givers, $2,843,430.73 collected.
Yep. We're simply the most selfish, greedy, mean, hateful people in the world. (I heard it on the NBC News, so it's gotta be true.)
< /totally fed-up acid-flamed sarcasm >
UPDATE @ 9:55 pm EST, approx. 27 hours since last update: 100,121 donors, $6,626,597.17
And the Red Cross reports that as of YESTERDAY (Weds.) noon, they'd received over $18 million dollars from AMERICANS.
I'm sure the UN thinks this is disgraceful in light of our unwillingness to pay higher taxes. Bastards.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 4:51 AM
I shouldn't be surprised that the MSM is piling on Dubya for not being a camera-hogging glory-whore like their beloved Bubba "I'm laughing, no I'm crying cuz the camera's on me" Clinton, but a cursory glance at the WaPo's Aid Grows Amid Remarks About President's Absence (washingtonpost.com) shows that Tubby Riefenstahl's bullsh*t smears about Presidential vacations are Holy Writ in the editorial halls of the supposedly objective media.
I'm on holiday vacation now and due to left-over time unused during the year, was out a full week ahead of my co-workers. Now, if they had a problem or something needed doing, it's not gonna be addressed by me until a couple of weeks later. Vacation for most means "I'm not working. See ya"
Despite Clinton's unexamined vacation habits, Dubya got unfairly smeared in "Farginghype 7-11" for being on vacation when anyone who looked at his schedules could see that he had plenty of work on the calendar. The President doesn't get to take the phone off the hook or pass off the job to lackeys while he naps, he's got an army of people briefing him and is able toact from wherever he is at a moment's notice. Clinton was able to order missiles launched to distract from his chunky mistress testifying before a Grand Jury while lollygagging with the hobnobs on Martha's Vineyard, yet were supposed to beleive Dubya is slacking.
I make this preface to show the hateful unfairness that the media is still spewing at Dubya. Despite my not voting for him and serious qualms about his job performance, I think it's instructive to observe how blatantly unfair his treatment is. Whatever he does will get bashed and I dunno how anyone can take the cheap shots so incessantly without wanting to just slug someone over it.
The Bush administration more than doubled its financial commitment yesterday to provide relief to nations suffering from the Indian Ocean tsunami, amid complaints that the vacationing President Bush has been insensitive to a humanitarian catastrophe of epic proportions.
Although U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland yesterday withdrew his earlier comment, domestic criticism of Bush continued to rise. Skeptics said the initial aid sums -- as well as Bush's decision at first to remain cloistered on his Texas ranch for the Christmas holiday rather than speak in person about the tragedy -- showed scant appreciation for the magnitude of suffering and for the rescue and rebuilding work facing such nations as Sri Lanka, India, Thailand and Indonesia.
After a day of repeated inquiries from reporters about his public absence, Bush late yesterday afternoon announced plans to hold a National Security Council meeting by teleconference to discuss several issues, including the tsunami, followed by a short public statement.
Bush's deepened public involvement puts him more in line with other world figures. In Germany, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder cut short his vacation and returned to work in Berlin because of the Indian Ocean crisis, which began with a gigantic underwater earthquake. In Britain, the predominant U.S. voice speaking about the disaster was not Bush but former president Bill Clinton, who in an interview with the BBC said the suffering was like something in a "horror movie," and urged a coordinated international response.
Go read the rest, but think about what can actually be done by him as his being pounded for not displaying sufficient FEELING about the disaster. What's he supposed to do? Rush over there to dig graves? Carry fresh water to villagers? WHAT?!?!? We've got relief flights under way, millions of dollars in aid and who knows what else and he's the bad guy because he didn't rush to a camera - like Clinton - to bite his lip and mouth platitudes about "feeling pain"?!?
Imagine you're a resident of the affected area. Which would benefit you more:
1. Sympathetic words from an criminal ex-President who let genocides occur on his watch without comment (cuz those black folks can't vote for him), but doesn't actually contribute more than his worthless words?
B. Actual aid from a President who is willing to send planes, troops, money and food to provide tangible reflief in this time of need?
Talk's cheap and so are the shots taken by the WaPo. Also, considering that Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the world, do you think America will gain some stature in among the Islamofascists so warmly supported by the media?
Yeah, didn't think so either. Nevermind.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 4:31 AM
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
One major source of pain for the Left has been the rise of countering viewpoints to their former monopoly on propaganda. From Matt Drudge's revelation that the media was covering up Bill Clinton's reckless behavior (which they still do - see: Marc Rich pardons) to the blogosphere's role in revealing the Feckless Crapweasel behind the curtain in this year's Election, they've been forced to start a money pit of a Potemkin radio network to spew unvarnished lies to their herd and generally been unpleasant to be around, but what's new?
Ed Driscoll has posted The Year Of Blogging Dangerously at Tech Central Station (hat tip: The Corner) listing the Top Ten moments in blogging for 2004.
For those of us Webloggers who track the media the way that sports fans follow the NFL, 2004 will be remembered as the year the mask not only slipped, it completely came off the mainstream media. Newspapers and television networks were happy -- almost gleeful -- to toss their previously vaunted claims of objectivity into the dumpster, to help defeat a president that, almost to a man, they despised.
Fortunately, the Blogosphere was there fight to back. Coming of age on and immediately after 9/11, there were numerous bloggers who watched with a combination of horror and glee at what we saw happening to the media in 2004.
It was horrific because most bloggers actually want to see a well-functioning press: one that reports the news fairly, and offers a wide range of opinions. And ideally, doesn't mix reporting and editorializing in the same story.
On the other hand, we were gleeful, at having so many stories to debunk and so much context to fill-in.
Read it all, but for the click-challenged, here's the rundown:
10. The Passion Versus Fahrenheit 9/11
9. Winter Soldier
8. Iraq Then And Now
7. Den Beste's Fall Preview
6. The Exit Polls
5. Political Conventions
4. Campaign Violence
3. The New York Times Announces It's Liberal
2. Christmas in Cambodia
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 10:44 PM
Yeah, a whole 300 votes closer! Woohoo!!! At a cost to Ohio taxpayers of over a million dollars more than the whining parties were billed, the recount didn't overturn the Election and somehow elevate the Feckless Crapweasel into the Oval Office. Wah.
Of course, the "let's count until a Democrat wins" people - see Washington's gubernatorial race for a prime example - aren't accepting the results:
Cliff Arnebeck, an attorney representing the voters in the challenge, wasn't taking much stock in the recount effort. He questioned why there was no independent investigation into the accuracy of counting machines to determine whether the machines had been tampered with.
"You're allowing the original error to be repeated a second time, so it's not a meaningful recount," he said.
The rabid Dubya haters were so far gone on their Kool-Aid, there was no result other than his defeat that they'd accept and they persist in clinging to the infantile fantasy that there is no reason he could've won without shenanagins. "It was racism! It was rigged voting machines! It was Karl Rove's army of Jesus freak zombies!" is heard over and over instead of the more accurate, "We picked the worst possible candidate."
(Now they know how Republicans felt in 1996 as they watched the compromised, irrelevant and criminal Bill Clinton trounce the generally decent guy, but totally inept Bob Dole. Of course, being a real war hero carried no value back then, unlike the phony war hero offered this time around in the form of Mssr. Feckless Crapweasel.)
Whether it's 500 or 5 million votes, the Democrats will refuse to accept democracy if it doesn't go their way. Hey, does that mean Vladimir Putin is a Democrat, too?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 9:19 PM
In the wake of the horrible earthquake and tsunamis in the Indian Ocean, the ever-reliable liberals have stepped up with the usual "This is all capitalism's fault!!! Down with America!!!" crap as they blame global warming, oil drilling and Republicans in general for not preventing the earthquake first and not giving enough immediately in disaster relief.
Take a look at the ass monkey below:
The Bush administration yesterday pledged $15 million to Asian nations hit by a tsunami that has killed more than 22,500 people, although the United Nations' humanitarian-aid chief called the donation "stingy."
"The United States, at the president's direction, will be a leading partner in one of the most significant relief, rescue and recovery challenges that the world has ever known," said White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy.
But U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
"It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really," the Norwegian-born U.N. official told reporters. "Christmastime should remind many Western countries at least, [of] how rich we have become."
"There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy," he said, adding that politicians in the United States and Europe "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."
Hey, you Norwegian woodhead, after 9/11 the "stingy" Americans coughed up over a billion dollars within a few weeks to help out and there's NOTHING STOPPING THEM FROM GIVING AGAIN TO HELP THOSE IN NEED NOW!!!!!
The miserable arrogance of these world government wannabes as they fart thru silk in our general direction should be galling to anyone with above-room temperature IQs, but I suspect some people think America is an evil, stupid, greedy country - and that's just because of the Election. (Kerry lost. GET THE F*CK OVER IT!!!) - and warmly welcome the Iron Fist of the UN to mug those Red Staters to give to the cause.
Of course, the Left is most upset about this natural disaster because until they get the child sex trade in Thailand back on all fours, they'll have to go back to molesting their own children or their friend's kids. (Do a Google on "Jonathan Swift" and piss off if you were offended by that.) Seriously, they have no use for the brown people of the world except to browbeat those non-liberal whites for not caring enough about the people they themselves could give a damn about other than their political utility.
The U.S. should take the money being billed to fund this anti-American club of thugs, kleptocrats and grifters and LOUDLY announce that it's being sent to Sri Lanka and then we should KICK THE F*CKERS OUT OF NEW YORK CITY!!!! Give Donald Trump the building so he can call it the "Trump Monolith" or whatever and let the f*cking UN move to Belgium where they can hate America all they want without having to actually be near Americans and let them park illegally in Brussels for a change.
If you feel that you aren't taxed enough, but still want to give aid, simply go to the American Red Cross site and make a cash contribution toward their International Response Fund. That way, you'll help and Kofi Anan's pals won't get rich off your charity.
UPDATE: The ass monkey says he was "misinterpreted".
Egeland told reporters on Tuesday: "I've been misinterpreted when I yesterday said that I believed that rich countries in general can be more generous."
"It has nothing to do with any particular country or the response to this emergency. We are in early days and the response has so far been overwhelmingly positive," he said.
"The international assistance that has come and been pledged from the United States, from Europe and from countries in the region has also been very generous," Egeland added.
Yeah, right. Give to the Red Cross/Red Crescent before you let the UN screw up another disaster. You're welcome.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 1:02 PM
Thursday, December 23, 2004
Figures. No sooner do I post that I'm taking a break, I come across something that MUST be noted because many of you or yours may be travelling this season.
Conservative hottie Michelle Malkin's been on a small-c crusade about the stupid dress code that Federal Air Marshalls are being forced to observe by the clueless dumbass in charge, Director Thomas Quinn. Apparently, the Marshalls are being forced to wear Men In Black-style business dress even if everyone else on the plane is in jeans and t-shirts.
Can you imagine if an al Qaeda bureaucrat had ordered the 19 Sept. 11 terrorists to wear "I heart Osama" T-shirts when they embarked on their murderous flights?
No idiot would send his men on a covert mission wearing clothes that would so blatantly give them away, right?
Wrong. Meet Federal Air Marshal Service Director Thomas Quinn. The man in charge of our in-flight cops, who are supposed to be spying secretly on would-be terrorist hijackers, refuses to allow his employees to dress undercover. Quinn insists that air marshals abide by military-style grooming standards and a rigid business dress policy regardless of weather, time of year or seating arrangement. He wants them to look PROFESSIONAL.
That means collared shirts and sports coats -- even if a pair of marshals is traveling in coach from Los Angeles to Orlando.In the wake of her column, Quinn has been in full-tilt "kill the messenger" mode, accusing people of violating security rules or simply making it all up. Malkin's not backing down.
In his appearances on both MSNBC and FOX News, Adams denied that a dress code exists ("hype," he sniffed; "totally wrong," he decried)...and then confirmed that the policy does in fact exist (marshals must "dress professionally"). Adams straight-facedly maintained that the code gives marshals "flexibility."
Yeah? Judge for yourself. Here's an excerpt from a memo that was sent to one of the air marshals' field offices four hours after my column appeared in the marshals' press clipping pack. (I've blacked out the name of the city and the person who wrote the memo to protect the confidentiality of my sources.)
To: XXXXXX FAMs
Special Agent in Charge
Date: December 15, 2004
Re: XXXXXXX Office Policy - Appropriate Dress and Equipment
Attached is Directive ADM 3702, dated 12/31/02, and is signed by Thomas D. Quinn, Director, Federal Air Marshal Service. That Directive, in conjunction with this memorandum, will serve as the dress code policy for the XXXXXX Federal Air Marshal (FAM) Field Office. The following information provides specifics regarding appropriate standards of dress for personnel assigned to the XXXXXX Field Office...
In addition to ADM 3702, male dress attire will consist of at a minimum, an appropriate sport coat (conservative in nature/style, color and fabric) that is readily available and worn by the FAM while on mission and in travel status...It is not acceptable to carry a sport coat in the FAMs travel bag. Appropriate dress also may include collared sport or Polo type shirts or banded type necks (turtle or crew neck).
Pants and or slacks must be clean and pressed and may not include denim of any color, nylon or other similar material, or cargo style pants. Appropriate footwear and socks shall be worn. Athletic shoes, sneakers, sandals or hiker/training boots are not allowed. Likewise, athletic sock will not be worn with dress shoes.
On a case-by-case basis, the Special Agent in Charge or their designee may grant exceptions to the directive and this policy. Failure to comply with this policy may result in disciplinary action and could be deemed as insubordination to follow directives and orders.
Another marshal sent me the following excerpt of instructions from a supervisor regarding code:
I recommend that you open and read the two attached Policy Directives which were issued from Headquarter 12/31/02, yes 02. Then you may want to re-read them so there is no aspect of the policies that are unclear. Apparently there [have] been a number of violations related to the above policies which were witnessed by the Director and his Staff. As a result of the imprudent actions of a few, we are all now subjected to a higher standard of scrutiny. To reiterate, all XXXXXX-based FAMs will adhere to the above attached policies to include the Sport Coat or Suit Coat will be worn while transiting all airports. A tie will be readily available. Those of you who choose to 'push the envelope' regarding the appearance and dress code, do so at great risk.I don't fly often and after reading about this nonsense, I'm in no hurry. Leave it to bureaucrats to f*ck everything up. OK, Dubya, you think you won because you're strong on security, start f*cking acting like it!!!
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 4:34 PM
With the year-end rush at work, holiday vacation swinging into gear and a bunch of compensated writing occupying my recent days, I've been neglecting the updates around here, not that I haven't seen plenty that I've thought, "Need to post that at Dirkworld."
The stuff and nonsense WILL return, but until then, have a safe and Herry Holidays and New Years. See ya later!
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 4:20 PM
Thursday, December 09, 2004
Gee, I thought the reason we were supposed to take these clowns seriously was because the media said they were all for the little people and what not, regardless of party. (It was just a coincidence that they spent 100% of their money on anti-Dubya ads.) Guess not, as MoveOn to Democratic Party: 'We Own It' reveals:
Liberal powerhouse MoveOn has a message for the "professional election losers" who run the Democratic Party: "We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back."
A scathing e-mail from the head of MoveOn's political action committee to the group's supporters on Thursday targets outgoing Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe as a tool of corporate donors who alienated both traditional and progressive Democrats.
"For years, the party has been led by elite Washington insiders who are closer to corporate lobbyists than they are to the Democratic base," said the e-mail from MoveOn PAC's Eli Pariser. "But we can't afford four more years of leadership by a consulting class of professional election losers."
Under McAuliffe's leadership, the message said, the party coddled the same corporate donors that fund Republicans to bring in money at the expense of vision and integrity.
"In the last year, grass-roots contributors like us gave more than $300 million to the Kerry campaign and the DNC, and proved that the party doesn't need corporate cash to be competitive," the message continued. "Now it's our party: we bought it, we own it, and we're going to take it back."
Well now. Since when has billionaire currency manipulator George Soros been considered "grass roots" and what kind of grass do you need to smoke to think that?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 11:52 PM
Tuesday, December 07, 2004
Hoo wooda thunk it?
Those using computers several times a week performed "sizeably and statistically significantly worse" than those who used them less often.
The OECD pointed to a positive link between students' interest in computers and their literacy, and Fuchs and Woessmann found that the more computers there were in students' homes, the better their test performance.
However, they realised that more computers in a household generally means a more affluent family. Children from affluent homes tend to perform better academically, so Fuchs and Woessmann factored this in their analysis.
Having done this they found that the more computers there were in a student's home, the worse the student's maths performance.
Fuchs and Woessmann found that students performed more badly in schools with a significant lack of computers. However, they then took into account that schools with better computer availability also have better resources in general. They found that computer ability was not related to student performance.
They also studied the effects of computer use on test scores, and found that greater use of computers in the home impacted positively on test scores.
In schools the effect was different. Students who hardly ever used computers did a little worse than those who used them between a few times a year and several times a month. But those who used school computers several times a week performed "sizeably and statistically significantly worse" in both maths and reading.
Sew, haveing uh komputer iz both gud and bad deepending on weather yore rich or knot. Teh thingz u lern theeze daze.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 8:52 PM
Hiya everyone. Sorry to be scarce, but when you're an internationally beloved pop culture icon, sometimes you've got to make some "me time". Thanks for understanding.
OK, during the run-up to the war, people fell into two camps: Those who knew that the UN's Oil-For-Food program was being pimped by Saddam, with proceeds being kicked-back to our supposed "friends and allies" to bribe them into hating us, and those who refused to believe these facts and snarled the usual "DittoheadFoxagandaRoveBushLimbaughHannityWingnutNaziBlahWoofYaddaWhatever" bile in response.
Well, don't take my word for it, check out what the Democratic Leadership Council - last I looked, not a Karl Rove-controlled outfit - has to say in The Price of Credibility in which they say....
Unfortunately, the United Nations' credibility has been steadily eroded by its own misdeeds, with a burgeoning scandal over its incompetent and sometimes corrupt management of the Iraq oil-for-food program being the most damaging example. Last week it was reported that the son of U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan received a series of payments from a Swiss firm that won a lucrative contract under the oil-for-food program. This development has fed growing doubts that the United Nations will be able to own up to its problems or reform its operations so long as Annan remains at the helm.
The appearance of a payoff to the secretary general's son was just the latest in a series of revelations about the oil-for-food program. Begun in 1996, the program allowed Baghdad to sell oil and use the proceeds to buy food and other humanitarian goods in order to soften the impact on the Iraqi people of the sanctions imposed on the country after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. A U.N. committee supervised the program; vetted contracts for food purchases; arranged payments; and hired inspectors to ensure Iraq did not import material that could be used for arms.
But mismanagement, corruption, and manipulation of the program by Saddam Hussein allowed his regime to amass at least $21 billion outside of the United Nations' control, with the great bulk of that sum -- $17.3 billion -- pilfered between 1997 and 2003 on the secretary general's watch. In effect, the United Nations colluded in Saddam's successful evasion of U.N. sanctions. The most damning charge so far -- that a former chief of the oil-for-food program, Benon Sevan, accepted bribes from Saddam's regime -- was made in October by former U.N. weapons inspector Charles A. Duelfer, who led a Senate investigation into the scandal. The program is now the subject of at least four congressional investigations, three U.S. federal investigations and the U.N.-appointed commission of inquiry led by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker.
Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, has underscored the urgency of such investigations, noting not only that the size of the fraud is "staggering," but also that some of Saddam's vast illicit stash might right now be funding terrorists and costing American lives. In an opinion piece in last week's Wall Street Journal, Coleman urged Annan to resign. "As long as Mr. Annan remains in charge, the world will never be able to learn the full extent of the bribes, kickbacks and under-the-table payments that occurred under the U.N.'s collective nose."
Annan's handling of the fallout over the past week has done nothing to improve his perceived credibility: He has refused requests from congressional committees for access to the United Nation's 55 internal audits and other reports, or for the chance to interview U.N. officials who oversaw the program, saying that it would interfere with the Volcker inquiry. That inquiry is expected to release an interim report in January. The full report could take another year and cost as much as $30 million -- to be funded with leftover cash in the oil-forfood program.
Annan's intransigence should not deter the Senate subcommittee on investigations or other congressional investigations. Volcker can hardly be expected to conduct a thorough and unbiased inquiry into a scandal in which the U.N. secretary general and his son are involved. The world deserves a full and thorough accounting of what transpired. The sooner the United Nations can get past this matter, the sooner it can get back to the important business of making itself an effective instrument for collective security against terrorism, failed states, and acts of genocide, a goal that Annan has strongly supported. The secretary general should place this critical mission ahead of his personal interests, and step aside. Given his own lack of credibility on the oil-for-food program, this step is the price Annan must pay to help restore the U.N.'s credibility, and to salvage his legacy as secretary general.
Salvage his legacy?!? F*CK HIS LEGACY AND F*CK HIM TOO!!!! Jeez Louise, thousands of Iraqis died at the hands of Sean Penn's buddy and the grifters of the UN and we've been fed 24/7 propaganda that we're the bad guys and the DLC is concerned for Anan's legacy?!?
Well, that's another lie of the Left up in flames, though I see Rev. Jesse is trying to overturn Ohio.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 12:37 AM
Thursday, December 02, 2004
If you missed last night's monumental takedown of Paris Hilton on "South Park", you MUST catch the rerun for it was one of the all-time funniest episodes of the show EVER!! I COMMAND THEE TO SEE IT!!! Only drink water during the commercials. You're welcome.
Matt Stone and Trey Parker are satirical masters as they make solid Red State moral points while using the raunchiest Blue State humor imaginable. Brilliant! Maybe we can all get along! ;)
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 1:45 PM
Monday, November 29, 2004
Remember John Kerry's "Band of Brothers"? They were the handful of sailors who served with Kerry during his four grueling months of self-inflicted wounds - before he could abandon them and flee home to call them war criminals - and accepted four-star travel and lodging in exchange for allowing themselves to be lugged around as human props for Kerry's phony war heroics myth-making.
Well, notwithstanding the hundreds of Swift Vets who spoke out against Kerry and were smeared by the MSM in concert with Team Kerry and disregarded, there was Stever Gardner, who served as gunner on the boat and refused to tow the line for Kerry and as detailed in "How Kerry whistleblower suffered for truth", is now unemployed and the victim of the usual Democratic tactic of destroying any who dare oppose their powerlust.
"They said I had a political agenda. I had no and have no political agenda whatsoever. I saw John Kerry on television saying he was running for the Democratic nomination for president, and I knew I couldn't ever see him as commander in chief -- not after what I saw in Vietnam, not after the lies I heard him tell about what he says he did and what he says others did."
Gardner's story is one that bears telling. He volunteered for the Navy, enlisting on his 18th birthday in February 1966. After training, he was shipped to Vietnam and served for two years as a gunner in the swift boat division. His superior, for four months, was none other than Lt. j.g. John F. Kerry.
"I had confrontations with him there. He nearly got us rammed by the VC one night because he wasn't watching the helm. I heard the motor coming close, turned on the spotlight, and the boat was only 90 feet away, coming fast. The VC was aiming an AK47 at us. I shot him out of the boat. We pulled a woman and a baby off the boat. Kerry wrote it up that we captured two VC and killed four more on the beach. None of that was true. The only thing true on Kerry's report was the date. The woman was catatonic and wouldn't call her baby VC and there were no VC on the beach. If we had seen that report before Kerry sent it up the chain of command, he would have been court-martialed and never allowed to run for office. And that's just the San Pan incident. There was much more. He is a self-aggrandizing bold-faced liar. I believe he caused the extension of that war."
Gardner told this story and others to radio stations and he wrote a piece for the local paper. Then, he says, he received a phone call from John Hurley, the veterans organizer for Kerry's campaign. Hurley, Gardner says, asked him to come out for Kerry. He told Hurley to leave him alone and that he'd never be for Kerry. It was then Gardner says, he was threatened with, "You better watch your step. We can look into your finances."
Next, Gardner said he received a call from Douglas Brinkley, the author of Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War. Brinkley told Gardner he was calling only to "fact check" the book -- which was already in print. "I told him that the guy in the book is not the same guy I served with. I told him Kerry was a coward. He would patrol the middle of the river. The canals were dangerous. He wouldn't go there unless he had another boat pushing him."
Days later, Brinkley called again, warning Gardner to expect some calls. It seems Brinkley had used the "fact checking" conversation to write an inflammatory article about Gardner for Time.com. The article, implying that Gardner was politically motivated, appeared under the headline "The 10th Brother."
Twenty-four hours later, Gardner got an e-mail from his company, Millennium Information Services, informing him that his services would no longer be necessary. He was laid off in an e-mail -- by the same man who only days before had congratulated him for his exemplary work in a territory which covered North and South Carolina. The e-mail stated that his position was being eliminated. Since then, he's seen the company advertising for his old position. Gardner doesn't have the money to sue to get the job back.
"I'm broke. I've been hurt every way I can be hurt. I have no money in the bank but am doing little bits here and there to pay the bills," he said.
All the millions of dollars raised by Gardner and his fellow Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and all the proceeds from John O'Neill's book, Unfit for Command, go to families of veterans, POWs and MIAs.
And, even though Gardner is broke and jobless for speaking out, the husband and father of three says he'd do it all over again. He says it wasn't for politics. It was for America.
Now that Kerry has gone back to being an ineffectual Senatorial drone and lobbys for gay marriage so he can marry his sugar-daddy George Soros, has anyone heard about those "Brothers" who sold-out? Didn't think so. They served their purpose - now, BEAT IT, PEASANT!!!
Democrats: Crushing the Little Guys who don't know any better - so, y'all better watch out!
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 6:47 PM
Listening to the coverage of the election there is giving me serious American Election deja vu, but what I found most interesting was this picture shown on Drudge:
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 6:41 PM
Thursday, November 25, 2004
A good piece at The Economist's site called "Dropping the anchorman" discussing the changes in the media to the disadvantage of the established lying liars of the Left. Some snips:
Next March will be exactly 24 years since Mr Rather took over from Walter Cronkite. But Mr Rather's reputation has not recovered from a “60 Minutes” documentary (made by CBS) which tried to raise questions about George Bush junior's service in the Texas National Guard. Mr Rather claimed to have documents proving that Mr Bush had violated a direct order to take a physical examination, and also that his superiors had been put under pressure to “sugarcoat” his evaluation. But within 14 hours internet sleuths had shown that the documents were forgeries. Mr Rather stood by his story for 12 excruciating days, while his supporters arrogantly contrasted the network's rigorous fact-checking with “a guy sitting in his living room in his pyjamas writing”. But the pyjama guy turned out to be right.
Mr Rather's retirement epitomises two broader shifts of power. First, the old media are losing power to the new. And, second, the liberal media establishment is losing power to a more diverse cacophony of new voices.
For most of the post-war era the American media were dominated by a comfortable liberal consensus. The New York Times was the undisputed king of the print news, while the network anchors lorded it over TV news. That consensus is now under siege. The attacks are partly coming from the cable networks—particularly from conservative Fox News. (Charles Krauthammer once quipped that Rupert Murdoch had spotted a niche market—half the country. Sure enough, Fox is now America's top-rated cable news network.) But old media also face a newer and more unpredictable source of competition—the blogosphere. Bloggers have discovered that all you need to set yourself up as a pundit is a website and an attitude.
Given America's fractious politics, it is easy to look at Mr Rather's retirement merely in terms of a left v right scorecard. But, more fundamentally, it is about choice.
Most Americans now get their news from an ever-proliferating range of sources: not just Fox or CNN, but also foreign newspapers and even the innumerable original documents that are now available at the touch of a button. And fewer people regard any single news source—be it CBS News or the New York Times—as the embodiment of truth.
And the most successful conservative bloggers are far from being party loyalists: look at the way in 2002 that they kept the heat on the Republicans' then Senate leader, Trent Lott, for racist remarks that the New York Times originally buried. It is a safe bet that, if the current Bush administration goes the way of previous second-term administrations and becomes consumed by scandals, conservative bloggers will be in the forefront of the scandal-mongering.
Mr Rather's passing does not mean that the liberal orthodoxy is about to give way to a new conservative one. It means that all orthodoxies are being chewed up by a voraciously unpredictable news media, which is surely all to the good.
Go read it all.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 3:16 PM
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
You may think that a blog that had it's share of Rathergate posts would be doing a big happy dance over the announcement that he's stepping down as anchor of the "CBS Evening Story Half-Hour", but what's to be happy about? He's leaving a full six months after his failed attempt at character assassination on Dubya; he's still going to be working on "60 Minutes II", the scene of his latest journalistic war crimes; and he's leaving without any acknowledgement of his malfeasance. If anything, this is just a slightly earlier retirement date for someone who was shuffling into the Gold Watch Sunset for quite some time.
The fact that a grunt producer who broke into the last five minutes of "CSI: New York" to announce that Yassir "Blow you up real good!" Arafat has begun his final descent into Hell got sacked within a few days while Rather (along with Mary Mapes) attempted to smear Dubya with phony forgeries in coordination with Team Kerry and the DNC shows what the priorities of CBS News are.
Scrappleface summed it up nicely with "Dan Rather Scrambles to Confirm Story of His Resignation":
(2004-11-23) -- Veteran CBS News anchor Dan Rather this afternoon said he was "scrambling like a gila monster on hot sand" to verify allegations that he will step down from his role on the CBS Evening News in March 2005.
"If this is true, I want to break this story," said Mr. Rather as he rushed from his office to track down a hot tip on the story. "I received a fax from a Kinko's in Texas indicating that I'm relinquishing the anchor desk, but we need to run this past several handwriting experts and get it fully vetted before we break into programming with the announcement."
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 5:43 PM
It appears to be that way if the fascist principal of Stevens Creek School in Cupertino, CA has her way as detailed in "Declaration of Independence Banned at Calif School". In keeping with the liberal tenets of unmitigated bigotry against Christians - you may've noticed something about it in the comments by the Left following the Election - Patricia Vidmar has cracked down on Steven Williams for spreading his faith via the, get this, Declaration of Independence. Yep, cuz it mentions "God", the lil' kiddies must be prevented from being exposed to such superstition, lest they stop believing in government as the Almighty Power in their lives.
I wonder if Ms. Vidmar would mind if she stopped getting paid so that she didn't need to worry about all that "In God We Trust" hooey unsetting her?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 5:28 PM
Saturday, November 20, 2004
Monday, November 15, 2004
Friday, November 12, 2004
Thursday, November 11, 2004
The simpering, mewling, hypocritical sobbing of the Left continues on as detailed in the ABC News story, "Some Say America No Longer Feels Like Home", in which the pathetically immature twits who can't deal with being unable to lord liberal power over the rest of us weep and wail and book transit out of the U.S.
Sayonara! Buh-bye! See ya! You still here?
"After the election, my husband and I asked ourselves, 'How could our country be heading backward? How could so many people miss or choose to ignore the obvious failures of the Bush administration?'" the former Florida resident said.
During the lame years of the Clinton Regime, I don't recall any plans to flee the country from those disgusted that a plurality of the voters - remember: Clinton NEVER won a majority - would vote for such a corrupt schmuck, but whatever. Instead of quitting and running away, the GOP practiced some good old-fashioned politics and re-won power. Ain't nothing stopping the Dems from doing the same other than their ideas suck and no one supports them outside the blue counties.
I didn't vote for Dubya because of his failure to practice conservative principles, so I guess she's not complaining about me, but what she can't accept is that despite any qualms people may've had about Dubya, Kerry was so demonsterably worse an option, people held their nose and voted the lesser of two not-so-goods. You can't dismiss the fact that a hefty chunk of the electorate think Dubya is doing an A-OK job and reject the lies and fear of the Dems, too.
They say they feel the United States is changing in ways they do not like, and they feel powerless to stop it.
I'll bet they didn't care if conservatives didn't like the country dragged thru the mud by a weak-willed horndog who could've stopped everything but just fessing up.
"We were leaving anyhow, mostly because we want to start a family and we don't feel our children can get a decent education in the United States," said Brian Sinicki, of Laramie, Wyo.
Schools are under the control of the Democrats and the teachers unions, so this is ironic.
American kids can't f*cking READ, WRITE or FIGURE and he wants them to do philosophy?!? OK, fine....WHAT philosophy? Karl Marx or Ayn Rand? (Thought so.)
"Television I think has single-handedly destroyed the level of political discourse," he said. "When I talk to people about politics, they're either radically misinformed or they wouldn't know how to define the terms that they use."
This is true because whenever I speak out about the overbearing leviathan that is government and how it should be MUCH smaller and intrusive, I get called a "fascist". (Check a dictionary.) I suspect that's not what he meant.
she said her concern was more about the role Bush's religious beliefs seem to play in his governing, and the role of religion in American society — what she called "aggressive Christianity."
"There is this aggressive morality that seems to me to have nothing to do with Christianity," she said. "Our fathers were mostly Unitarians, not at all holy rollers."
You hear this a lot: Christianity has become TOO Christian and not New Age enough for thier sensitive tastes. "That Old Testament stuff is so medieval. Here, try my new lemon-scented God with less judgementalism and fewer carbs!", is what she'd probably prefer.
Here's where the "we're better than you are" stuff shows up:
She also said it feels like there has been a closing of the American mind.
"I can't understand when in our nation's history being an intellectual, having a questioning, curious mind, wanting to travel, became bad," she said. "I don't understand when it became stigmatized."
I'd like to ask her where the f*ck she gets off proclaiming herself so intellectually open-minded right after she slandered religion?
As evidenced by the hateful rhetoric of the campaign, liberals think anyone who doesn't toe their rigid ideological line are simply.....simple.
"I do love my country and it hurts me very deeply to see what's happening here, to see us so far off course," she said. "But I've met a lot of evangelicals and they believe it deeply. They'd rather vote for fetuses and against gay people, rather than voting against war, with thousands dead, against guns, which we know kill people. When you're talking about deeply held religious beliefs, you're out of luck."
As I was saying....
"I can no longer in good conscience support a nation that believes it is OK to lie to start wars," she said. "I will not live in a country where dumb and dumber are my two choices for president. I'm taking my assets out of the country and moving to Central America, where ironically, I will have more freedom to live my life without interference from a corrupt government. My husband and I will leave within four months."
If a Democrat gets elected in the next go around and/or the junta or whatever has a coup or she gets the runs, can we prevent her from coming back? Please?
"With the ban on gay marriage passing in so many states and the conservative agenda President Bush is taking, it doesn't feel safe in the U.S. any more," she said. "We are expecting that next year Bush will try to push the Federal Marriage Amendment Act through Congress again."
Now, I disagree with the FMA and considered it another demerit against Dubya for it's cynical political roots and blatantly anti-conservative Big Government interference in our lives, but to flee the country because it's going to go up for a vote shows the immaturity and catastrophic mindset of these dunderheads. If they still taught the Constitution, maybe she'd know that Dubya and the Congress are just the BEGINNING of the Amendment process, not the end.
As much as the Left likes to smear the Red States as the tip of the spear to exterminate gays, Oregon - one of those Blue States that they want to seceed to Canada passed their gay marriage proposal and I heard something on the radio (sorry, can't find the cite) to the effect that even in the Blue Counties of the Red States, the gay marriage issues passed.
Ponder that: The slur is that Red State people are homophobic animals, yet in Blue Counties, the majority also disapproves of gay marriage.
Huh? How can this be? Could it be that the Blue Counties aren't as socially advance as they hype themselves to be?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 2:30 PM
OK, that's not exactly what he said, but that's what the result will be of his planned continuation of the jihad that brought crushing defeat to the Democratic Party last week. "Fahrenheit 9/11½." is going to pile another load of manure on Dubya, because, according to Fatty:
"We want to document and commercialize it. Fifty-one percent of the American people lacked information (in this election) and we want to educate and enlighten them. They weren't told the truth. We're communicators and it's up to us to start doing it now."
Yeah, Bub...you're communicating that you....just...don't....get....it!!!! As long as the Left operates on the assumption that unless you agree with them, you're some sort of ignorant moron, they're going to see their chances get smaller and smaller. While that suits me fine - Democrats are dangerous - the alternative, Republicans, ain't much better and the non-starter status of 3rd parties isn't a good development for the Republic.
Also note that Moore plans to get even richer selling lies to his sheep. Sure, he talks about trying to get to the Truth, but the only truth that matters is checking some more bank. Fat Man needs to be fed, don't he?
So, go for it Mr. Riefenstahl! Document some more fantasies about Dubya and then put it out in time to......uh......in time to......um, well....exactly WHAT? Even if people wanted to vote for Dubya a third time, he's not going to be on the ballot and since Cheney isn't gonna run, all the dirty laundry in the world will have NO EFFECT because they're not going to be on the ballot!!!!
The voters of 2008 are gonna choose between Hillary! and McCain or Guiliani. Whether Dubya was a cross-dressing Satanist or Cheney was a Sith Lord won't be a factor, so what's this for other than milking the flock?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 2:11 PM
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
The irony of the demonization of Ashcroft by the Democrats is that if they hadn't robbed him of his Senate seat in 2000 with their usual "steal what we can't win legitimately" antics, he wouldn't have been around to do the most disgraceful act an Attorney General has ever committed in office: Sing a stupid song he'd written about eagles at a press conference.
WTF was THAT about?!?!? Show some f*cking dignity you tool. Gah!!!! Orin Hatch doesn't do that!
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 11:33 PM
Some cheerful asstackler keeps posting this in the comments sections and rather than clutter them with "post deleted" shrapnel or block anonymous comments, I'm posting it here for everyone to see and evaluate who of us is a moron and/or deficient on the talent front.
If only he/she had the stones to claim credit for their erudite antagonism. Tsk tsk.
* This applies regardless of gender.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 11:27 PM
Friday, November 05, 2004
Laugh HARD at the creativity of the Interweb. (Work safe - unless you get busted for laughing.)
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 4:18 PM
Not all Democrats are lost in the Fever Swamps with Moore and Dean. This bloke actually shows some hope for a return to civility, not that the enraged and elite Left are gonna start listening to a sellout accomodationist like HIM.
Read every last word he's written, but for a quick taste, dig on this:
Our error is that we Democrats are far less understanding than we think we are. Our version of understanding the other side is to look at them from a psychological point of view while being completely unwilling to take their arguments seriously. "Well, he can't help himself, he's a right-wing religious zealot, so of course he's going to think like that." "Republicans who never served in war are hypocrites to send young men to die. " "Republicans are homophobes, probably because they can't deal with their secret desires." Anything but actually listening and responding to the arguments being made.
And when I say 'responding,' I don't just mean 'coming up with the best counterargument and pushing it.' Sometimes responding to an argument means finding the merit in it and possibly changing one's position. That is part of growth, right?Here are some arguments that are being made that the Democratic party has simply not responded to, in the larger sense of the word "response":
- Whatever the UN was, might have been, or should be, it now isn't. Genocidal tyrannies are on the Human Rights commision. Saddam Hussein funneled over 1.7 billion dollars to various decision makers and world leaders to weaken his sanctions program. One out of every three votes is about Israel. Until the UN is significantly reformed, you shouldn't take its decisions seriously.
- If we view 1000 or even 10,000 dead soldiers as unacceptable, we will never be able to fight a real war again.
- Proportional response with no preemption allows the other side to set the pace of the battle.
- Just because it says something in the Bible doesn't mean there are no ancillary arguments supporting it. And just because someone uses the Bible as a source of their morality doesn't mean that any particular view of theirs is wrong. Actually, stuff that's lasted for thousands of years is more likely to be useful than stuff that was dreamed up in a French philosophy book.
Someone want to tell Moby about this?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 2:33 AM
Thursday, November 04, 2004
GO HERE NOW AND GEEK OUT MASSIVELY!!!! Looks killer!
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 9:08 PM
Techno-dweeb Moby has been filling his diaper over the Election results because since he's no longer capable of making interesting or commercially desireable music (I did used to like his stuff - this isn't a political thing), he's bound his entire being up in being a self-abusing martyr for the Democratic cause.
While some self-pitying was to be expected, dig the depths of narcissistic immaturity Mopey wallows in:
OK, It's Done
11/3/2004 - New York City
can someone remind me why secession is not an option at this point?
i mean let's be realistic, we live in a divided country.
can't we have the breakaway republics of 'north-east-istan' and 'pacific-stan'?
wouldn't the red states be happier without us?
we could still travel freely and trade freely with them, but can't we just leave?
then you could have 3 countries:
one other option would be for us to all join the republican party en masse and make it socially liberal and fiscally conservative(as opposed to it's current 'socially puritanical/fiscally insane' status).ok, it's done.
john kerry has seceded.
if you need us, my friends and i will be drunk for the next 4 years.
11/4/2004 - New York City
'dear rest of america,
can't you please let little old new york city secede from the rest of the nation?
we're very little and you probably wouldn't even notice that we were gone.
please? pretty please?
how about if we buy you guys donkeys?
will you let us secede if we buy each and every person in the rest of the united states a donkey?
you'd like to have your own friendly donkey, wouldn't you?
wouldn't you rather have a friendly donkey than a small insignificant city that no one really likes anyway?
we will be good neighbors, and you can come visit whenever you like(considering you have a valid passport).
thank you very much, and i look forward to hearing your response.
Ooooh, a free donkey?
What Do We Do Now?
11/4/2004 - New York City
a lot of people have been asking me, 'what do we do now?'
well, my answer is kind of simple and probably disappointing.
we should have fun with our friends, and do good work, and maybe adopt a dog, and eat. eating is good.
in other words, we shouldn't let ourselves get distraught over politics.
yes, america has chosen gw bush as their president.
it's not what we wanted, but that's the way it is.
we can hope that maybe the 2nd bush term will be more moderate than the first(this isn't just me being willfully naive, i do believe that a 2nd bush term might be more moderate because he's not going to up for re-election again so he doesn't have to accomodate the christian right as slavishly as he's done in the 1st term).
we'll see what happens. sorry if i sound like i'm being wishy-washy, i just don't want us all to let ourselves sink into depression over the democratically expressed will of the majority of voting americans.
it is what it is, and being depressed and despondent isn't going to make anything better.
so go out and eat some ice cream and play with a dog and go see a movie with your friends.
the world will go on, don't let yourself get depressed, ok?
1. Don't get depressed? Dude....
B. I love his "yes, america has chosen gw bush as their president. it's not what we wanted, but that's the way it is." bit. When some people complained about Clinton being elected, did they take them seriously or did they laugh and kick some more sand in their faces?
But wait there's more!!!
11/4/2004 - New York City
now, more than ever, your neighbor to the south(aka-the blue states)needs you. most of us living in the northern and western parts of the united states don't feel very connected to the rest of the u.s, so can we bring our states and become part of canada?
we have a lot of money and some interesting cities and we promise not to be too much trouble.
the benefits to you:
a-in one fell swoop you can have southern california and new york city! surfing in canada! suddenly the u.n is on canadian soil! broadway is suddenly in canada! you could then say that canada is the birthplace of jazz and hip-hop!
b-money. cold hard cash. the red states in the u.s might have the voting power, but guess who has the money? yup, your friendly neighborhood blue states.
so when/if you accept our offer you will instantly become the richest country in the world! that sounds pretty good, right?
c-karma. accepting this offer will give you more good karma than you'd know what to do with(because you would instantly make 120 million people VERY happy).
so you get warm beaches, tons of cash, and good karma. who can say no to that?
please let us know if you accept the offer. given our enthusiasm to join canada it's safe to say that the details of the offer could probably be worked out in an afternoon.
thank you very much,
moby p.s-just to put your minds at ease, we do know that we can't bring our assault weapons with us.'
Let's dispose of this myth of "Blue States" right now. Check this map out:
Liberals in their infinitely hypocritical arrogance don't seem to mind that the VAST MAJORITY of counties in states with heavily Democratic enclaves are effectively disenfranchised - what's the use of being a conservative in upstate NY when Mopey and Michael Moore and their liberal pals in Manhattan will simply outnumber them? What happened to "every vote counting"?
When the only way Gore could've won was to use the popular vote total in 2000, the Left screamed that the Electoral College was archaic and needed to go. Well, were are those calls this year? (I know, I know....)
Colorado voted on - and Maine already has IIRC - using proportional distribution of electoral votes by district so that voters are more accurately represented instead of rural bergs being overwhelmed by big cities and I've alway thought that made sense. It'll never happen, because as the map shows, Democrats would never have another chance because the country is NOT even divided, but clearly tilted to the right.
Democrats and liberals don't believe in democracy. Never forget it.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 7:28 PM
Well, it's two days after the Election and the world is still turning, despite Dubya getting re-elected. Looks like all the fear-mongering of the Left was just so much baloney after all.
While life moves on, there's some aftermath details that need to be noted and, as usual, we're on the case here.
Starting things off is Peggy Noonan's piece at OpinionJournal which includes this:
Who was the biggest loser of the 2004 election? It is easy to say Mr. Kerry: he was a poor candidate with a poor campaign. But I do think the biggest loser was the mainstream media, the famous MSM, the initials that became popular in this election cycle. Every time the big networks and big broadsheet national newspapers tried to pull off a bit of pro-liberal mischief--CBS and the fabricated Bush National Guard documents, the New York Times and bombgate, CBS's "60 Minutes" attempting to coordinate the breaking of bombgate on the Sunday before the election--the yeomen of the blogosphere and AM radio and the Internet took them down. It was to me a great historical development in the history of politics in America. It was Agincourt. It was the yeomen of King Harry taking down the French aristocracy with new technology and rough guts. God bless the pajama-clad yeomen of America. Some day, when America is hit again, and lines go down, and media are hard to get, these bloggers and site runners and independent Internetters of all sorts will find a way to file, and get their word out, and it will be part of the saving of our country.
Damn right! That's why the Left is so frothingly mad over the rise of the blogosphere: They no longer have the monopoly on the flow of information and it's a lot harder to brainwash the sheep.
Wah. Suck on it.
All over the Interweb, a lot of people are regurgitating their ideological masters' talking points and being generally sore losers. The central theme of most of their arguments is that the people who voted for Dubya - all 59+ million of them - are nothing more than stupid, Jesus freak rubes. When one poster tossed up the cannard of "Even if you like Bush I don't see how you would want a leader who divides the country so intensely.", I fired back with:
BUZZ!!! WRONG ANSWER!!!
It wasn't Bush who divided the country, it was the whiny, spoiled liberals who thought they were entitled to perpetual rule and couldn't accept that they lost a close race in 2000. It's like if they were the Yankees who after winning the previous two World Series lost Game 7 by a score of 1-0 and decided that rather than shrugging it off, embarked on a 24/7 propaganda campaign to say that the entire National League was populated with inbred Nazi child molesters with bad fashion sense and can't dance.
It was impossible for Bush to repeat his "uniter, not divider" strategy from his Texas days when the entire liberal media/Democrat apparatus had declared jihad for the last 4 years, because for him to win again and retain control of Congress would mean the end of liberal control of government for another generation and liberals don't have anything useful to offer society other than ladling out government grift.
Look at the hateful rhetoric you guys are spewing. Are you planning on spending the next 4 years b!tching about Bush and the "stupid, Rube State, Jesus freak, homophobic, morons" who voted for him, as if a vote for Kerry is proof positive of superior intellect, whiter teeth and a shinier coat, while a vote for Bush means you probably don't know how to tie your shoes, use indoor plumbing or count to 21 without taking off your clothes?
And BUSH is the one dividing the country?!?!?!?
Other threads pointed to Kerry's strength in urban areas as proof that Republicans are dumb hicks who don't care about urban problems, cuz they've got theirs. Others have rebutted such nonsense and pointed out that most cities are too expensive for the poor to live in and it's the RICH who live downtown while the poor live in the outlying areas. (Not that the liberals are listening.)
Hmmm....I just checked back and this was posted below me, but in response to another point:
The difference between liberals like myself and the rest of the liberal crowd is that I have a firm grip on reality. Liberals like myself would rather unite, with no need to conquer, while twits like Moford want to drive the wege into the existing ideological chasm even deeper - pandering to the elite and arrogance twits who seemingly believe they are so much more cultured and highly bred than everyone else. He and others like him would lead people to believe that this is a battle. WTF? A battle against ourselves? People like him fearmonger by casually tossing the word "fascism" about like a frisbee yet, ironically enough, they appear to be setting themselves apart as the new Arayan liberals. Think of a Hitler salute with a latte grasped firmly in hand.
Just as Muslims need to reclaim their faith from the jihadists, it's time for the non-tinfoiled liberals to cut the Moores, Soroses and Deans loose. (Yeah, that'll happen.)
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 1:05 PM
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Which part of "You got over 3.5 million fewer votes nationally AND your fake Ohio votes won't count!" is eluding your comprehension, Bub?
Time to, pardon the expression, move on.
UPDATE: AP is reporting that Kerry will make his concession speech at 1 p.m. Thanks for listening, you Feckless Crapweasel. Back to windsurfing and being a useless Senator for you, Francois. Hope Mommy Warbucks won't mind you wasting her inheritance on your ego trip.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 10:45 AM
Saturday, October 30, 2004
With a gig tomorrow night, a big stack of DVDs to watch and review, "Ray" to see (irony!), Dead or Alive Ultimate on hand and an Election to cast my worthless (voting Libertarian) vote in, I'll be off until Wednesday when I'm sure I'll have something to say about something.
In the meantime, visit all the links at the right and broaden your horizons.
And to show that it's all about love here at Dirkworld®, here's a fine gratuitous shot of Bai Ling:
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 3:00 AM
The Last Desperate Bleats of a Drowning Feckless Crapweasel (or How the Red Sox Bogarted All the Luck In New England)
With this last minute campaign ad from Osama bin Hagar which sounds like he's been sitting in a cave watching "Centigrade 7-11" since Tubby Riefenstahl dropped off his autographed copy last summer, John Kerry has got to be wondering if his ol' pal Osama really wants him to win or not, cuz it doesn't help that while he's been attacking the troops as idiots for letting .1% of Iraqs explosives go missing (which is still 99.9% more than a President Kerry would've rounded up), John & Jane Q. got a fresh reminder that someone's out their needing killing and he ain't the guy to do it, no matter how much he pretends he wants to.
Before I depart for the long Election weekend, I leave you rabid Dubya haters with a final reminder as to why you're simple-minded plankton in your support of Feckless...er...John Kerry as the Annointed "Anybody But Bush" and how supporting him is proof that you aren't thinking about anything but revenge for 2000 - nevermind that EVERYONE was happy that Gore wasn't President on 9/11. In fact, now that I think of it, even the tinfoil hat crowd never says that Gore would've done everything better like Kerry does. Wow.
The kind people over at the Captain's Quarters lay the smack down on JFingK's typically shameful and childish outbursts today:
I'm not suggesting that John Kerry shelve his campaign in the face of the OBL videotape. Doing so only gives the Islamofascist mass murderer a political victory. However, Kerry should have stuck to the facts instead of promoting what is, at best, mere speculation about bin Laden's whereabouts in December 2001. He also should quit promoting that intellectually lazy "outsourcing" line that has been proven false and misleading. The statement is also wildly hypocritical considering that his major policy stance in Iraq is to attempt to "outsource" the democratization of the newly liberated Iraqis to the UN, guided by the famous democracies of Syria and China, and the paragons of virtue that are France and Russia.
In engaging in rank demagoguery and using OBL's threats as an explicit inspiration, he makes bin Laden a legitimate voice in the election -- exactly what OBL intended. His empty assertions that he would have poured men and materials into Tora Bora based on hazy intelligence on one man's whereabouts, and into an area in which the US military had lukewarm expertise, instead of our partners whose intimate knowledge of the terrain and quite frankly were expendable while we kept our options open, shows the shallowness of his understanding of military strategy -- as well as the falsity of his oft-stated emphasis on building alliances.
Bush needs to keep up the pressure on Kerry for his reliance on the appearance of America's enemies to make his case for the presidency. We knew where Hitler was in 1944, too, and Hirohito as well. Did Wendell Wilkie hold press conferences blaming Roosevelt for their continued existence in order to convince voters of his qualifications as commander in chief? No. Wilkie had what Kerry does not -- a love of country that outstripped his personal ambitions, and the class to understand that Hitler and Hirohito were the enemy, while Roosevelt was merely Wilkie's opponent. It's a lesson that the Left in this country still hasn't learned, and hopefully American voters will teach them that lesson on Tuesday.
Of course, if you're sympathetic to Kerry's anti-American leanings, this will only make you want to vote for him more, won't it?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 1:55 AM
Friday, October 29, 2004
Well, well....despite no mention of Van Helsing, it seems that Osama bin Hagar has decided to send a long-distance dedication to his homie J-to-tha-F-to-tha-K-to-the-feckless-crapweasel and appear in a nice campaign ad that may've been scripted by Michael Moore.
Apparently, everything is our fault and all we have to do is bug out of the Middle East and abandon Israel and everything will be all good for the future. Good thing we've got just the guy running who will gladly meet OBH's demands by brie-and-tea time next Jan. 20th.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 5:29 PM
Chuckie Krauthammer speak Truth to the liars yet again in Kerry's Afghan Amnesia (washingtonpost.com) detailing how John Kerry has flip-flopped and rewritten history in a manner that his Soviet controllers would blush with pride over. Read the whole thing, but here's the punchline:
This election comes down to a choice between one man's evolution and the other man's resolution. With his endlessly repeated Tora Bora charges, Kerry has made Afghanistan a major campaign issue. So be it. Whom do you want as president? The man who conceived the Afghan campaign, carried it through without flinching when it was being called a "quagmire" during its second week and has seen it through to Afghanistan's transition to democracy? Or the retroactive genius, who always knows what needs to be done after it has already happened -- who would have done "everything" differently in Iraq, yet in Afghanistan would have replicated Bush's every correct, courageous, radical and risky decision -- except one. Which, of course, he would have done differently. He says. Now.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 11:40 AM
A moment's break from bashing Darth Kerry to get some Star Wars geekage up. The new teaser poster for Revenge of the Sith is out...
...and I'm not too crazy about it. The cape is billowing too much to get that Darth Vader face in - it's contrived. Some of the fake posters floating around the Interweb looked better IMO.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 9:01 AM
I'm sure many people passing thru are 110% certain to vote for John Kerry because he is the "anybody but Bush" on the ballot next Tuesday. I've even been told that if the choice was between Dubya and Mussolini, they'd chose ol' Benny cuz they hate Dub with such blazing fury.
OK, fine, you'll vote for a proven liar and ruthless traitor to America just to avenge Al Gore, but while you count down the moments til you can rush off to as many precincts as you can to cast as many fraudulent provisional ballots (works best if you aren't white, BTW) before calling the lawyers to complain that you had to show your ID, take a half-hour and see the latest mini-films from the SwiftVets and POWs for Truth, the folks who have been smeared by Team Kerry's butt monkeys in the media as being partisans while allowing Kerry to cover up his service record which could reveal that he's a self-made war fraud...er....hero, dontchaknow?
If you've only got time for one film, watch the "No Man Left Behind" episode - it's only 8 minutes, but if you still think Kerry's anything but a self-serving fraud after this, well, vote up, Shriner!
(Hat tip to BeldarBlog.)
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 1:14 AM
As reported by The Times (London) Online, feckless crapweasel and President wannabe John Kerry is already counting his chickens and has asked infamous British politician channeler Joe Biden to be our Secretary of State.
THE man whose presidential ambitions were destroyed when he plagiarised Neil Kinnock is set to become America’s chief foreign policymaker if John Kerry is elected President next Tuesday.
Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware has been asked by Mr Kerry to become Secretary of State in a Democratic administration, according to Kerry campaign aides. Mr Biden, the leading Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the past four years, ran for President in 1988. His campaign ended abruptly when it was revealed that a key element of his stump speech had been lifted directly from Mr Kinnock’s general election speeches in 1987.
When Biden goes to surrender America's sovereignty to Iraq's oil-fed allies, will he use his own words or rip off someone else's capitulation?
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 1:10 AM
Thursday, October 28, 2004
You may've heard rumors that Kerry served in Viet Nam (No? Yes!) and lots of references to his "Band of Brothers", you know, those guys who he abandoned in the jungles of Nam the moment he was able to forge enough Purple Hearts to bug out of country and leave others to "die for a mistake...for a lie." Of course, the same lying crapbag who says that Iraq wasn't a threat to the United States also says that he proudly "defended America" from the.....uh....Viet Namese. Cuz they were gonna come over here and get us, dontcha know? Um....
If Dubya hadn't been a total liberal whore for media acceptance - the fat lot of good it did him - and had resisted his urge to outspend LBJ and cynically trashed the Constitution for dubious reasons and the Election was solely about the War on Terror, I wouldn't have a second thought about recommending his re-election, especially since the alternative is a tragedy waiting to happen.
Yeah, it's thin gruel to say "Don't vote for that guy, but I'm not voting for this guy either," but to say that it's not possible to do worse than the current occupant of the Oval Office is just wrong. It is and this Hugh Hewitt column at the Weekly Standard sums up the overlooked (and under-reported) fact that John Kerry has built his entire political life on the foundation of trashing his "Band of Brothers" and the American military. As posted before, he believes that it's only OK for U.S. soldiers to die in service of the UN, not the U.S.
JOHN KERRY now closes his presidential campaign exactly as he opened his political life: Attacking the United States military.
Thirty-three years ago, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he indicted the soldiers of Vietnam as war criminals, the heirs of Genghis Khan.
This week he embraced an already discredited account of missing munitions to attack the reputation of the 3rd Infantry Division and the 101st Airborne. Make no mistake, that is exactly what Kerry is doing when he asserts that deadly weapons went unsecured and unreported as these two divisions rushed to liberate Baghdad. And not just these divisions, but every officer and soldier who had a hand in drawing up the war plan. If the negligence that Kerry charges the military with was real, additional troops would not have made a difference. The initial search would still have been conducted by the 3rd I.D. and the site pronounced clear. The 101st would still have spent 24 hours in the munitions complex before moving on. Kerry cannot avoid owning the latest of many slanders he has launched at the military as a means of wounding the president.
That the story was floated by a Bush foe in the U.N. bureaucracy at the IAEA did not discourage Kerry. Nor did the evident pretzel logic of condemning the war while bemoaning the huge danger of Saddam's arsenal. The facts on the myth of the missing munitions are available at The Belmont Club and Instapundit, but facts did not matter to Kerry at all, nor the reputations of the soldiers he charged with allowing massive amounts of deadly munitions to go missing.
THIS ELECTION has had a Greek Chorus--the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the POWs who testified in Stolen Honor. The mainstream media did not want to hear this chorus, even when the first volley aimed at Kerry successfully exposed his fabricated tale of a secret mission to Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968--an episode Kerry asserted on the floor of the Senate was "seared, seared" into his memory. The mainstream media has refused to question Kerry on his other accounts of incredible adventures transporting CIA men up river and running guns to anti-communist Cambodians, afraid perhaps to pull on a thread that might leave the candidate exposed as a serial fabulist. Despite the hostility, the chorus has kept chanting, this week even, pointing to meetings Kerry held in Paris with the North Vietnamese.
I am grateful for their work, especially this week as Kerry lashes out again at the men and women in uniform. Many times over his long political career Kerry has taken credit for missions he did not undertake and successes in war he did not achieve. What a sharp contrast with his attempt this week to deny credit to active duty soldiers for missions that really did occur and which really did succeed.
The left genuinely hates these veterans of that long ago war: for refusing to shut up and sit down; for questioning the pose struck by Kerry long ago; for rekindling memories of a war that, once lost, resulted in the death of millions.
The veterans' real significance has been to keep the question of fitness for command front and center for the past three months. The Kerry campaign has been almost all low ball--from the moment he blamed the Secret Service agent for his fall on the slopes, to his venom picked up by a mike he thought was off to his, his staff's, and Elizabeth Edwards's abuse of Mary Cheney's privacy to his wife's condescension towards Laura Bush. And when not low ball, he was bouncing a pitch at Fenway and bagging (or not) a goose in full hunting regalia. Kerry's not a closer: He's a poser, or maybe what the Canadians would call a hoser.
But what he most certainly is not is a commander-in-chief.
The Left has slurred most of this Administration as "chicken hawks" because they use military force while skipping military service - though Dubya served and didn't get credit either, so it doesn't matter to them when they'll just lie anyways - but it's interesting that their Annointed Candidate is far worse than a chicken hawk, he's a sheep in wolves clothing - talking tough, but ALWAYS ready to side AGAINST America, AGAINST our soldiers and AGAINST our security.
Don't take my word for it - take his. Those being the words he said before he decided it was time to pretend he was something he never was: A proud American.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 1:10 PM
One of the most frustrating aspects of the past few years has been the shobboleth that "real patriots are those who criticize the government" coming from people who didn't have a problem with - or didn't openly speak out against - Bill Clinton's war in Bosnia (no UN approval or threat to America) or his attacking of two Muslim countries with cruise missiles, blowing up an aspirin factory in Sudan (don't the anti-Americans claim that we brought 9/11 upon ourselves?) because his tubby mistress was testifying about Stupid Cigar Tricks and the ramifications of not getting the evidence cleaned.
Pointing out liberal hypocrisy is like reminding people that fish in the sea tend to be constantly damp - seemingly obvious, but news to some. With the Countdown to Armageddon clock standing at t-minus-5 days, it appears that there are still some idiots who think the answer to the Dubya problem is to elect Kerry because "he can't be any worse" (despite oodles of evidence to prove otherwise.)
The lessons of history are ignored when ideologically inconvenient to the Left, by historian Victor Davis Hanson reminds us that at many times, we've had some tough choices to make and, fortunately, we've made the choices that have allowed the general comfort and safety that allows today's ill-informed and maliciously treasonous the latitude to espouse their smug pieties in the hope that America will slit it's own throat.
The full text is in the print version of National Review, but this sample says enough:
Had Lincoln lost the 1864 vote, a victorious General McClellan would have settled for an American continent divided, with slavery intact. Without Woodrow Wilson's reelection in 1916 — opposed by the isolationists — Western Europe would have lost millions only to be trampled by Prussian militarism. Franklin Roosevelt's interventionism saved liberal democracy. And without the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan and his unpopular agenda for remaking the military, the Soviet Union might still be subsidizing global murder.
This election marks a similar crossroads in our history. We are presented with two radically different candidates with profound disagreements about how to conduct a historic worldwide war. We should remember that all our victorious past presidents were, at the moments of their crises, deeply unpopular precisely because they chose the difficult, long-term sacrifice for victory over the expedient and convenient pleas for accommodation (if not outright capitulation). We are faced with just such an option today: a choice between a president whose call for patience and sacrifice promises victory, and a pessimist stirring the people with the assurances that we should not have fought, and now cannot win, the present war in Iraq.
Our terrorist enemy has no uniforms or aircraft, but nevertheless struck at the very heart of our financial and political capitals in a fashion unimaginable by Nazi Germany, Tojo's Japan, or the Soviet Union. The Islamic fascists' creed is Hitlerian, their methodology primeval. Their aim is not mere territory: They want nothing less than the destruction of Western freedom, through the takeover of the Middle East and the use of its petroleum wealth to craft a nuclear, global caliphate, Dark Aged in its values, 21st-century in its lethality.
This war against Islamic fascism is now a quarter-century old, and began with the Iranian seizure of the American embassy in 1979; the apex of this escalating assault — owing to past American neglect and appeasement — was September 11. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and John Kerry — so unlike their Democratic predecessors FDR, Harry Truman, and John Kennedy — have seen the struggle not as one for national survival, but at best as the lamentable dividend of inequality or poverty, and at worst as the felonious behavior of a few miscreants who seem to eat, sleep, and bank in the upper air rather than in the houses and streets of real countries. Thus arose John Kerry's revealing use of "sensitive" and "nuisance" to suggest that we need to return either to writs and indictments or the occasional cruise missile — i.e., the status quo before the world changed on 9/11.
Even though I'm dissatisfied with Dubya and am not voting for him, you don't see me voting to sacrifice my country to settle my differences over his stewardship. I hope others reach the same conclusion, because the price to be paid will make 9/11 look like a picnic and you know damn well, the Left won't accept responsibility for the carnage.
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 11:09 AM
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
...but now wants us to be upset that we can't find 380 of those tons now?!?!?!?
Andrew C. McCarthy, who who led the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others, beats down on the Times, CFR and Kerry's dangerously naive fecklessness with regard to his UN Masters. The sauce:
Why is it more plausible that the U.S. forces incompetently safeguarded the site than that Saddam cleaned it out beforehand? It's not. That, no doubt, is why Kerry foreign-policy adviser Richard Holbrooke candidly told Fox's John Gibson yesterday that he did not know the truth of what had happened. But a non-story doesn't help Kerry, and a story that points to the Iraqi dictator as the culprit would only underscore the danger that Saddam posed and further validate President Bush's determination to remove him.
So the Kerry wags instead weaved a story that made Bush and the military into the keystone cops. The Kerry camp was so clued in that they had a campaign ad up by the close of business. Just imagine, though, what the Times and CBS would say if the Justice Department brought an indictment based on the dearth of evidence Kerry is now using to accuse the president of the United States of being an incredible incompetent.
Still, the bigger questions about competence remain. Saddam didn't have 380 tons of high explosives; he had 400,000. Using the Kerry math — now ludicrously deployed to evoke images of Pan Am 103 after months of Democrat insistence that Saddam and terror were like oil and water — this would compute to 80 million planes that could have been exploded out of the sky.
That can't happen now, however. Under President Bush's leadership, over 99 percent of that 400,000 tons is now in American hands. Under a President Kerry, 100 percent of them would have been in the hands of a free Saddam who, having bought off the allies with whom Kerry longs to summit, would be thisclose to ending the sanctions and regenerating his ambitious WMD programs — with Abu Musab al Zarqawi happily ensconced in Northern Iraq and Osama bin Laden perhaps cashing in on Saddam's long pending offer of safe harbor.
Kerry's latest riff, of course, has been that the president rushed into a war (that Kerry voted to authorize) instead of "giving the inspections a chance to work." Is no one — not Kerry, not the Times, not CBS — troubled by the fact that their vision of the "inspections working" is one in which Saddam was blithely permitted to keep 400,000 tons of high explosives, constituting components for nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles — components that were supposed to have been removed, destroyed or rendered inert a dozen years earlier under the resolutions that ended the Gulf War.
Just what does American national security get out of summitry and IAEA inspections? If that's competence, let us hope for more "incredible incompetence."
Remember, the world will love us the moment we surrender to them! Vote Kerry!!!!
Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 5:06 PM