Spring Fund Drive
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Hannicatch of the week
This week we have a Sean Hannity fan for our Catholic readers. I was a little leery about posting this one for a couple of reasons. First, it isn't up on the Hannidate site yet, but my sources inside Hannidate tell me it'll be up soon. Second, this hannicatch almost sounds like he might be a homosexual. I don't think that's the case, regardless of what Pam might have to say about it. Think about it. Would Hannity allow homosexuals to recruit on his dating site? I don't think so.
Previous Hannicatches:
Another twofer. She's spends a lot of time alone while her boyfriend pursues his backyard wrestling career. He's worried about Mexicans spitting in his food.
Wants a buddy for heterosexual fun.
Likes to go on long romantic pogroms against Mexicans.
A twofer. He's a Christian ninja. She's tired of waiting for God to slam his immaculate salami home.
A match for a billionaire.
Wants stupid woman with big breasts.
No Coloreds
Republican Fundraiser
Kentucky Thoroughbred
Headlights of Morality
He kilt the man who tried to kill his daddy
George W. Bush
The Lord's Chosen
Your Majesty,
There is only one course left for you to take now that Saddam bin Laden is finally dead. You must give a speech in prime time detailing your long battle against this man. Your father should be made to kneel down beside you as you address the nation, so that once and for all, the world will know that you are a better man and a greater leader than him. Saddam's dead, naked body should be draped over the podium as you speak, and once you've finished, you should have your way with it to demonstrate that you've achieved the only thing you ever really wanted to accomplish in Iraq, the total domination of the man your father couldn't control, not with weapons sales or war. Then, you should bring our troops home.
Heterosexually yours,
Gen. JC Christian, patriot
Friday, December 29, 2006
A glorious war plan for Iran*
Arthur Herman
George Mason University
Dear Dr. Herman,
There's a lot to like about your plan to attack Iran. Our experience in Iraq and Israel's success in Lebanon are great examples of how bombing the hell out of a country's infrastructure will quickly bring the enemy to his knees.
However, the boldest piece of your plan, seizing Iran's off-shore and coastal oil facilities, may look better on paper than it would on the battlefield. We're looking at over 100 facilities there. It's going to take more than a small force of combined marines and special forces to capture and hold them. I don't think we have enough spare troops to pull it off. Especially now that it looks like we're going to solve the Iraq problem by rotating all of our troops in and out of there until their privatized social security accounts kick in.
That's why I think you should add giant robots that shoot heat rays out of their snakelike appendages to your plan. I'm thinking something along the lines of the ones in War of the Worlds. Not only would they be able to take and hold the oil facilities, they'd also scare the living hell out of the Iranians and their Islamunistofascist allies. The whole Middle East would convert in droves. In less than a week, we could be looking at one big Alabama between the Nile and the Indus. Then we could get down to the serious business of rebuilding their economy by loaning them money to build shoe factories to supply our Wal-Marts.
Heterosexually yours,
Gen. JC Christian, patriot
*Yeah, I stole Greenwald's title, but I'll be damned if I'm going to let anyone else use my favorite adjective without putting up a fight. By God, he's going to be sorry when his infrastructure is gone and he's facing vaporization by my robot's snake-like appendage.
Elsewhere: Jews on First has more on the Little Green Schoolhouse in Mrs. Malkins America story I wrote about yesterday. And if you didn't listen to the This American Life story to which I linked in my earler post, do it now. There's nothing like hearing it directly from the people who lived it (Click on the blue speaker icon for free streaming audio. The story begins at about 7:10).
Thursday, December 28, 2006
Religion of Peace
The most holy Emperor Misha I, who features a crusader's cross on his website, reacts to the Ethiopian invasion of Somalia:
Splendid! And when you get there, please feel free to level the entire piss hole of a "city", then cover it in gasoline and set it on fire. And don't bother being too meticulous about killing the inhabitants first. Let them crackle, hiss and sizzle while the rest of us laugh ourselves silly.
[...]
As is always the case whenever the followers of Mohammed the Pedophile are getting butchered. I'd suggest strapping the diplomats to the outside of your tanks, then finding a nearby building to run over. Or, better still, strap them to the exhaust grill. Nothing smells quite as wonderful as a set of striped pants on fire while the worthless bag of skin inside screams himself to death.
Tales from Mrs. Malkin's America
We don't need no little 9-year-old "Muslim-loser" girls comin' 'round our Little Green Schoolhouse (Click on the blue speaker icon for free streaming audio. The story begins at about 7:10)
I liked how Slate's Sonia Smith described Clarity and Resolve as being an "Islam-focused blog." The guys at my "civil-rights-focused club" enjoyed it too. We're going to ask Jethro to read all of her articles to us after he finishes that "Jewish-focused book."
Finally, I've wanted to write something using this rare picture of Michael Chertoff, Commander of the State Security Apparatus, but I'm still too sick to do it right.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Accepted by my peers
I didn't realize that this cookbook wouldn't include French recipes when I made my contribution to it. It's nice that someone finally realized that there really isn't a lot of difference between Jesus' General and Instapundit, Atlas, Wizbang, or The Anchoress. Heck, we could probably write each other's posts and no one would be the wiser.
Here's my contribution:
The General's Very Manly Chips Olé
1 10 oz bag of Fritos
1 can of chili.
2 cups shredded cheese (American, dammit*)
1 small jar of sliced jalapeño peppers
1 small onion
1 six pack of beer (I prefer the generic beer, the kind that comes in the white cans with the word "BEER" printed in big black block letters on it)
A box of band-aids
Directions:
Drink a beer. Cut off the top third of the frito bag leaving the fritos inside. Drink another beer. Scratch yourself. Heat the chili in your microwave. Drink two more beers while watching the chili turn round and round on the microwave carousel. Drink another beer. Chop the onion. Bandage the fingers you accidentally cut while chopping the onion. Scratch yourself. Do you have any beers left? If so, drink another beer. Pour everything into the bag of Fritos and serve with beer.
*Velveeta may be used as a substitute in an emergency.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Praising Pinochet and Franco
The patriots at the Free Republic love Our Leader's mentors:
Yet Communist dictator Salvador Allende is treated as hero by "progressives", and human rights abuses and deaths are never counted or stand trials in courts.
To: CutePuppyOne man stopped communism there.
2 posted on 12/25/2006 9:24:23 PM PST by Sundog (Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana. Go Parse.)
To: SundogIndeed he did. And the media was thankless - of course. Allende was taking money from the KGB. Fact. Allende's party never had more than 34% of the vote. I hope to God we never have to make a choice like Pinochet did here in the US.
3 posted on 12/25/2006 9:33:25 PM PST by RKV ( He who has the guns, makes the rules.)
To: CutePuppyAllende the communist was trying to do to Chile what Chavez is doing to Venezuela right now.
4 posted on 12/25/2006 9:36:13 PM PST by Nextrush (Chris Matthews Band: "I get high....I get high.....I get high....McCain.")
Chile is better today in spite of what did or didn't happen
(how can I trust Communist-left wing sources that the MSM consider infallible) under the rule of Pinochet.
If only we could emulate Chile's social security system here our future taxation and debt problems would be helped greatly.
To: CutePuppyGood for him. Pin a medal on him. Many more tens of thousands would have died under a communist dictatorship.
5 posted on 12/25/2006 9:38:05 PM PST by RichardW
To: CutePuppyMore innocents were murdered by Islamicists on one day in September 2001 than in the entire reign of Pinochet.
6 posted on 12/25/2006 9:55:42 PM PST by Brilliant[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]
["According to a government report that included testimony from more than 30,000 people, his government killed at least 3,197 people and tortured about 29,000." --JC]To: cpdiiiExactly: and the same can be said for the Spanish Republic (yeah they were supported by Hitler-blah( evil), but at least they were anti-communist). It later turned Parliamentarian..!
9 posted on 12/25/2006 11:01:16 PM PST by JSDude1 (www.pence08.com)
Pinochet was a Hero, as are many fine anti-communist/leftist South Americans..
We should have emulated him in Iraq rather than on insisting upon "democracy", it would have made our job much easier in the long run/IMO!.
To: JSDude1Good point, a lot of similarities can be found between Pinochet and Franco - they both saved their countries from totalitarian Communism, both were branded fascist dictators while doing that, and both set their countries' course toward constitutional democratic Republics.
10 posted on 12/25/2006 11:55:18 PM PST by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
Socialists in both countries (and elsewhere) are trying to rewrite history, as they usually do as it's their primary tool of propaganda and establishment of permanent socialist government.
There was an article recently about new government in Spain revising the 1930's and trying to change the names of streets and cultural or historical places... Fortunately, there's a backlash from significant portion of population that had family members killed and that remebers atrocities of the Communists before Spanish Civil War.
The Enemy's Face
I know I feel a little safer now that the State Security Apparatus is fingerprinting babies. How about you?
Monday, December 25, 2006
Crisis in the North: Pig War II
In honor of Manley McFlagHag's (now that's a patriot's name if I ever heard one) post urging an invasion of Canada, I thought I'd repost my three part series outlining the rationale for taking back what's rightfully ours. It was originally posted June 9-12, 2003.
One hundred and fifty years of shame
The case for war against Pender Island, British Columbia (Part 1)
On June 15, 1859, those who hate America because we're free sent a pig into Lyman Cutler's garden on San Juan Island in Oregon Territory. That pig was a message. A message of disrespect for all we believe. Lyman Cutler answered that message in the only way a true American can. He shot the pig. Thus began what became to be know as the Pig War.
The foreigners immediately tried to arrest Cutler. The Governor of Oregon Territory responded by sending the hard charging Capt. George E. Pickett along with 66 men to San Juan Island. That angered the Governor of British Columbia (BC), who claimed the island for the Queen of England. Three British warships were sent to dislodge Pickett and the brave Americans.
The British sailors, being the prim and proper girly-man they are, refused to engage our gallant soldiers. A stand-off ensued until a group of bearded peaceniks in Washington convinced the liberal socialist Democrat president, James Buchanan, to sue for peace. To the shame of Americans everywhere, the appeasnik Buchanan agreed to joint occupation. That shame was compounded 13 years later when an Arkansas sharecropper named William Clinton forced President Grant to allow the German Kaiser, another foreigner, to decide who would own the island. Fortunately, the Kaiser recognized the American claim. He failed, however, to force the British to pay for the damage done by the pig to Cutler's garden, thus encouraging our enemies to commit further crimes against America.
The British terrorists moved across the Haro Strait to Pender Island. Their progeny live there today, smugly taunting America with their pigs and gardens. We may have the land, but the Pender Islanders have our stolen honor and they mean to keep it. That's why they have acquired weapons of mass destruction and have opened terrorist training camps. More on that in future installments.
Facts about Pender Island, BC
- Many of their official documents are written in French.
- It is part of a province named for two foreign countries.
- Their autocratic mayor, Ian McNeely, is probably French.
- Like the Arabs, they measure distance in kilometers rather than miles.
- They trade with Cuba.
- They celebrate Thanksgiving in October.
- They send children to a special childrens prison
- They play a sport called "curling" with brooms and teakettles. It's a metaphor for their goal of feminizing the world.
- They eat Christian babies on a holiday they call "Boxing Day."
- Pender Island is actually two islands. They think they're fooling us.
Clams with really big parts
The case for war against Pender Island, British Columbia (Part 2)
For years, I'd heard rumors that the freedom-hating citizens of Pender Island had launched a psychological warfare program against us. The geoducks were my first piece of proof. Geoducks are a type of clam that is easily identified by it's large syphon. While I've always felt a bit inadequate around geoducks, I've noticed that the Pender Island variety was particularly obscene. Moreover, they've caused me to have strange, unnatural thoughts. These thoughts grab hold of my mind forcing me to commit certain private sinful acts. Someday, I will sit down with Jesus to review my life, and these acts will be the source of many seconds of embarrassing silence. I'm sure that Hell will be something like those few moments.Anyway, these clam's syphons are unnatural -- even for geoducks. They must be the result of some kind of genetic engineering project. But why? Sure, they cause me to spill some of my essence, but that only weakens me momentarily. Within hours, my seed regenerates itself. There must be more to it.
The answer came to me one day when I went to Pikes Place Market with my wife and sister-in-law, Susan. As we walked past a stack of iced geoducks, Susan whispered something in my wife's ear, and they giggled. I recognized that giggle. I've heard it a thousand times. They were making fun of my little soldier. The geoducks gave them a model of something no man can achieve. These freak clams are turning men into little more than a cheap joke. The islanders are using them to undermine the authority of the American male, thus weakening our great nation. It's a new kind of subtle warfare, a type of insidious terrorism that can bring down a nation without a shot being fired.Island of death
The case for war against Pender Island, British Columbia (Part 3)
Every few days, I go down to the local gym and hang around the locker room to look for suspicious activity. You never know what you'll see when the men there undress. I once saw a tattoo on a white guy that was written in Chinese. He was obviously a Red Chinese spy. I followed him everywhere for months. He couldn't use the bathroom without me being there. He tried every spy trick in the book in an effort to shake my surveillance. Threats, restraining orders, arrests -- nothing stopped me. After about 17 months of following him to no avail, I finally struck pay dirt when he grabbed a ferry to Pender Island and checked himself into a place called Camp Spartacus. I thought that it must be some kind of gladiator camp. I was absolutely thrilled because I'm a huge fan of gladiator movies. I hid outside for nearly a week, waiting for him to leave so that I could check in.
Unfortunately, once I did get in, I learned that it wasn't a gladiator camp after all. It was a secret weapons of mass destruction production site. Thank God I had my camera and was able to take the pictures posted below. I authenticated them using two different sources. First, I sent them to Judith Miller of the New York Times. She showed them to her contacts at the Department of Defense and they confirmed that these are indeed pictures of a WMD production facility. I then sent them to Donald Rumsfeld. He showed them to his contact at the New York Times, Judith Miller. She noted that she had seen similar pictures that had been authenticated. There I had it, confirmation from two sources. Pender Island was making weapons of mass destruction.
Sunday, December 24, 2006
I'm finally out
Remember that flu I had last week? It put me in the hospital, yesterday (pneumonia). They just released me so I could be home for Christmas Eve. This may be my last post for a couple of days, but I'll just as likely get bored and write something.
Surging Forward: Debating American Troop Levels in Iraq
Image © Austin Cline
Original Poster: National Archives
Click for full-sized Image
There is a lot of public discussion about whether America should increase troop levels in Iraq, either temporarily or for the long term. There are a number of forceful voices on both sides and the very existence of this debate is healthy — can you imagine a similar disagreement proceeding so publicly and strongly even just a year ago? For far too long, public discussions have been little more than a mockery of how debates should proceed in a democracy — Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum pretending to disagree when they have already accepted the same policy positions and are just haggling over the details of implementation for the sake of public theater.
Perhaps the current debate isn’t much better in some ways because most of the ground being covered is simply whether to increase troops and for how long, not whether the entire policy is a failure and should be fundamentally altered, but at least that is being touched upon around the margins. It’s not where we should be, but it’s a refreshing change for the better, and if it’s still poor then that simply reinforces how bad things have been.
So, what should happen with troop levels in Iraq? Most liberal critics seem to react almost instinctively to condemn the idea, but I think that we should be more willing give temporary increases serious consideration. There are of course questions about whether increases are even feasible from a logistical perspective — we don’t want to ruin the military for the sake of trying to achieve a temporary gain, after all.
I’m trying to address this from a perspective of what the appropriate policy should be, though, and at least in theory there could be valid reasons for temporary increases, though they don’t seem likely to exist in reality. For example, an increase might be needed to deal with a sudden crisis, to press home a new advantage that has opened up, or even to help structure a large-scale withdrawal of troops overall.
There is one feature which such situations should all have in common: a reasonably clear goal that creates a definite picture of what “success” would look like, such that we have an idea not only of what the troops are trying to achieve, but also of when they will return once they have achieved it. Doesn’t that sound like the conditions that should have been in place before any troops were sent in at all? We didn’t have them then, and we are unlikely to have them now — that’s why valid reasons for a “surge” may be theoretically possible, but probably won’t be forthcoming.
Of course, there’s no point of even pretending to have a debate if neither the course it takes nor its final outcome will have any impact on the ultimate decision — but that’s precisely what we are probably facing. President George W. Bush has declared himself to be the “decider,” and there is little evidence that he takes seriously advice or warnings from people who tell him things he doesn’t want to hear.
He seems much more likely to listen to advice when people are telling him things that justify the choices he already intends to follow. Any surge in troops will simply be part of “surging” forward with the same basic goals that have existed since the beginning. Bush isn’t looking for a plan — he’s looking for new ways to get people to believe that he has one in the first place. It’s all about selling his war to an increasingly skeptical public, not about developing the best means for pursuing a necessary conflict as part of a defensible agenda.
Bush has said in the past that he opposed politicizing the war (a process he observed with Vietnam) and intended to follow the advice of his military commanders; today, he appears poised to reject the recommendations of his military commanders who don’t want more troops sent in. Bush is wrong on both counts: every war is necessarily political and all decisions must be made on the basis of both political and military needs. Sometimes the former will take precedence over the latter, and only under a military dictatorship do the military commanders make all of those decisions.
On the other hand, sending in more troops against the wishes of military commanders is probably a bad idea anyway if they are saying it won’t help the situation and may hurt the military overall. Even if Bush has the right idea about how political leaders must make decisions about how to pursue a military conflict, he seems to have chosen just about the worst time to assert that role and reject the advice of military commanders.
Political leaders may make militarily poor decisions that we don’t like, but they, not the generals, are elected by and accountable to the people — including the troops being put in harm’s way — and thus the final decision must be theirs. Bush is in charge and has a responsibility to make military decisions on the basis of both military and political factors. We the people, however, have a right know what those factors are and why they are being used. We have a right to know why he would continue with the same policies and plans despite how they are shredding both military lives and the nation’s military capability.
