Just another 1.67 Friedmans, I promise.

Damn. He's caught on to the fact that we're all laughing at him.

Best three out of five? Come on, three out of five.

The problem, Steve, is that we know what your promises are worth these days (emphasis added):

During the election campaign, Harper promised to hold a free vote in the Commons on whether Parliament should revisit the [same-sex marriage] issue. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said he is willing to abide by a decision by the Commons to let the current law stand.

So does that mean that, if this free vote fails, Steve is prepared to let the matter drop permanently? Because, say the Tories (God help us all) win a majority in the next election. Will Steve look at that majority and think, "Hey, a majority. I'll bet it'll work this time."

Or can someone pin him down and ask him point-blank whether, if this free vote fails, he's done with it. For good and forever.

Of course, he could make a promise but, as I've already pointed out, we all know what those are worth.

SLIGHTLY CONFUSED AFTERTHOUGHTS: I'm puzzled by PMS's position that, while he's going to hold a free vote on SSM, "he is willing to abide by a decision by the Commons to let the current law stand."

I find this odd. I'm not really used to the image of the Prime Minister of Canada announcing a free vote on a topic on which he allegedly has no opinion. What is the point of holding such a free vote when you've already announced ahead of time that you're just fine with the situation the way it is? This would seem to be a particularly unproductive exercise for Canada's Parliament.

More to the point, what is Harper's position on SSM? I'm assuming all you're going to get out of him is that he promised a free vote on the subject so he's going to hold one. (You know, like he promised he wasn't going to fuck with income trusts and, sure enough, ... um, wait ... bad example. Never mind.)

So will any journalist have the cojones to ask PMS to his face how he wants SSM to be resolved? Yes, I'm sure he's going to be as uninformative as possible and just say he's allowing a vote but, theoretically, if it was entirely within Harper's power to overturn SSM, would he choose to do that? I don't think that's an unfair question.

If Harper is going to waste everyone's time re-opening this debate, I think he owes everyone at least his personal opinion on the subject.

Is this thing on? Hello?

Apparently, someone's auditioning for that new Fox News right-wing comedy travesty ... uh, show:

Well, He Didn’t Scream — That’s a Good Sign

The full text of Howard Dean’s speech to the Liberal convention is now available...

I’m not watching the Liberal convention, but I gather he didn’t scream or make any silly noises.

Yessir, that joke just gets funnier every time I hear it. I mean, after the first 1,500 times, it's a real knee-slapper, isn't it?

Dude, that's what Blackberries are for.

No big deal, it's not like it's high-priority or anything:

All eyes are on Amman as President Bush meets with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Kamel al-Maliki looking for solutions to the political and military morass in Iraq.

Prospects for the already-delayed meeting were put into further doubt when al-Maliki canceled a presummit dinner with Bush. But White House Spokesperson Dan Bartlett denied there was a snub, saying it was nothing more then a schedule change.

"We have increasing violence in Anbar province, a growing insurgency and now, people being dragged from mosques and burned alive in the street so this summit meeting can't possibly come soon enough for ... damn! Did I say Wednesday? Sorry, my mistake, can't make Wednesday. How about Friday? Does Friday work for you?"

I'm sure we'll get a retraction and apology any minute now ...

See, first there was Canada's Crazy-Assed Racist Redneck™ being a good little neo-con stenographer. And then there's reality.

I'm guessing you'll get a public correction from Kate the day Satan starts ice skating to work.

I guess that's why they call them "red" states.

I'll bet you never expected to read this:

GOP Senatorial Committee in the Red

The Republicans' senatorial campaign arm, which lagged behind other national party committees in fundraising the past two years, emerged from the Nov. 7 election in debt and is soliciting donations to get out of the red.

In an urgent appeal to donors this week, Sen. Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, the chairwoman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, beseeched contributors to "help us retire our debt."

"If we let this debt linger, it will cripple our efforts to recruit great candidates for the next election and begin our drive to win the one additional seat we need to regain the Senate majority," Dole wrote.

No fear, Liddy -- Dianne should be showing up on your doorstep any day now to help out. It's not like she has a full schedule around here anymore.

And if that fails, well, you might try to suck some money out of this.

Open thread: CPoC broken promises edition.

Busy day today, so why don't you enumerate all of Stephen Harper's broken promises and flip-flops since taking office? Be specific. Give references.

I only beat you because I love you.

Shorter American public: "And if you don't stop twitching and spasming uncontrollably and get up, I'll Taser you again."

The heartbreak of word limit.

Shorter A Step to the Right: "Of course, to be fair and balanced I'll also tell you about CPoC MP Greg Thompson and Norm Doyle and Loyola Hearn and ... oh, darn, I can see we're out of time here."

And THESE people are in charge of our climate change program?

Just when you think it's not physically possible for the Blogging Tories to get any denser as a collective, well, they can still surprise you. Take, for example, "Conservative Life," who blogs on global warming but without taking the time to actually understand it 'cuz that would be, you know, hard work:

How come whenever we have a hot summer day I have to endure listening to leftist proclaim that the sky is falling. But when Alberta is experiencing its coldest spell in 100 years I find out about it on an American news source.

Apparently, on CL's planet, a nasty cold spell is all that's necessary to make fun of that whole "global warming" silliness. Just as apparently, CL has never taken the time to figure out that one of the proposed consequences of global warming is more frequent weather extremes, as Tim Thompson explains here:

... let me point out that global warming is a globally averaged phenomenon. That means that some places will get colder, while some places get warmer, with the global average getting warmer. Furthermore, there are obvious & well known cycles in nature, and no doubt others that are not obvious & not known (yet) ... I think the overall effect of global warming is most easily seen in the extremes; cold places get colder, warm places get warmer, and where the coldest & warmest places are will change as air mass motions change. But there are significant effects in nature, from feedback between oceans & atmosphere, to unexpected solar cycles, all of which need to be studied & understood.

But one need not take Thompson's word for anything. You can take the time to do an online search for some combination of "global warming" and "weather extremes" to see for yourself. Or you can become a member of the Blogging Tories and stay stupid.

The choice is entirely up to you.

LIES, DAMNED LIES AND WANKER STATISTICS. It's always amusing (and a bit painful) to watch the residents of Wankerville twist themselves inside out to ignore what the rest of us would see as obvious statistical trends. Take, for instance, this graph of the U.S. deficit (explained here):

Now, you and I (our fundamental properties being that we are not clinically insane) would look at that graph and think, "Hmmmmm ... I see a definite pattern here."

Your typical wanker, on the other hand (based on his views on global warming), would look at the same graph and proclaim, "Well, see, there's that increase in 1997 when Clinton was president so we really can't say anything about trends, can we? So there."

And that's when having a quiet conversation with your cat suddenly seems intellectual by comparison.

If you want to bitch slap Mark Steyn, you'll have to take a number.

Those of you who saw the movie "Airplane" will remember the scene where a woman passenger is getting hysterical, and other people on board line up, not to try to console her, but to slap her upside the head to shut her up.

Apparently, if you want a piece of Canada's Mark Steyn, you'll have to stand in line there, too.

I'm sorry ... you just suggested WHAT??

You know your ideas are pure lunatic wingnut when even a CNN NBC anchor looks a bit stunned.

(H/T e-mailer Simon.)

Gosh, he's so adorable when he's being such a petulant, little fuckwit.

Yeah, I'd say someone's back on the bottle again.

I'll see your scientifically-illiterate anti-environmentalist, and raise you an anti-choice, fundamentalist whackjob.

I swear, it's almost like Stephen Harper and George Bush are having a contest to see who can appoint the most hideously inappropriate, howlingly incompetent wingnut to a position of power.

Down south, we had a Bible-whomping, evangelical lunatic as the former Attorney General, followed by one who thought torture was just peachy keen and that the Geneva Conventions were both "obsolete" and "quaint."

Not to be outdone, PMS appointed a Minister of Justice who pleaded guilty to election finance overspending, a Foreign Affairs Minister whose talent at diplomacy is even worse than mine at subtlety, and an Environment Minister who is a documented liar.

But Commander Codpiece is not going to take this lying down as he raises in a big way, appointing a new chief of family planning at the Department of Health and Human Services who is an avowed pro-lifer who does not believe in birth control and is convinced there is a link between abortion and breast cancer.

You have to admit, that last appointment is going to be tough to beat in terms of sheer, unadulterated wingnuttery. Steve? Your move.

"Irony"? How do you spell that?

Apparently, ideologically-slanted news is a bad thing. Who knew?

THE HYPOCRISY! THE HYPOCRISY! As thwap points out, government propaganda masquerading as news was a regular feature of the Bush administration. Recall, if you will, the embarrassing cases of Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher and Michael McManus. And those were just the ones who got caught.

Sorry, Kate ... you were saying?

Ever have one of THOSE days?

For the first time for as long as you can remember, the drive to work is a breeze, and then ...

Civility in discourse -- who would have guessed?

First things first -- all readers are now welcome to weigh in on the inaugural CC wanker challenge here. Now that we've had a couple responses from the loyal opposition, everyone's welcome to play.

But what's more interesting is a real rarity in the Canadian blogosphere -- civility. Over here, Robert makes a post, Canada's lone remaining thoughtful conservative Olaf asks an appropriate question, and Ti-Guy politely provides the answer. This is an ugly trend. If it keeps up, I may have to stop referring to Steve Janke as a "dumbass."

Psyche! Just kidding on that last part. Steve will always be a dumbass.

Actually, feel free to let the door hit you in the butt on the way out.

And now that the voters in London North Centre have spoken, Dianne Haskett is free to drag her worthless, carpetbagging, neo-con ass back to Washington. And, as a favour, maybe she can take that sorry hack Michael Ignatieff with her when she goes.

Now that's a two-fer I could live with.

I love it when a plan comes together. And when I'm right.

Gosh, it wasn't all that long ago that I suggested a whole new neo-con talking point regarding "Operation Iraqi Clusterfuck", where GOP Rep. Chris Shays (R-Clusterfuck Apologist) spake thusly of the clusterfuck:

"Well, the problem is we’re a divided nation. We went into Iraq on a bipartisan basis and we’re gonna have to find a bipartisan solution, and the Democrats may not want to own Iraq but they own it now as much as this President. And that’s not a bad thing."

In short, despite the fact that this fiasco is entirely the GOP's fault, it's suddenly convenient to spread the blame and the responsibility around. And you can see this new talking point on glorious display here.

No, no, not the article itself (which is, by itself, hilariously educational regarding the mind-set of the clinically insane Right). No, it's a comment by "Jake," wherein Jake writes:

I think we all pretty much agree that the justification for the war was very faulty. Uh, we're WAY beyond that point now. Why do you guys keep looking to the past? We have to be concerned about the present and the future.

So yeah, call it a "neocon armada" and call it an "illegal and immoral invasion" all you want. That doesn't solve anything. WE'RE ALREADY IN IRAQ. Your comments are all geared as if we're still debating whether to invade Iraq or not. But, uh....we're already there.

How about we be constructive instead of just shouting out liberal talking points? Like, for instance, how can the U.S. win? How can we stabilize Iraq and secure freedom for its people? How can we help Iraq govern itself? These kinds of issues are much more important.

You libs just don't get it.

In other words, will you Libs please stop harping on the past and whose fault it is? Somehow, we've ended up totally upside down and in flames in this ditch and it's not doing any good to dwell on the fact that it was Jake behind the wheel, and pointing that out is just wasting time, so we have to put our heads together and figure out how to salvage the situation since we're all in this together.

Expect to see a lot more of this in the coming days.

SO MUCH WINGNUT CRUNCHY GOODNESS: You really should read at least the first part of the comments section at that Attytood post to appreciate the breathtaking dumbassitude of the Right, as portrayed by "Jake":

Again, I challenge all of the ultra-liberal talking heads on here to add a constructive, FORWARD-looking comment. But you guys just can't bring yourselves to do it, can you?

Instead, you blame America, you blame Bush, you blame Republicans. People, we already know that huge mistakes were made. Like I said, we're way past that point now.

AGAIN, can you come up with any independent thinking of your own as to how we can win this thing? Can you get past your blind and complete hatred of Bush for just one second to add a constructive comment?

Jake just doesn't get it, does he? It's too fucking late for that. To flog my favourite analogy to within an inch of its miserable life, you're already upside down in the ditch. At this point, you can't turn to the passenger who's been pleading with you to slow down all this time and ask, "So ... how about you stop whining for a while and make some suggestions as to how we salvage this situation?"

You can't -- the situation is not salvageable anymore. Period. So it's pointless (and hideously irresponsible) to keep harassing the "liberals" to come up with any "FORWARD-looking", constructive suggestions. It's too late for that.

The neo-cons have fucked this thing up beyond redemption, and the smartest thing the leftists can do at this point is make sure everybody knows whose fault it is.

NEVER MIND, PROBLEM SOLVED. As always, Rush has a solution.

The CC wanker challenge -- step right up.

In defending its 2003 invasion of Iraq, the administration of George W. Bush produced one horrifying claim after another -- Saddam Hussein was in league with al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein was behind the terrorist attack of 9/11, Saddam Hussein had WMDs and they knew exactly where they were, and on and on and on. And, as we all know, every single one of these breathless claims eventually crumbled, but that's not why we're here.

Not surprisingly, as each of those claims was shown to be howlingly inaccurate, the Left predictably accused the Bush administration of lying. "Bush lied, people died" went the refrain. But the Right was having absolutely none of that, no sir.

It didn't matter how spectacularly false a claim eventually turned out to be, Bush never, ever "lied." That simply wasn't an option, regardless of how much evidence his mindless defenders were clubbed with. However, there were apparently limits to just how much Kool-Aid these people were prepared to drink.

While the claim that the President "lied" was simply not an option, numerous wanks were forced to admit that, yes, the President had, well, "hyped" or "misled" or "cherry-picked" or "embellished" or "exaggerated" or some appropriate synonym. Even right-wing firebrand Pat Buchanan categorically rejected the concept of lying, even as he admitted to a mess of allegedly lesser offenses:

" ... they cherry-picked it. They hyped. But I personally do not believe the president of the United States deliberately lied about anything... [Bush] did not lie to them. The president emphasized, cherry-picked, hyped the causes for going, and set the others aside. That's not lying.

In short, Bush's behaviour might have been sleazy and tacky and questionable but, by God, he absolutely wasn't a "liar" and that was the end of that. Which brings us to basis of this post and perhaps the first in a series of wanker challenges: What would it take for Canada's wankers to admit that their heroes in the Conservative Party are, well, dishonest sleazebuckets? And I'm going to pose this question in the context of a recent development involving the CPoC.

As you can read back here, Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty made some news recently with a rather astonishing claim:

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty hopes to eliminate billions of dollars in net debt within the next 15 years, calling it "a matter of fairness for future generations."

As many followup news pieces pointed out, what Flaherty was referring to -- something called "net debt" -- was most emphatically not the same as what most people already understood as the regular national debt:

Liberal MP John McCallum accused Flaherty of misleading Canadians by promising to tackle the net debt, calling the proposal "technically true but a gimmick."

"You are using this arcane statistic of net debt, which nobody except a few economists in the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) have ever heard of," charged McCallum.

Even the Bloomberg news service clearly realized what was going on, given that a news piece they produced had that phrase significantly inside quotes:

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty moved the country in that direction by pledging yesterday to buy back C$3 billion ($2.63 billion) in bonds each year, as part of a plan to eliminate the country's ``net debt'' by 2021. He also forecast combined budget surpluses of $50.1 billion over six years, according to a fiscal update released in Ottawa late yesterday.

And that same article's opening paragraph even took the time to briefly explain what Flaherty was actually talking about:

The Canadian government will seek to become the first Group of Seven nation to bring debt levels in line with assets, as it benefits from revenue windfalls stemming from the largest oil reserves outside of the Middle East.

But that's not the worst of it since, as you can read in that earlier CTV article, Flaherty seemed to clearly and deliberately confuse the two types of debt:

{Flaherty] said the total net debt currently stands at $481 billion.

That statement is simply false -- the figure of $481 billion refers to Canada's national debt. Which brings us, finally, to the challenge I'm posing to Canada's wankers: I want them to give me their opinion on the ethics and/or honesty of Flaherty's actions. Note first that this challenge consists of two parts.

First, I would like to hear from the wanker community their opinion on Flaherty's use of the arcane notion of "net debt" -- a quantity sufficiently unusual that many subsequent news pieces had to explain precisely what it meant so that readers wouldn't be confused.

One could, of course, defend Flaherty by being pedantic as hell, and parsing his claim extremely carefully, suggesting that what he was saying was technically accurate. But we're all familiar with that kind of weaseling -- where you choose your words carefully to give one impression, while leaving enough room to have plausible deniability later. So, technical accuracy aside, what do Canada's wanks think of the ethics of Flaherty's announcement?

More importantly, what do those same folks think of Flaherty's flagrant falsehood, when he claimed that Canada's "net debt" was $481 billion? You could, of course, argue that he misspoke, or something equally lame. But it's hard to swallow that possible defense given how much work he must have put into constructing the whole "net debt" scenario in the first place. One simply doesn't "misspeak" about an amount like $481 billion, particularly if one is Canada's Minister of Finance.

So there's the challenge -- I want to know what this country's conservatives think of Mr. Flaherty's ethics and honesty. And, yes, there's a reason for this.

There's a perpetual complaint that it's simply impossible to have any sort of civil, political dialogue anymore -- that neither side even attempts to listen to the other, that the opposition is hypocritical and so on. Well, this is my attempt to see just how hopeless the situation is since, based on the responses I get (if any), I think we'll get a pretty good idea whether it's even worth trying to hold a conversation.

To that end, I'm going to ask my regular (and not-so-regular) liberal/leftist commenters to refrain from commenting for the time being. I want to keep the comments section (at least for now) exclusively for those from the Right, to hear their perspective on honesty and ethics in government with respect to Mr. Flaherty.

And once we get some feedback, I think we'll be a lot closer to knowing whether there's any chance for a dialogue here at all.

The word "pathetic" just doesn't seem to do this justice, does it?

How low do you have to sink to have to pay people to say nice things about you?

Death by photo op.

Geez, it's getting bad when Commander Codpiece can kill security personnel without even sending them overseas:

HONOLULU, Hawaii (AP) -- A motorcycle officer injured last week while escorting President Bush in the islands died Sunday, police said.

Steve Favela, 30, and two other officers crashed their cycles as the presidential motorcade was traveling across Hickam Air Force Base to meet troops for breakfast early Tuesday.

While the President and the First Lady expressed their condolences upon hearing the sad news, Vice-President Dick Cheney reportedly responded, "See? I told you it looked serious, and that I could have finished him off on the spot but nooooooo ..."

Once they're born, though, that's a different story.

Apparently, that sanctimonious reverence for all human life ends shortly after birth:

"It was great fun to listen to Mustafa's idiotic shrieks"

"All college students should be tasered on the first day of orientation to break them in, and all UCLA students should receive a weekly taser enema if overheard using the expressions 'abuse of power', 'Patriot Act', or 'civil rights' at any point in their school careers."

I give you ... the Holy Taser of Antioch.


AFTERSNARK: I'm a bit creeped out by Kathy's gleeful approval of the idea of a "weekly taser enema." Maybe it's just me, but it seems that Catholics in general are disturbingly obsessed with all matters, uh ... anal, if you catch my drift.

And I think you do.

TBogg does Canada's Mark Steyn.

TBogg: 1, Steyn: 0. Precisely as it should be.

EASY, GUYS ... there's enough of Steyn to go around.

We have NEVER been "stay the course."

And another embarrassing bit of history goes down the memory hole.

OFFICIAL RETRACTION: Yes, unlike our wanker brethren, we here at CC HQ have no problem admitting when we screwed the pooch.

Mind you, that "Stay the course" thing ... we're not letting that go just yet.

Readers: Start your engines ...

From a recent post, commenter "Red Squirrel" comes looking for opinion:

Hey, I'm not a great fan of the US foreign policy, either. But may I ask you a different question - what is your attitude to Americans in general? Do you feel your nation has some ties with them? Do you feel the two countries are close or do you feel the US is trying to dominate over Canada? The reason I'm asking is that we're taking a class called Canadian World, and they tell us things... I won't tell you what kind of yet, so as not to affect your own reply.

Take it away, folks ...

When life imitates Dilbert.

One of my favourite Dilbert cartoons, from Scott Adams' book "Dilbert and the Way of the Weasel," pokes fun at a particularly weaselly debating technique which involves restating your opponent's statements using "bizarre absolutes" so that you can refute a subsequently nonsensical and irrelevant position:

Dilbert: We should add this feature to our product to make it more useful:

"Bizarre Absolute" Guy: "Are you telling me that not one person on earth will use our product without that feature?!!"

Dilbert: "You just changed what I said into a bizarre absolute."

"BA" Guy: "Oh, I change everything you say?!"

It's pretty embarrassing when you end up resembling the foil in a Dilbert cartoon, as "Kitchener Conservative" does back here when, after I complain about PM Stephen Harper's reclusive inaccessibility these days, KC replies in a bizarre absolute kind of way:

I guess what you must be saying is that Harper should run outside once a day between running the country and Question Period, so that every John Q. Protester can feel good that they can get picture taken with Harper present.

Tune in tomorrow when "KC" does his best impression of Dilbert intern Asok, who is convinced to crawl into the office ventilation system in an emergency attempt to shut down the Jeffries tubes in order to prevent an imminent warp core breach.

Well, we ARE open to suggestions.

Back here, Kitchener Conservative seems thoroughly put out that readers just aren't getting the point of his original article, which was that it's just so tacky to interrupt a public gathering addressing cancer funding to whinge on and on about someone's indifference to the deaths of bunches and bunches of foreign people.

Normally, KC might have a point, except for the inconvenient fact that "Canada's New Government" has made it virtually impossible for the general public to protest against its policies in any meaningful way.

Take PM Harper's reluctance to hold regular press conferences with the Parliamentary Press Gallery, his contemptuous avoidance of journalists on a recent trip, and his ongoing muzzling of CPoC candidates, at which point, one can, in all fairness, ask KC just when and where someone should make their feelings known to Little Lord Fauntleroy.

Perhaps that latest protest does detract from the important message of funding cancer research, but if PMS insists on perpetually hunkering down behind the doors of his protective bunker, then he really has no right to complain if his critics have to go to greater and greater lengths to get their point across, does he?

Civil discourse? Well, OK, just this once.

And having been chided on a regular basis for an occasional lack of civility in our blogging, we here at CC HQ have decided to respond to those complaints by putting aside our partisan animosity, and addressing a random, conservative political opinion piece with politeness, and decorum, and a fair and balanced look at the facts, and ... and ...

Jesus H. Christ, but Hinderaker is a fucking douchebag. And I say that with the utmost respect for actual douchebags everywhere.

OK, maybe that was a bad example.

A history of Microsoft in one minute and 26 seconds.

"Sore Loserman," indeed.

See if you can spot the underlying pattern ...
... here ...

Republicans vacating the Capitol are dumping a big spring cleaning job on Democrats moving in. GOP leaders have opted to leave behind almost a half-trillion-dollar clutter of unfinished spending bills.

There's also no guarantee that Republicans will pass a multibillion-dollar measure to prevent a cut in fees to doctors treating Medicare patients.

The bulging workload that a Republican-led Congress was supposed to complete this year but is instead punting to 2007 promises to consume time and energy that Democrats had hoped to devote to their own agenda upon taking control of Congress in January for the first time in a dozen years.

... and here ...

Friends: Hastert Dejected, Unlikely To Serve Entire Term As "Rank And File" Congressman...

Speaker J. Dennis Hastert made history this year when he became the longest-serving Republican in that post. Now he is about to go into the books again as one of the few House speakers, and the first in almost 50 years, to rejoin the rank and file.

Defying expectations that he would immediately retire if the Republicans lost their majority, Mr. Hastert is preparing to remain in the House for at least the early months of the 110th Congress while he helps orchestrate a line of succession at home in Illinois and seeks to shape a political ending beyond his party's defeat.

... and now here ...

Is it just me or has George W. Bush checked out of the stumbling national crisis we know as 'Iraq'?

I know his name shows up in the headlines. He's meeting Iraq Prime Minister Maliki next week in Amman. Vice President Cheney is shuttling to Saudi Arabia. And all of this is being billed as a part of a new and broader 'regional' approach to getting the conflict under some measure of control.

But I don't hear the president. Not his voice. The one thing that's been a constant over the last three and a half years is the president as the voice of American Iraq policy. Whether he's the author of it is another question entirely. But the voice and pitbull of it, always.

And yet since the election he seems to have disappeared from the conversation entirely. Like he's just checked out. It's not his thing anymore.

Take your time ... it'll come to you.

Apparently, Michelle Malkin was right. Go figure.

That liberal obsession with fairness, tolerance and basic human rights for all? Apparently, we really are just unhinged and deranged moonbats after all.

I can't wait for the Charles Krauthammer book review.

Irony is officially dead.

Reports Backseat Blogger:

Playing the homophobia card in politics is not restricted to the good o’ U S of A.

It also plays well in Latvia where the new guardian of human rights in Latvia is a parliamentarian who calls gays “degenerates” and “perverts”

Tune in next week when BB accuses the government of Mozambique of appointing to the post of minister of environmental protection someone who couldn't give a crap about the environment. Oh, those wacky, wacky foreigners.

My new favourite comedian.

Apparently, the Death Star had a cafeteria. Who knew?

Blogging Tories Short Takes: Sat, Nov. 25, 2006.

Shorter Kitchener Conservative: "For the sake of civil discourse, it's critically important that we show the maturity to eventually put issues like this behind us, and move on."

Shorter Kate McMillan: "For the sake of civil discourse, it's critically important that we never forget issues like this, and that we keep dragging them out and clubbing our opponents with them every chance we get."

Shorter True North: "When it comes right down to it, kids these days are being brainwashed with a bunch of leftist, liberal propaganda just oozing with tolerance, open-mindedness and a respect for the basic human rights of everyone else. This has got to stop."

See, that's the problem with a one-trick pony.

And the good news just keeps rolling in:

The Florida pastor recently tapped to lead the Christian Coalition of America resigned his position in a dispute about conservative philosophy - more than a month before he was to fully assume his post, he said this week.

The Rev. Joel Hunter, of Northland, A Church Distributed, in Longwood, Fla., said he quit as president-elect of the group founded by evangelist Pat Robertson because he realized he would be unable to broaden the organization's agenda beyond opposing abortion and same-sex marriage.

He hoped to include issues such as easing poverty and saving the environment.

"These are issues that Jesus would want us to care about," Hunter said...

Hunter hoped to revive the group by expanding its agenda to include what he called "compassion issues." He also planned to teach evangelicals how to "vote with their life," or integrate and apply their Christian values to public life.

The coalition's rejection of Hunter's approach means it is unwilling to part with its partisan, Republican roots, Hunter said.

So if the CCA wants to sink along with the rest of the Republican whackjobs down south, I think it's incumbent on us compassionate liberals not to just stand idly by. Rather, it's incumbent on us to throw them an anchor. A large, heavy anchor. And perhaps hold their heads underwater until the bubbles stop.

Because I'm sure that's what Jesus would do.

Just kill me now, Lord.

Remember how I warned you how Troglodyte Central was going to try to be, well ... funny. (And by "funny," I didn't mean a Katherine Harris, "We're going to win this election in the end" kind of funny. I mean, allegedly amusing.)

Well ... don't say I never did anything for you.

P.S. Over at Firedoglake, TRex goes to town on this as well. Somewhere, Jon Stewart just pissed himself with hysterical laughter.

He who laughs last ...

Hey, kids -- remember way back when the lower forms of life in the wankersphere were cackling with glee over the misfortunes of the Dixie Chicks? Well, you know it's not nice to gloat but ... what the fuck.

And here's a little something to celebrate with:

I figured it was only appropriate.

Dear American troops ...

... almost 3,000 of you are dead because of this. Happy now?

A little more here than meets the eye.

Before you all go getting woodies over the CPoC's suggestion that they can wipe out the federal debt within 15 years, you might want to read the fine print more carefully. On Thursday, we heard this from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty (all subsequent emphasis added):

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty hopes to eliminate billions of dollars in net debt within the next 15 years, calling it "a matter of fairness for future generations."

He said the total net debt currently stands at $481 billion.

However, further down in that article, we read the disquieting clarification:

Liberal MP John McCallum accused Flaherty of misleading Canadians by promising to tackle the net debt, calling the proposal "technically true but a gimmick."

"You are using this arcane statistic of net debt, which nobody except a few economists in the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) have ever heard of," charged McCallum.

Flaherty's figure of $481 billion includes both federal and provincial government debt, minus assets like the Canada Pension Plan and Quebec Pension Plan.

A CTV news piece the next day went into this in somewhat more detail:

Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is defending his plan to wipe out the "net debt" by 2021 against critics who are calling it a gimmick that doesn't add up...

But Liberal MP John McCallum said the net debt is an arcane statistic that "nobody except a few economists in the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) have ever heard of."

The net debt is much smaller than the federal debt which stands at $480-billion, said McCallum, a former Royal Bank chief economist.

That second CTV article goes into much more detail, but let's let prominent Canadian right-wing pundit and fashion plate Adam Daifallah explain the sophisticated and bewildering financial technicalities for us:

Another great day for conservatism

The list is starting to get quite long.

No complaints here.

Tune in next week when Adam leads us through the intricacies of PM Stephen Harper's proposal for a constitutionally-sound state of "nationhood" for Quebec: "Whoo hoo!! Does Stephen Harper fucking rock or what!?!?"

BY THE WAY, I'm hoping that you noticed that Flaherty simply lied in that first article:

[Flaherty] said the total net debt currently stands at $481 billion.

That's just crap. The current federal debt is around $480 billion, making the net debt considerably smaller. If you need any proof of the difference, let me predict that what you'll hear from now on is Flaherty making promises to wipe out only the net debt, while promising only to reduce the federal debt.

Need proof? How about this article from today's London Free Press, where you can see for yourself how carefully Flaherty is now choosing his words (emphasis added):

Releasing a fall economic and fiscal update, Flaherty unveiled a 15-year plan to devote $3 billion and all surplus proceeds to pay down the federal debt.

Not "eliminate." Simply "pay down." Flaherty initially tried to bluff his way through this, and he got busted. Just what Canada needs: A federal finance minister that's a lying douchebag. Did anyone seriously expect anything better from this lot?

When you absolutely, positively have to kill some civilians overnight.

Canada's clinically deranged Joel Johannesen gets his Captain America™ Underoos in a bunch:

The Russians apparently see nothing wrong with offering delivery of weaponry to a dangerous, radical nutbar terrorist regime bent on global instability and domination ...

Well, sure, but do they guarantee delivery by 9 a.m.?

I can name that tune in one freakin' note.

Sorry? You're not from around here and you want to know about our national ruling party? Let me give you the Reader's Digest Condensed Version.

What's that? You're American? Well, then ... that explanation was totally unnecessary, wasn't it?

Too much for just one day a year.

In honour of Canada's Crazy-Assed Racist Redneck™'s swooning adoration for Fighting 101st Keyboardist Victor "Spartacus" Hanson, TBogg brings us the latest installment of "National Crazy Day" -- the VDH Edition.

This would be the same Victor Davis Hanson who once opined:

For good or evil, George W. Bush will have to cross the Rubicon on judicial nominations, politicized indictments, Iraq, the greater Middle East, and the constant frenzy of the Howard Dean wing of the Democratic party — and now march on his various adversaries as never before. He can choose either to be nicked and slowly bled to death in his second term, or to bare his fangs and like some cornered carnivore start slashing back.

I'm fairly sure that's not the look Hanson was going for. But I'm guessing it's the best he's going to get.

BONUS TRACK: Unlike Kate McMillan, James Wolcott has some talent with the written word.

And you just noticed that NOW!?

From the Department of "Well, duh":

It is hard to find anyone in the Bush administration who endorses the way Rumsfeld was handled. His friend and comrade, Vice President Cheney, is reported to be profoundly disturbed.

I wouldn't worry too much about the Dickster. Just let him shoot someone in the face and I'm sure he'll be back on his game in no time.

"I have some good news, and I have some bad news."

(CC News) -- In a move clearly designed to steal the spotlight from the Bloc Quebecois, Canadian PM Stephen Harper announced that he was prepared to recognize the province of Quebec as a "nation," as long as they didn't take that to mean, you know, a real nation. In addition, Harper also vowed to stand by his "promise" related to same-sex marriage, as long as no one insisted that it be treated as a real promise.

In unrelated news, the Catholic Church announced that they would be more accepting of gays as long as those folks weren't, you know, too gay.

Apparently, there's just no pleasing some folks.

What ... you got a problem with the word "wanker"?

Sometimes, a link is all you need.

I was going to blog about this but ... why bother?

P.S. Glenn Greenwald points out that Richard Cohen has always been that much of a dick.

"All of our previous fantasies are inoperable."

2002:

"The idea that it's going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990," [Donald Rumsfeld] said on an Infinity Radio call-in program...

"Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that," he said. "It won't be a World War III."

2006:

At a breakfast meeting with reporters, Gen. James Conway also warned that it could take years to adequately train and equip the Iraqi security forces — longer, perhaps, "than the timeline that we probably feel ... our country will support."

"This is tough work, it doesn't happen overnight," and patience by the American people will be needed, he said.

Oopsie.

The downside of high technology.

Sometimes, those videophones can get you in a heap of trouble. And note that the video has already disappeared from YouTube. Pity. It might have been amusing.

The 2006 CBA Awards: What the f...?

And at the risk of this sounding like sour grapes (which it really isn't), while everyone is basking in the glow of the first round of voting over at Robert McClelland's 2006 CBA Awards, I'm going to drop a metaphorical turd in the punch bowl by asking, in my best bewildered Stewie Griffin, "What the hell, man?"

Quite simply, I need someone to explain to me how the blog "Raymi the Minx" ended up an absolutely runaway leader in the categories of "Best Blog" and "Best Personal Blog" and was second only to Rick Mercer in the "Best Humour Blog." Actually, never mind -- I know how stuff like this happens. Forget I asked.

Sorry, Robert, but, if this is where the CBA Awards are going, you need to rethink this whole thing in a big way. When countless, truly worthwhile Canadian blogs can get trounced by someone who blogs in utterly vacuous, 12-year-old Valleyspeak, you have a real problem.

Google: Endless fun for the whole family!

Oh, Google ... you can read me like a book.

"Nostradamus, deadpan mode, please."

Sometimes, you almost feel guilty about taking the credit for being this prescient (emphasis added):

Yes, by George, the GOP almost had this thing in the bag, the insurgents were in their last throes, a bunch of desperate "dead-enders" and all, and along come the Democrats who threaten to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but that's all right as long as George W., in the spirit of co-operation and bipartisanship that he's famous for, reaches across the aisle and stabs Democrats in the eyeballs with his veto pen over and over, after which Iraq will, as a consequence, turn into another Vietnam, which will, naturally, be all the Democrats' fault.

Well ... that didn't take long, did it?

SHAYS: Well, the problem is we’re a divided nation. We went into Iraq on a bipartisan basis and we’re gonna have to find a bipartisan solution, and the Democrats may not want to own Iraq but they own it now as much as this President.

But of course. Having been treasonous, "cut-and-run", cowardly, troop-hating, terrorist-loving, obstructionist scum all this time, the Democrats are suddenly full partners in Operation Mideast Clusterfuck.

Yes, and after I had too much to drink and drove totally recklessly (ignoring all your pleas to slow down and let you drive) and we're now lying in the ditch upside down, I'm going to let you take the wheel and, oh man, we are both so fucked when Mom and Dad find out what we did.

And, yes, I did see that coming, thank you very much.

Wednesday night open thread.

Let's chat about something other than what a total dickhead Joel is.

Giving that dead horse one more whack: the Joel Johannesen edition.

In spite of Thomas Huxley's thoughtful advice that "one should never occupy oneself with the slaying of the slain more than once," we're going to give Proud to be Canada's Biggest Dumbass Joel Johannesen's crumpled, bleeding form a couple more swift kicks to the happy sack, at which point we will consign him to the dustbin of history where he belongs. (Well, we might hold something back for one more kick, but that will be your Christmas ... whoops, I mean holiday present from me, at no extra charge.)

Recall, if you will, what inspired Joel's infantile, little tantrum here:

Surprising to not one single soul who is even remotely in search of the great book “GODLESS”, Ann Coulter’s latest (of five) huge best-sellers; or the great thinker Mark Steyn’s best-selling book “America Alone”; or, say, Bill O’Reilly’s huge best-seller “Culture Warrior”, the Chapters - Indigo “Christmas” catalogue, which they call their “Holiday Gift Guide 2006” is out, and it features none of them, nor virtually any of the other huge best-selling conservative-tolerant books of late. Left-wing books? Oh yes of course.

... In a perhaps unwitting nod to the “big ideas” of the right, if indeed they have any at all according to “Heather”: a book by Niall Ferguson is offered, called “The War of the World”. It is the only one of 13 books in the spread.

Note carefully the fundamental flaw in Joel's petulant outburst: his entire column is based solely on Chapters' Holiday flyer, and nothing more. There's nothing that says you can't purchase the latest ignorant piece of swill from Steyn, or Coulter, or O'Reilly, from Chapters. Not at all. Joel is basing all of his hyper-ventilating whinging on the necessarily limited selection that Chapters has chosen for its flyer, and if that chain chooses to slant leftward for its Christmas promotion, well, that's their choice, isn't it? But wait -- there's so much more.

While Joel seemed happy to shriek about liberal bias and related idiocy like that, your humble correspondent (uh, that would be me) decided to actually run a little experiment, so I hied myself hence to the local Chapters store in Waterloo to see for myself the hideous discrimination against what passes for deep thought in Joel's social circles.

I walked in the front door. I didn't even make it to the stacks.

Right there, directly off the main aisle, under the prominent banner reading "Books with Buzz," I found Steyn's recent magnum dopus, "America Alone." And not just one copy, oh no -- five copies, all stacked neatly on the top shelf, right in the middle -- absolutely prime bookstore real estate if there ever was such a thing. Oh, yeah -- there's some serious left-wing bias going on here, Joel. But wait.

It gets better since, leaving the "Books with Buzz" section, you run smack into the main display -- centre aisle -- under the banner "Big Ideas, Current Events." And you'll never guess what you find there. No, really, go ahead ... guess. All right, fine -- I'll tell you.

More Steyn. That's right -- it's not enough to give Steyn prime shelf space at "Books with Buzz," but he's given a position of prominence in that second location as well. Damn that Heather Reisman! Damn her and her grotesque bias! But it doesn't end there, as you look around at the other selections in that same display, where you find (and I am not making any of this up) those five additional copies of Steyn, a half-dozen of the new John Ashcroft crud "Never Again," a sizable stack of conservative Hugh Segal's "The Long Road Back" and (I'm sure you saw this coming) a small pile of Ferguson's "The War of the World" (with a "Chapters Recommends" sticker on it, no less).

Hard to believe, isn't it? Joel has wasted God knows how much time and strained all eight of his brain cells venting about that nasty left-wing bias at Chapters, when a five-minute trip to the local store was sufficient to demonstrate how utterly full of shit he is. And all of the above represents just what you can buy off the shelf. (And, as I said, this was all at the front of the store, in the promotional displays. I never even bothered to head back to the stacks. I figured I'd made my point.)

You can, as I'm sure you realize, also order anything you want from Chapters online, which means Joel doesn't even have to drag his sorry ass off of the Cheeto-stained couch in his parents' basement to get whatever he wants delivered right to his door. But that wouldn't be any fun, because then it wouldn't give Joel the excuse to bitch and whine and moan about how everyone's out to trample the intellectual freedom of him and his mentally-defective collection of groupies over at his hermetically-sealed web site.

In any event, I think we're done with Joel Johannesen. I see no point in wasting any more snark in his direction. Frankly, I don't know if he's actually the stupidest conservative in the entire country but the thought of anyone even dumber just gives me the creeps.

"Free speech? I got yer free speech right HERE, buddy."

Joel Johannesen, that stalwart defender of fair and balanced public opinion, tells Adrian MacNair what he can do with his right to free speech.

At this point, I think it's safe to say that Joel aspires to rise to the level of low-hanging fruit.

NOT SURPRISINGLY, pro-fetus whackjob Suzanne shows up at Adrian's place and proceeds to perform a particularly ugly abortion on simple logic:

I think Joel Johansson is expressing Free Speech by banning someone. He is perfectly entitled to do that.

Why, yes, Suzanne ... Joel is perfectly within his rights to ban whomever he pleases from his web site. But if he does, he is not entitled to then bitch about others doing precisely the same thing. That's called "hypocrisy," Suzanne -- I'm sure you're familiar with it.

More juvenile Rona Ambrose sexist humour.

He said "briefs." Eh-heh. Eh-heh. Advantage, Steve.

BY THE WAY, you have to like Steve's reference to Ambrose's performance before committee, where she brandished an alleged list of Canadian purchases of international carbon credits -- a list which magically vanished when people wanted a closer look at it.

Let's see -- publicly touting a "list" that vanishes into the ether ever so conveniently ... why does that sound suspiciously familiar?

Because sometimes I just feel like being cruel.

You can learn a lot about someone from the people they idolize. Like the way Canada's Crazy-Assed Racist Redneck™ adores Victor Davis Hanson. Yeah ... that Victor Davis Hanson.

P.S. By the way, Kate, when you're publicly gushing over someone and practically offering to have his litter, you'd sound less like a gibbering buffoon if you could at least spell his name correctly. Really, it's not that difficult. I got it after just one try.

BONUS TRACK: For more Hanson hero worship, wander over here and check out the comments. But don't blame me if you lose your lunch.

"I meant what I said, and I said what I meant ..."

... and when PM Stephen Harper makes a promise, well, you can take that baby to the bank:

"The prime minister has made a commitment and he will honour that commitment," Toews said when asked by Reuters if there would be a vote [on same-sex marriage].

Yes sir ... honouring that commitment. It's the Conservative thing to do, you know.

So much for that "Let the market decide" thing.

Oh, dear. Someone better get Joel Johannesen some nails and a large piece of wood so he can exercise some self-martyrdom.

As I read it, Joel is all bent out of shape because Chapters-Indigo is, in its Christmas flyer, emphasizing books for your non-brain damaged loved ones. Apparently, the fact that that company is "owned by liberal-leftist Heather Reisman" should in no way give her the freedom to decide what she chooses to promote for the holiday season.

(And, after all, what better gift to find under the tree on Christmas morning than Ann Coulter's ignorant, scientifically-illiterate, hate-filled screed "Godless"? The lost Yuletide opportunity almost brings tears to your eyes, doesn't it?)

Of course, it's amusing that Joel, who thinks others have some sort of moral obligation to accommodate him by being fair and balanced, is the same guy whose blog registration requirements would make some of you feel ... well ... less than welcome.

Come on, Joel. Don't be petulant. It's the Christmas season. Have some cheese with that whine.

Why, yes, I can see the resemblance now.

If there's one thing our wanker politicians have in common with their wanker politicians, it's that infantile "I'm taking my ball and going home" attitude:

Republicans vacating the Capitol are dumping a big spring cleaning job on Democrats moving in. GOP leaders have opted to leave behind almost a half-trillion-dollar clutter of unfinished spending bills.

There's also no guarantee that Republicans will pass a multibillion-dollar measure to prevent a cut in fees to doctors treating Medicare patients.

The bulging workload that a Republican-led Congress was supposed to complete this year but is instead punting to 2007 promises to consume time and energy that Democrats had hoped to devote to their own agenda upon taking control of Congress in January for the first time in a dozen years.

I'm thinking that describing them as "childish" would be an insult to children everywhere.

The next sound I want to hear is a bullet from the alley.

Seriously, after you watch this:

do you really give a shit if these people come back alive anymore?

(H/T Americablog.)

Hey ... HERE'S a thought ...

Oh, man ... I can't wait to see how this works out.

No, you're not a journalist, you're just a blogger. Deal with it.

Over here, Ed Hollett draws our attention to a dicey issue these days -- as a blogger, is you or is you not a "journalist?"

Correct answer: you isn't, unless you grant that every idiot with enough smarts to sign onto Blogger is now a "journalist," which would logically imply that Steve Janke is a "journalist," and that's a concession that's just miles outside my comfort zone.

It's all a matter of perspective, you know.

Stuff you'll read about at Jason's blog:

As if the Liberals weren't corrupt enough already

The CAW is seriously kissing the feet of the Liberal party with this local endorsement of Glen Pearson, the Liberal candidate for the London North-Centre by-election.

Stuff you won't read about at Jason's blog:

A GOP fundraiser who embezzled from a state investment in rare coins was sentenced Monday to 18 years in prison in a scandal that helped bring down Ohio's ruling Republican Party on Election Day.

You keep using that word "corrupt," Jason. I do not think it means what you think it means.

The lighter side of conspicuous consumption.

Now this is seriously hilarious:

A restaurant in the south-western US state of Arizona that proudly admits to trying to finish off its customers has introduced a new item on its menu - the "quadruple bypass burger".

The burger at the Heart Attack Grill restaurant is stacked with four beef patties, cheese, onions, tomatoes and fried bacon and weighs in at 8,000 calories - more than three times what the human body needs in one day.

I mean, is that hysterical or what? Who, I ask you, wouldn't see the humour here? Well, all right, maybe her:

Yeah, she might not be laughing out loud, but I'll bet she's still smiling inside, right? Right?

"It's been fun ... try not to step on any IEDs after we leave."

"Hey, we'd love to stay and fight for freedom and democracy, but we've got some ski jumps to protect."

Well, he oughta know.

Courtesy of Blogging Tory "A Step to the Right," we learn of Islam's extremist agenda via CNN's Glenn Beck. Which is eerily appropriate since, if anyone understands bone-headed, extremist stupidity, it's Beck.

"Angry in the Great White North's" Steve Janke ...

... now with "new functionality."

He used the word "function." Eh-heh. Eh-heh.

I doubt Jon Stewart's losing any sleep over this.

Via Think Progress, we learn that Fox News wants to get into the field of political comedy:

Comedy Central has made a good living out of skewering the political right.

Now Fox News Channel, a primary source of material for Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, is teaming with the exec producer of "24" to try its hand at a news satire show for conservatives to love.

Joel Surnow, co-creator of "24," is shooting two half-hour pilots of a skein he described as " 'The Daily Show' for conservatives," due to air in primetime on Saturdays in January.

If successful, the show could take its place on the regular schedule, adding satire to FNC's formula of news and opinion.

Yes, I can see it now:

"Good evening, and welcome to 'Liberals Suck.' Tonight, our special investigative I-Team looks into why Democrats are ugly. (Laughter.) And they're stupid, too. (Laughter.) And Michael Moore is fat. (Applause, laughter.) And our special investigative correspondent Brit Hume asks the burning question -- George W. Bush: Is he the sexiest man alive? (Overwhelming, extended applause.)"

"But first, these headlines -- Poor people: Are they totally annoying or what? We'll get to that after our first commercial break. (Ongoing applause and ... fade to black.)"

I can't wait, especially for the Michael Moore fat jokes. Those just never get old, do they?

You're not going to believe this ...

Apparently, a right-wing media outlet agrees with a right-wing pundit. What are the odds of that?

Oh, those wacky, wacky lefties.

Can you believe this? "Global Orgasm for Peace Day" of all things! God, what a bunch of total fruitcakes. I mean, what an utter freakin' waste of time since, as we all know, it takes a National Day of Prayer to actually get things done.

Geez, any maroon knows that.

"Quick! Get me rewrite!"

Good Lord, man ... more left-wing, liberal media bias! Damn that National Post! Damn them, I say!

Islam: Religion of (really, really slow) violence.

Slow news day in the wankersphere. Should we even ask if any Blogging Tories are going to take the bait?

Wait ... let me rephrase that.

Tolerance, Catholic-style:

U.S. Catholic bishops said on Tuesday that gay men and women should be welcomed in the church but that those who engage in homosexual activity should not receive Communion.

Because if there's one thing those Catholic priests simply cannot abide, it's some hot man-on-man action.

You've been warned.

BONUS MAN-ON-MAN NEWS COVERAGE, AT NO EXTRA CHARGE. Former GOP congressman and serial teen sexual predator Mark Foley checks out of rehab:

Sources tell us disgraced ex-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) ended his stay at a rehab facility in Arizona that treats alcohol addiction as well as sexual addiction and compulsion before he headed back to Florida to attend the funeral of his father.

Sure ... 49 days to deal with alcoholism and a lifelong attraction to teenage boys. Sounds about right.

PM Stephen Harper: The thesaurus edition.

"Opaque": see "petulant," "childish," "infantile."

Why is this man still allowed outdoors without a leash and a muzzle?

You know, when it comes to Bill Kristol, after you read this and after you watch this, you have to wonder why anyone even allows Kristol to speak in public anymore.

Then again, it is Fox News.

BONUS TRACK: Not surprisingly, more and more folks are starting to get tired of Kristol's shtick.

Because actual reeding iz hard werk.

It's so adorable to see some Blogging Tories patting themselves on the back for their newfound compassion and charity, based on a book they haven't read since it hasn't even been released yet.

And guys? Iraq had WMDs! And Iran was going to make Jews wear badges! No, really, it's true. I read it somewhere.

CONSERVATIVE CHARITY, as it were. I wonder if those donations are tax deductible.

The upside of Tasers.

Hmmmm ... I'm starting to see the real potential of applying 50,000 volts to certain individuals:

But UCLA police are allowed to use Tasers on passive resisters as "a pain compliance technique," Assistant Chief Jeff Young said in an interview Friday.

Under UCLA policy, Young said, officers can use the weapons after considering the potential injury to police and to the individual as well as the level of resistance and the need for prompt resolution.

Young described Tabatabainejad as a "passive resister" who refused to cooperate with officers. He acknowledged that the student didn't actively resist the officers.

I'm thinking one of those babies could come in handy when I'm stuck behind yet another nimrod in the line at Tim Horton's: "I'd like a medium ... no, make that a large ... and a decaf, no, wait, half regular, half decaf and a muffin, um, do you have any fat free, no, i don't like blueberry but ... YEEEEEEEARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHH!!"

Next time, just order a regular coffee and a box of Tim Bits, OK?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Blogging Tory and Batshit-Crazy Unhinged Catholic™ Kathy Shaidle draws our attention to the incipient dangers of the public school system and the subsequent attraction of home schooling. Sadly, though, it would appear that home schooling has its own potential problems.

So ... ideological word puzzles versus a homicidal maniac with a 54-gun arsenal. Tough decision. Grapple, grapple ...

I'm guessing this is NOT what they had in mind.

Apparently, there's something to that free market thingy after all.

Human rights watch, wanker edition.

More conservative family values:

Alaska Republicans have drawn a line in the sand, refusing to obey a court order mandating health and other benefits for the same-sex domestic partners of state employees and retirees.

This has been your regular installment of "What wingnuts are doing for you," from the Adam Daifallah Centre for Avoiding Reality at all Costs.

Not a bad investment, if you think about it.

Cost of initial attack: A bunch of airline tickets, some preliminary flight school training, a whack of box cutters and 19 volunteers who are now spending eternity with more virgins than is probably healthy.

Cost of utterly unproductive response: Over half a trillion dollars, almost 3,000 lives and counting, military readiness, national security, the House, the Senate, worldwide goodwill and any chance for peace in the Middle East.

Advantage: bad guys.

Right-wing hypocrisy. No, really.

Then:

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is playing with fire when he suggests that Republicans will deploy the so-called "go nuclear" option to prevent Democrats from using filibusters to block controversial judicial nominations expected to reach the floor in mid-to-late February, says congressional expert Steven S. Smith

"Decrying Democrats' tactics as unconstitutional, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has threatened to ban judicial filibusters by majority vote, a procedural move dubbed the "nuclear option" since it would invite massive retaliation by Democrats," suggests Smith.

Now:

The Senate's next Republican leader issued a veiled threat to block action on legislation if Democrats refuse to allow confirmation votes on President Bush's troubled judicial nominations.

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who will become minority leader Jan. 4, told the conservative Federalist Society Friday not to feel bad about the Senate election results because Republicans will hold 49 seats in a body that requires 60 votes to end a filibuster and bring legislation or presidential nominees to a final vote.

Cue citizens of Wankerville, sputtering, "But ... but ... that's different."

To infinite wankery! And beyond!

Oh, Lord ... Canada's own Crazy-Assed Racist Redneck™ channels Adam Daifallah. It's way too early in the morning for that kind of bad craziness.

BY THE WAY, it's always possible that Kate's self-congratulatory stroking might be a wee bit premature, given that the book she's crowing about isn't scheduled for release until November 24. Is it normal for someone to wax this sanctimonious over something they haven't even read yet?

And maybe, just maybe, it's worth spending a few minutes online, where one finds cautionary pieces like this:

Yet, the apple tends to fall, in all giving, pretty close to the tree. Yalies give to Yale, preps to their prep school. Educated money to the arts and cultural institutions that provide services that donors use and appreciate. The believer gives to his or her church or house of worship. The church may be in a good part of town, surrounded by big houses. The pet lover endows a home for poodles. The athlete a stadium. And on and on.

Yes, it would be interesting to see just where all that vaunted conservative charity is going, wouldn't it? Maybe, as the first commenter suggests, this is where some of those "qualifiers" have been dropped.

Is it irresponsible to speculate? Hell, no. It would be irresponsible not to.

"... without admitting any wrongdoing."

Shorter Conservative Party of Canada: "We absolutely did not break the law back then, and we're going to change the rules to prove it."

Family values blotter ...

... GOP child abuse edition. Because if you don't hit your 9-year-old foster child in the face, the terrorists will have won.

I sense a disturbance in the force ...

... ah ... Joel's back. Carry on, then.

Compassionate conservatism -- the Taser edition.

Given that it's actually the Right that's so ferociously concerned about human rights, it should come as no surprise that, when you have an appalling incident like a UCLA student being Tasered by campus police for not having a student ID card, it's the Blogging Tories that are going to be absolutely beside themselves with rage, demanding a full accounting of this atrocity and ... and ...

You didn't even follow that Blogging Tories link, did you? Have I become that predictable? Lord, you people can read me like a book.

MORE RIGHT-WING "HUMAN RIGHTS" CRUNCHY GOODNESS: Really, I could milk this for years, couldn't I?

But if I accept what REALLY happened, it's no fun.

Shorter Damian Penny: "Well, sure, he actually had nothing to do with it, but as long as I pretend I don't know that, I can be an asshole about it. What ... you got a problem with that?"

The boy in the bubble -- Adam Daifallah edition.

Adam's world:

Given this and so many other examples over the years from across the Anglosphere, it still amazes me how many people still associate support for human rights with the political Left, when the complete opposite is true. It's frustrating.

Then there's the world the rest of us live in:

Noting that every five seconds, a child under the age of five dies from hunger or hunger-related diseases somewhere in the world and the world already has the capacity to feed twice its current population, the resolution called for a response to food crises across Africa.

In favour - 175 countries
Against - The United States.

The U.S. representative explained that he had difficulty with the concept of food as a right...

Oh yeah. And Canada abstained from recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, making this the first time Canada has not supported the resolution.

When I grow up, I wanna be a big-time, right-wing pundit like Adam. It looks easier than actually having to know stuff.

Separated at birth -- the TBogg edition.

That whole "One of my eyes is bigger than the other" thing -- adorable:

Ehhhhh ... not so much adorable as creepy:

Those who cannot remember history ...

... are apparently condemned to be Blogging Tories. According to Adam, a lack of government regulation is a good thing. After all, what can possibly go wrong?

Busy morning open thread.

It's called "dead air." Feel free to fill it.

Debatably a hanging offense.

(CC NEWS) -- In a shocking reminder of the old days of the Cold War, Canadian authorities arrested a suspected Russian spy as he was about to board a plane out of the country.

The man, who had been living in Canada under the name Paul William Hampel, was taken into custody on Tuesday at Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport in Dorval, Quebec.

According to Canada's Minister of Justice and Attorney General Vic Toews, Hampel, under interrogation, admitted to having been sent to Canada to snoop on "Canada's New Government" and steal any information related to the Conservative Party of Canada's new policies on women's rights, gay tolerance and environmental protection.

Toews suggested that, given the severity of the crime and the inherent value of the data collected by Hampel, he was recommending a sentence of 10 days in prison for Hampel, to be served on alternate weekends and followed by 100 hours of community service. Hampel's lawyer, horrified by the unfairness of the sentence, has already promised to appeal.

Canadian security officials are still uncertain how Hampel planned on smuggling the stolen information out of the country and continued to search his luggage for high-tech items such as microdots and encoded data but found nothing out of the ordinary, although they admit being puzzled by the presence of both a postage stamp and a shaving brush.

Blogging Tories Short Takes: November 16, 2006.

Shorter Dr. Roy: "So, if by 'internecine fighting' we mean one disgruntled hack who happens to be married to a high-level GOP operative, I believe I have an interesting point to make here."

Shorter Adam Daifallah: "So, if you ignore our gutting the Status of Women Canada and the Court Challenges Program and our rampant racism and homophobia, I believe I have an interesting point to make here."

Shorter The Politic: "So, if someone wants to explain what my interesting point might be, I believe I have an interesting point to make here."

Oh, Jesus.

I just wet myself.

What part of "metaphor" do you just not get?

Dude ... when we use the phrase "bitch slap," we don't mean it literally.

Great moments in Canadian punditry.

This is why Adam Daifallah gets invited onto The Agenda, and you don't.

"And Iran? Yeah, that'll be a cakewalk, trust me."

Ti-Guy brings our attention to more pontificating from Canada's Mark Steyn:

Well, my view of Europe in 20 years' time is that you'll be switching on the TV, you'll be looking at scenes of burning and conflagration and riots in the street. You will have a couple of countries that are maybe in civil war, at least on the brink of it.

Good thinking, Mark -- make predictions 20 years out. 'Cuz if they're any closer, well, stuff like this tends to happen, know what I mean?

YOU KNOW, one can generally respond to anything by Mark Steyn by referring simply to his Wingnut All-Star bio page, leaving it at that and moving on to more pressing topics. As Thomas Huxley once said, "Life is too short to occupy oneself with the slaying of the slain more than once."

But we'll still check in on Steve Janke once in a while, anyway.

BY THE WAY, it's amusing to watch interviewer Hawkins and interviewee Steyn continually refer to other ethnic groups and their "breeding," as if those groups were collections of prize show dogs or something:

Hawkins: Mark, here's the $24,000 question: can you give us a quick rundown on the reasons why Europe's birth rates have plummeted?

Steyn: Well, I think it's true as countries get wealthy, birth rates decline and that's true around the world even in Muslim cultures. For example, more advanced Muslim societies such as those little wealthy Gulf Emirates, they breed less than they do, say in Somalia or in Pakistan or Yemen...

Hawkins: Now, here's an even more relevant question: is there any plausible way you can see to get them breeding again?

That's a good question. I'm thinking maybe lightly spritzing their genitals with Axe Body Spray and letting nature take its course. If all else fails, some soft-core porn and a 12-pack of Molsons.

Hey, it works for us.

GETTING SLAPPED BY THE BEST. I only this minute noticed that uber-blogger Glenn Greenwald also takes uber-dumbass Steyn out to the curb. That has to be uncomfortable for Greenwald since Steyn is pretty much low-hanging fruit even for me.

"No, seriously, is this thing on?"

This is the sort of thing that tends to happen when you frantically re-title your talk from "The genius of Karl Rove and the well-oiled GOP election machine" to "Why are voters so fucking stupid?"

The Jonah factor is just the final nail in the coffin.

Your "liberal" media ...

... Republican man-crush edition.

ON THE OTHER HAND, left-wing hero worship can go suck eggs.

Children, don't try this at home -- I'm a professional.

Sure, blogging's fun ... until someone loses an eye.

Mark Steyn -- the cold sore that just won't go away.

Apparently, it's the Globe and Mail's turn to weigh in on Mark Steyn:

Mark Steyn is a wonderful and prolific journalist, Canadian by birth, American by residence. I first encountered his writings in Britain's The Spectator, one of the most elegant political and literary magazines published in English. An urbane, witty, insightful observer of U.S. politics, he shared the magazine's moderate conservative point of view.

How, then, could he write America Alone? It is quite possibly the most crass and vulgar book about the West's relationship with the Islamic world I have ever encountered.

Fucking liberal media, right?

The Backseat Blogger "Court Challenges Program" challenge: Fun for the whole family.

Since this is now the second time Backseat Blogger has called my rhetorical talents into question, it's time to settle this one way or the other.

In the comments section here, BB accuses me of cutting and running from a legitimate argument:

CC definitely likes to snark. More than a few 'Blogging Whories' are on his hate list.

Challenge him on his arguments though he folds like a house of cards.

This accusation is apparently based on an earlier post by BB, in which he took swipes at both the Status of Women Canada program and the Court Challenges Program, and to which I responded only briefly to his SWC idiocy. In BB's mind, the fact that I didn't demolish every aspect of his entire post somehow suggested that I high-tailed it out of town in abject fear of his overwhelming intellectual and rhetorical superiority. Let me disabuse all of you of that notion forthwith.

In the first place, anyone who writes the following:

So what if I’m late to the program? I mean in our hyperactive news cycles these stories are OLD news…. except for the silly Progressive Bloggers and their stupid ‘you’ve come far enough baby’ campaign.

So what about these programs. I will cheerfully admit that I know virtually nothing about SOW beyond the fact that the minister responsible cut back its funding recently. Cue howls of protest from the usual suspects.

really doesn't have any claim to the moral high ground when it comes to intellectual discourse. Anyone who cheerfully admits he knows nothing about a particular topic, and yet proceeds to slag it in public doesn't have a truckload of credibility, if you catch my drift. But that's not the real issue here.

BB seems to think that, whenever he throws down the gauntlet, I have some sort of obligation to drop whatever I'm doing and respond. I hate to break it to BB but it doesn't work that way.

All of us have our own interests and hobby horses we like to ride. I don't feel any overwhelming duty to react to everything BB writes. In fact, the main reason that I said nothing about the CCP is that I simply didn't know enough about it to comment intelligently. (See how that works, BB? I don't really understand a topic? I keep my mouth shut. What a concept, no?)

But if BB wants to make this personal, no problem -- we can do that. If BB really wants to get into a discussion related to the CCP, here's what we're gonna do.

I want BB to write a thorough criticism of the CCP, defending the CPoC's decision to cut funding for the CCP:

For example, the Court Challenges Program which funded equality and language-rights groups to challenge federal laws -- an initiative long disdained by Conservatives -- is getting the axe.

I realize he's already done that in his earlier post, but I don't want to take advantage of what he might have written in the heat of the moment. I'm offering him the chance to go back, take another look, tidy up his arguments and produce what he considers the definitive piece on why the CCP deserved to get whacked. 'Cuz, here at CC HQ, we're nothing if not fair. And once he finishes that, that's where the fun starts. Because once BB has done that, he can drop me a note and a copy of the new piece and I'm going to post it here, at which point I'm going to ask my readers to tear it to pieces.

"Hang on," BB might howl in my direction, "that's not fair! I was challenging you to refute my argument, not everybody!" To which I would justifiably reply, "Piss off and stop wasting my time."

It's been my experience that wankers in general are only interested in having an "intellectual" discussion on "the issues" if they get to control the format of said discussion. Have you ever noticed how often these wanks think a debate is the best possible forum for getting at "the truth?" In their minds, there's no better way to cut through the crap than to give one person exactly 30 minutes, then the other person 30 minutes, then each person have 5 minutes for closing comments, and so on. Very scheduled, very choreographed, and utterly, utterly useless.

I don't do that shit. It's why I have a public blog, with an open comments section -- so that anyone (with the exception of total dickheads) is free to express an opinion. You don't like something I wrote? Say so. The lines are open. And it's why, if BB wants to suck it up and play this game, then his submission will be fair game for all of my readers. If he sincerely wants to know whether or not his argument is crap, then he should welcome input from everywhere.

(I will, of course, put some reasonable restrictions on what I allow as comments. As long as it addresses the issue and has substance, it stays. If it's just idiotic, vacuous invective -- no matter who it's from -- it's gone. Fair?)

It's your call, BB. If you're up for this, let me know. Then take as long as you need to write out your position, get it to me, I'll post it here, and the readers can have their say. That's how real dialogue works.

But if all you're going to do is bitch and whine about how I can't eviscerate every little thing you write, well, you can stop wasting my time. All that means is that you really don't give a shit about actual discussion, all you want to do is play "gotcha." And, frankly, I don't have time for infantile crap like that. I grew out of that about 20 years ago, and you should, too.

Your move, BB. Put up or shut up.

BY THE WAY, I'm a bit put out at this from BB:

CC definitely likes to snark. More than a few 'Blogging Whories' are on his hate list.

I'm not sure what BB's getting at with that reference to "Blogging Whories" in quotes since, to the best of my knowledge, I have never used that phrase in any post I've ever written, unlike some of the Blogging Tories themselves who routinely use words like "Fiberals" or "Lie-berals."

A small retraction on your part might be in order, BB.

BONUS TRACK: You really should read the entire comments section here where this sentiment:

So ...... the Cynic gets to make up his own facts while criticizing others with the very same claim!
I've seen many of his posts and most of them can be boiled down to this "I'm smart and your [sic] not so don't bother saying anything!"

can be found sandwiched in the midst of the following intellectually upstanding excerpts:

Pointing out lefties are factualy [sic] challenged is comparable to pointing out rain is wet, I mean really why pick a fight with them? Pity them for they know no better and refuse enlightenment as contrary to thier [sic] brainwashing.

There's no redeeming people like Canadian Cynic. If anything, he's probably a big embarrassment to their side, because the only way he knows how to make a point is to make adolescent attempts at cleverness that people who are logical can see right throw [sic].

... A "reality-based community"? I don't know what kind of world you and Canadian Cynic live in, but it's not the real one, last time I checked.

The only reason the left feels a need to respond is because they know we are right and the truth drives then [sic] crazy after getting their own way in the MSM for years.

I recently bought a book by Ron Dreher because it was trashed by the left. I had no intention of buying Steyn's book until the left trashed it. Not only did a [sic] buy a copy, I have bought extra copies for xmas to give for gifts and I recommend it to everyone I know.

They trash you because you are getting under their skin, so keep doing it. The left are mad because no one reads their shit. How many times have you seen leftwing drivel and the comments section is zero.

Hate is all they know, that's why they are socialists...

OK, point taken. I guess I now have a new intellectual standard to live up to. I'll give it my best shot.

Apparently, we should all step back and take a deep breath.

Oh, dear. Apparently, I have breached the bounds of decorum, so it would seem incumbent on me to demonstrate more restraint and more politeness, to perhaps better emulate the manners and civility of our right-wing colleagues and ... um ... hang on a sec ... be right back ...

Sorry, where was I? Oh, yeah ... something about decorum and civility.

The evils of high technology.

Apparently, that "not bearing false witness" stuff is overrated:

... After two weeks, a meeting took place in the principal's office, wherein [history teacher] Paszkiewicz denied making many of these [offensive and demeaning] comments, claiming that [student Matthew] LaClair had taken his remarks out of context. Paszkiewicz specifically denied using the phrase, "you belong in hell." He also asserted that he did nothing different in this class than he has been doing in fifteen years of teaching.

At the end of the meeting, LaClair revealed that he had recorded the remarks, and presented the principal with two compact discs. The teacher then declined to comment further without his union representative.

And those video cameras? Yeah, they're tools of the Devil, too. And don't even get me started on YouTube.

Place your bets: Garth Turner edition.

Some definite "Hmmmmmmm" factor here:

OTTAWA (CP) - Independent MP Garth Turner is threatening to expose what he terms "disturbing insights" into the workings of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government.

The former Tory member of Parliament has scheduled a news conference for Tuesday, promising to reveal what's contained in correspondence between his staff and the prime minister's office since he was ousted from the Conservative caucus. "The big issue right now is not me, but rather some disturbing insights into how the 'new' government is actually working," Turner wrote.

Dude, when you get my hopes up like that, you better deliver the goods. Nothing's more annoying than to be aroused and left hanging.

It's deja vu, all over again.

Remember how Commander Codpiece, throughout his entire life, simply moved from one disaster to another, always counting on his name and Daddy's friends and business connections to bail him out of his latest clusterfuck?

Well ... guess what.

Mark Steyn redux, the myth of Regnery Press "bestsellerism" and some homework for my readers.

As Ti-Guy suggests in an earlier comments section, there's more to Regnery Press' "bestsellers" than meets the eye. It doesn't take much work with Google and the phrases "regnery" and "bulk purchases" to come up with the scoop:

In a quick smack-down, Sidney Blumenthal has flattened Ann 'Thrax' Coulter over her phony best-seller, Treason.

In case you haven't noticed, Coulter’s book stands alone on the New York Times Best Seller List with a dagger next to its title – signifying bulk purchases.

It’s been that way with all of the right-wing alleged best-sellers from Whacko Regnery (Thrax's former publisher) to Crown Books, a division of Random House, whose 'Crown Forum' is the current shame of publisher's row.

Each and every one of them – Limbaugh, Gary Aldrich, you name it – lands on the list because right-wing angels buy up huge numbers of copies in bulk. What they do with the books – hand ‘em out to ditto-heads, salt 'em away in warehouses – is anybody’s guess. Just as long as it keeps up the appearance that demented lunatics like Coulter have a huge popular following out there that buys books.

At long last, someone has exposed this racket – who else but the intrepid Sidney Blumenthal?

'What I think the key question is for Ann Coulter and all these other right-wing writers is, why is there a dagger in the New York Times best-seller list next to their books?' Blumenthal recently told the New York Observer.

'That means that someone is buying their book in bulk to put them on the best-seller list. These are bogus best-sellers,' Blumenthal said. 'I want to know why [Ms. Coulter] won't come clean and explain which rich right-wing sugar daddies are putting her on the best-seller list.'

Now, I'm a bit swamped today so I'm going to leave it as an exercise for my readers to pick up the thread here and start nosing around to see what the deal is with Steyn's book. Think of it as showing Steve Janke how to do real investigative journalism.

All comments welcome, but I draw the line at anything involving Cindy Sheehan's private parts. After all, we here at CC HQ have standards and, every so often, we take the time to remind ourselves what they are.

About Mark Steyn and his persecution complex ...

At the moment, there appears to be much moaning and wailing in the Canadian wankersphere about how the evil empire Indigo Books & Music is conspiring against legendary Canadian wingnut Mark Steyn and boycotting his latest offering of rancid, right wing shrieking.

Sadly for Steyn, even the National Post has managed to figure out what's really going on here:

Mr. Steyn has charged that Indigo and its chief executive officer, Heather Reisman, underestimated demand for his book as a means of "boycotting" it.

Yes, yes, we're well aware of Steyn's manic fits of hallucination. So what's really happening? (emphasis added)

Sorya Gaulin, vice-president of public relation for Indigo, sought to quell the brouhaha yesterday, saying the company has in no way sought to boycott the book.

The company offered America Alone for sale as soon as it came out in September, but it quickly sold out, she said. Ms. Gaulin could not say how many books were originally ordered.

"Upon realizing we had grossly underestimated the demand for this title, Indigo immediately reordered several thousand more books, but Mr. Steyn's U.S. publisher was unable to fulfill our order because they, too, underestimated demand in the U.S. and Canada," Ms. Gaulin said.

Like other book stores in Canada, Indigo is now waiting for shipments that are expected to arrive this month, she said.

Mr. Steyn's U.S. publisher, Regnery, has said the book is in reprint and that all back orders will be filled...

In Ottawa, the Steyn book is available neither at Chapters nor at such independent bookstores as Nicholas Hoare. A clerk at the Nicholas Hoare bookstore said the book has been difficult to obtain for Canadian retailers.

Well, how about that? Apparently, it's Regnery that couldn't keep up with the demand and keep either Indigo or other bookstores properly stocked.

One can, you would imagine, finally tell Steyn to put a fucking sock in it at this point, which is pretty much what Indigo's Gaulin does here, and good for her. Every little finger flick to Steyn's nads just makes the world a better place.

P.S. And we will link to one Derryl Murphy's take on this, just 'cuz we like the name of his blog, and are really pissed that we didn't think of it first.

"We'll just put you down as 'undecided,' OK?"

Shorter Defend Marriage K-W: "So, when you said you wouldn't piss on us if we were on fire ... you meant that in a good way, right?"

Just how unspeakably stupid IS Mark Steyn?

For me, one of the ongoing mysteries of the right-wing wankersphere is how many of the most prominent, revered and oft-quoted pundits are, for the most part, people so imbecilic that I wouldn't trust them to wash my car.

Here, Canada's Mark Steyn manages (unintentionally, I'm sure) to refute months worth of asinine, American right-wing talking points:

On the radio a couple of weeks ago, Hugh Hewitt suggested to me the terrorists might try to pull a Spain on the U.S. elections. You'll recall (though evidently many Americans don't) that in 2004 hundreds of commuters were slaughtered in multiple train bombings in Madrid. The Spaniards responded with a huge street demonstration of supposed solidarity with the dead, all teary passivity and signs saying "Basta!" -- "Enough!" By which they meant not "enough!" of these murderers but "enough!" of the government of Prime Minister Aznar, and of Bush and Blair, and troops in Iraq. A couple of days later, they voted in a socialist government, which immediately withdrew Spanish forces from the Middle East. A profitable couple of hours' work for the jihad.

I said to Hugh I didn't think that would happen this time round. The enemy aren't a bunch of simpleton Pushtun yakherds, but relatively sophisticated at least in their understanding of us. We're all infidels, but not all infidels crack the same way. If they'd done a Spain -- blown up a bunch of subway cars in New York or vaporized the Empire State Building -- they'd have re-awoken the primal anger of September 2001. With another mound of corpses piled sky-high, the electorate would have stampeded into the Republican column and demanded the U.S. fly somewhere and bomb someone.

Note what little Markie is suggesting here. He's suggesting that the terrorists have kept a low profile to lull American voters into a false sense of security, a sense of security that would allow them to drift slowly over to voting for the (gasp! horrors!) Democrats because, as we all know, the terrorists want the Democrats to win. So ... the absence of murderous domestic terrorism lately is because ... the terrorists are playing politics -- this is little Markie's view on things.

Hang on, though. Wasn't it the GOP who ran on a platform of how effective they had been in protecting America, with the Dickster going so far as to claim credit for the fact that there had been no attacks on the U.S. since 9/11?

So, according to Cheney, it's due to Republican cleverness and perseverance that the American people have been safe the last several years. No, wait, says Steyn -- it's only because the terrorists have been cleverly playing politics because they want the Democrats to win the election that there haven't been any attacks.

Personally, I think the last several years of American domestic safety is because aliens from the planet Weembo are broadcasting anti-terrorist mind-control rays. Sure, I have no evidence to back that up, but that just means I'm no worse off than Steyn and his vacuous pontificating.

And to think people actually take this dingbat seriously.

P.S. Not surprisingly, Blogging Tory and Deranged Catholic Kathy Shaidle thinks Steyn is a freakin' genius. And you know what? Comparatively speaking, I think she might be right.

History repeating itself.

I have a nagging feeling I've read something like this before:

George W Bush has just bought 150 square miles of land in Paraguay. 98,842 acres.

Daddy has already bought 173,000 acres.

And in the same town of Chaco Paraguay, family friend Rev. Moon has bought 1,482,600 acres.

U.S. troops now granted immunity from war crimes prosecutions have arrived for military exercises and there are rumors of a future superbase and airfield near by.

We have a very Bush friendly president in Paraguay. There's an extradition law with the U.S. but recently, Paraguay has exempted political crimes and offences from their laws.

The perfect retirement get away for war criminals on the run?

Hmmmmmm ... war criminals fleeing to Paraguay ... damn, that rings a bell ... oh, right.

Pay no attention to that spot of unpleasantness last Tuesday.

Shorter Spanky: "I just know there's a pony under here somewhere."

BONUS TRACK: And over at "True North," Jason also continues to whistle "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" even as he's being nailed to a large piece of wood.

UM ... JASON? Commenting on his own article, Jason makes a mountain out of a molehill:

I'm just pointing out a subtle bias. They got lazy (or started partying) and didn't check their facts.

You know, Jason, there's "wrong" and then there's just freaking wrong:

Can you appreciate the subtle difference?

The civility of discourse, GOP-style.

Just for the record, Elizabeth Dole has always been a repulsive, screeching control freak. Why Timmeh didn't just lean over and slap her senseless is beyond me, since it's no less than what she deserved at that point.

The new (skeptical) kid on the block.

Personal acquaintance (although I'm guessing he'll deny it even under threat of waterboarding) Larry Moran has a new blog. Here, we have avowed atheist Richard Dawkins sharing the same space-time continuum with meth-head, man meat Ted Haggard.

Why the universe didn't just fold in on itself at that point is a mystery.

But THIS time, I really, really, really mean it.

One more Friedman. Really. I promise.

Low-hanging fruit: Steve Janke Sunday morning edition.

I'm guessing Steve might want a do-over on this old headline:

John Roberts is confirmed, and the left chokes on sour grapes

How are those grapes tasting these days, Steve?

Speaking to Americans. Slowly.

Via Alison, we have Chris Hedges' "Letter from Canada." So all you adoring, wistful, progressive Yanks can stop gazing so longingly in our direction for just a bit -- we've got our own whackjobs to deal with for the time being.

We'll let you know when it's all straightened out.

Sunday morning snark.

It occurs to me this fine Sunday morning that people who go around worshipping a book that contains this (emphasis added):

Genesis 7:17-23: For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. Every living thing that moved on the earth perished — birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

and this:

Exodus 11:4-6: So Moses said, "This is what the LORD says: 'About midnight I will go throughout Egypt. Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn son of the slave girl, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well. There will be loud wailing throughout Egypt—worse than there has ever been or ever will be again.

and this:

Deuteronomy 2:33-34: And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain.

and this:

Deuteronomy 3:6: And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city.

really don't have the moral high ground to be getting their thongs in a bunch over this:

College urges euthanasia for sickest newborns

BRITAIN'S Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology is reportedly calling on doctors to consider euthanasing "the sickest of newborns" which it says can disable healthy families.

Know what I'm sayin', Suzanne?

We now return you to your regular Sunday morning, meth-addicted, man-on-man humping, TV church services.

Low-hanging fruit: "The Politic" edition.

There's funny, topical snark. And then there's folks too freakin' clueless to get the joke.

Jesus, you're not asking for much, are you?

A recent e-mailer, inspired no doubt by the recent discussions here at CC HQ, asks:

I was wondering if you could recommend a "good" conservative blog. Someone who has a conservative or rightish bent to their writing, but who is also fair, based in reality and not an ideologue.

To which I will go out on a limb and say, no, because those people are all batshit fucking crazy lunatics, except for the occasional lucky one who has a moment of lucidity, in which case the consequences are fairly predictable.

Next question, please.

AND AT NO EXTRA CHARGE. Speaking of batshit fucking crazy lunatics ...

When the gales of November came early.

David Frum: The very definition of a "useful idiot."

The (half-)wit and wisdom of Canada's David Frum:

But what's the excuse of those in the West who succumb so easily to the deceptions of terrorists who cannot invent even half-way plausible lies?

Yeah, um ... speaking of "half-way plausible lies," Dave ...

BONUS TRACK: Accidental Deliberations also takes Frum out to the woodshed, but with considerably more nuance and sophistication. Yeah, that works, too, I guess.

Remembrance Day, Roger Waters-style.

But will it be as good as "Due South"?

This looks like it has potential:

James Bond never drove a Ford Fiesta, occupied an office above a convenience store or economized on international missions by bunking down at Motel Six.

And he certainly wouldn't have circled the block nervously, unsure what to do after spotting an unfamiliar Honda parked in his love interest's driveway.

But then again, Agent 007 had unlimited resources and ladykiller instincts. And he didn't have to work for the Canadian Secret Service, a fictional Canuck spy agency at the centre of a new NBC pilot Underfunded.

If this is any good, I might finally spring for cable.

Low-hanging fruit: The Steve Janke edition.

Apparently, the premature eJankulator can't get enough of that Howard Dean "scream" meme:

Howard Dean to scream at...er...speak at the Liberal Party convention

You know, Steve, that whole "scream" thing wasn't all that funny the second or third time I heard it, and it's really pretty lame two years later. And then Steve asks the obvious question:

What do you think Dean is going to tell Canadians that will somehow be of value?

To which one can, in referring to the idiotic grumbling coming out of the Democratic Party that Dean be replaced as head of the DNC after having thrashed the Republicans to within an inch of their miserable, corruption-ridden lives in the recent elections, reproduce the proposed Dean response supplied by commenter "Twisted Martini" over at Firedoglake:

Howard Dean: WE sent the fuckin’ hobbits into Mordor, WE dropped the fuckin’ ring into the mountain, so the rest of you can KISS MY ASS!

I think Howard's looking at you, Steve.

Steve Janke: The "Beamer" of our time.

In the 1977 episode "Beamer's Last Case" of the series "The Rockford Files" starring James Garner as private detective Jim Rockford:

After taking a vacation Jim returns home to find his trailer lived in, his car smashed, his clothes worn, and money spent on his charge cards. What is worse; someone is going around town posing as 'Jim Rockford' and taking dangerous cases which need solving!

The "someone" turns out to be Fred Beamer, a geeky mechanic's gopher at the garage where Rockford takes his car who desperately wants to be an important someone and who takes advantage of Rockford's absence to take his car, then spends the next several days running around playing junior detective, all the while passing himself off as Jim and getting Jim in just a buttload of trouble. Sound like anyone you know?

Meet Steve Janke.

Back here, I asked (in all seriousness) whether there were any Blogging Tories that were even remotely worth reading. Robert over at MyBlahg picked up on that, which prompted a slew of comments there, one of which suggested that the eJankulator sometimes produced "real" research if, by "real research," you mean more about Cindy Sheehan's menstrual cycles than you ever wanted to know.

Now, having read Janke's meticulous investigation into Sheehan's gynecological issues, one can certainly appreciate that Janke is unquestionably a thorough investigator, while at the same time wondering what the fuck it was about that story that so obsessed him. I mean, it's one thing to want to get to the bottom of a story, but it's quite another to wonder why anyone is so frighteningly attracted to that story in the first place. And it doesn't end there.

Another commenter in that thread writes of Janke:

Mr. Janke very much does not admit when he’s wrong. Take his most recent posts about the disappearance of Ms. Eva Ho.

As for the Yasmin Ashareh “story” thread, his “research” was conducted under false pretenses that were quickly sniffed out by his interviewees.

And it's following that second link that very quickly starts to creep you out something fierce.

Apparently, Janke is (for no really apparent reason that I can see) absolutely obsessed with the death of one Yasmin Ashareh, and is determined to play junior investigator, as he opens that thread (emphasis added):

... If anyone has any information, either personally or through friends and family in Canada or Somalia who know the Ashareh family, please contact me at agwnblog@gmail.com. In particular, I would like to know who Yasmin's father is, the circumstances of his return to Somalia, whether Yasmin was born in Canada or Somalia, and any other family or clan background.

I am a freelance reporter in Toronto trying to piece together the truth behind this killing.

Um ... a "freelance reporter?" Since when do fourth-tier right-wing hacks from Open Bathrobe Media start passing themselves off as reporters? But that's OK, because Steve ends up posting such suspicious idiocy that readers figure out, in short order, that something is very wrong here:

dalmare: I do not think that you are a journalist but a Toronto police offier [sic] trying hard. Who else would be interested about the death of a poor black girl in Toronto.

Responds the eJankulator:

I'm flattered that you think I'm a police officer, but I assure you I am not. Actually, I'm an engineer who does investigative reporting on the side...

I'm just trying to establish some level of credibility.

And, suddenly, Janke's no longer a "freelance reporter," he's just an engineer who gets his kicks playing Junior Investigative Journalist in his spare time, which pretty much opens the floodgates of scorn aimed in his direction:

dont talk to this guy ... again he is a lawyer for imona russel fishing for some defence for his client! ...

This one smells bad to me folks. If he was a journalist do you think he would come to Somaliuk.com to find out about this girl? He could just go to Somali community offices all over this city, and believe me there are plenty of them around there. But perhaps he thinks he can find better info that those in the community offices would release to him online.

If you know any more info about the family of our late deceased sister don't give him this guy. I am a social scientist who knows exactly how men and women in his "profession" work...

Awrliqe Good Job. You figured out that Steve was trying to paint the murder of Yasmine as honor killing. “Qataal Sharaf”. Awrliqe, you are always one step ahead of everybody. Alaa yacisak Reer OOGO

As far as I know we do not practice “honor killing” in Somali society. We are not Pakistanis!

Oh, yes, those readers nailed Steve's motivation nicely, didn't they? And the upshot? Well, we don't call him the "Premature eJankulator" for nothing, as we can see how quickly Steve ends up backpedaling here regarding the Eva Ho story:

Hopefully the Sing Tao can sort this out. It's important, because the true circumstances of Eve's disappearance might be very grim indeed, but utterly unrelated to the problem of online predators ...

No more information on Philip Ho Sing Sit is available on the web as far as I can tell. All we know that a few days after Philip's remains were found, three of his friends went missing, including Eve.

As far as we know, that is all the police know as well.

In short, Steve appears to have squat in the way of actual facts, but it doesn't stop him from jumping all over this story and sensationalizing it based on the flimsiest of conjecture. Which inspires the obvious question: What the fuck is driving Steve Janke? And the answer, as I'm sure you've already guessed, is obvious.

Steve really, really, really badly wants to be a legitimate investigative journalist. My God, but what he wouldn't give to break a real story, and see his name on the front page as the super-sleuth who got to the bottom of the case. He fancies himself as Jim Rockford when, in fact, he's Fred Beamer, bumbling around, passing himself off as a freelancer and, in general, fucking up everything he touches, after which he writes lurid pieces with appropriately salacious details but with an Adam Daifallah-like absence of content.

I could go on, but there's really not much point. It's not that I think Janke is too clueless to take seriously -- it's that I think he's dangerously irresponsible. So while I don't think Janke is even remotely worth reading based on his actual production, I think he's worth keeping an eye on based simply on the damage he seems capable of causing. And frankly, if he keeps up this sort of sensationalistic rubbish, I'm betting it's only a matter of time before he finds himself on the business end of a defamation suit of some kind.

And that I'd be willing to blog about.

BONUS TAIL-WAGGING IDIOCY: I realize I should let this go, but there's still some free entertainment to be extracted from this. At that original extended thread regarding Yasmin, one commenter apparently uses one of Steve's own articles to question his credibility.

That article of Steve's can be found here, and opens thusly (and, as you read this excerpt, do not follow the links yet):

The investigation of the murder of Yasmin Ashareh continues. A man, William Imona-Russel, has been arrested. My original theory that Yasmin might have been the victim of an honour killing seems to have been discredited.

So, quite clearly, Janke first proposed that this was an honour killing, then had to retract when it became obvious he was just blowing smoke. But that's not the best part. The best part is when you see where those four hyperlinks go. Check them out. Go ahead.

That's right -- every single one of them points back to one of Steve's blog posts. Apparently, Steve's idea of investigative journalism is, quite simply, to quote himself. If that isn't hermetically-sealed wankeritude of the highest order, I don't know what is.

Let's all send happy thoughts to the Zorph.

Apparently, it all ended well but there were some frightening early moments:

You know something is wrong when you feel sick to our stomach and you end puking blood.

I know exactly how he feels, but then I stop reading Joel Johannesen and everything returns to normal. Although the overwhelming urge to claw out my eyeballs lingers for a while.

"Bipartisanship" as a blunt instrument.

Well ... that didn't last long:

President Bush has pledged to be a bipartisan, consensus builder now that Democrats are to control Congress, and since Wednesday he has made conciliatory gestures. The question now is whether Mr. Bush is ready to junk all of his make-nice pledges in order to keep John Bolton at the United Nations...

.... Mr. Bolton is keen to stay at the helm of the American team at the United Nations, administration officials say, and White House officials, including the legal adviser, Harriet Miers, have been looking into whether Mr. Bush can somehow bypass the Senate and save Mr. Bolton. Administration officials said that Vice President Dick Cheney is backing the exploration of such a move.

Yes, let's do that. Now that the GOP have lost both the House and the Senate and have had their sorry, racist asses kicked all the way back to East Dumbassville, Idaho, what better way to begin the healing than to try an insulting end-run around the Senate?

Please, oh please, try that. The entertainment value alone would be worth it.

Unintentional humour, right-wing style.

There's something vaguely Ted Haggard about that second strip, but I just can't put my finger in it.

On it. I can't put my finger on it.

Last Chick standing.

Well, he who laughs last and all that (emphasis added):

The Texas band, which has felt a backlash at home for criticizing Bush's Iraq war policy, played a sold-out concert in Vancouver Wednesday night.

Ouch. If you're a Blogging Tory, that has to be just another knee to the happy sack.

I have GOT to stop reading the blogs today.

You'd think that, with the ass-kicking the Republicans just got (in large part because of their appalling sleaze and overwhelming corruption), they might want to clean up their act just a wee bit. You'd think that.

You'd be wrong.

BY THE WAY, if the Dems had any sense (and, yes, we are speaking hypothetically here), given Steele's passing himself off as a Democrat during this last election, the Dems should keep their mouths shut about Steele, and even promote his appointment.

And after that appointment goes through, the Dems will have at least two glorious years of pointing out, every chance they get, that the head of the Republican National Committee is a self-described, unabashed Democrat and, by God, they've got the campaign literature to prove it.

Could life get any more entertaining than that?

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Can you say "schadenfreude," boys and girls?

Sometimes, even parody seems inadequate.

Back here, I (half-jokingly) suggested that George W. McChimpster's strategery would be to obstruct the Democrats as much as possible, then blame them for not getting anything done.

Little did I know:

... But there is motivation for Democrats — and Mr. Bush intends to exploit that if he can.

“Their whole theme has been the do-nothing Congress,” Mr. Black, the Republican strategist, said. “Now, if they get in there and make themselves vulnerable to that charge, it hurts them in ’08. He knows that they have an incentive to get things done, and he’s going to take advantage of that.”

It's hard to believe that even satire has lost its value.

Ask and ye shall receive.

You know, I just can't wait until the grown-ups are back in charge ... whoa, speak of the devil.

Blowback.

Shorter Michelle Malkin: "Good riddance, Lincoln, you little turd."
Shorter Lincoln Chafee: "Fuck you, too, bitch."

"Yeah, I'm a HUGE fan of what's his name."

What's wrong with this picture?

Yesterday in the National Post, Barbara Kay wrote about the Academia's ignorance of some the finest Conservative Authors. Mark Stein and his book "America Alone" being the latest example.

Give it time ... it'll come to you.

You're entitled to your own opinions ...

... you're not entitled to your own facts. And this is the basic issue when dissecting the inane dumbassitude of the wankersphere.

It's not that their opinions are illogical, internally inconsistent, poorly reasoned and even more poorly defended. It's that their basic facts are just hopelessly wrong. Or, as Arnold Rimmer would say, "absolutely brimming over with wrongability."

I've been chided (in good fun, of course) for picking on the "low-hanging fruit" of the Canadian wankersphere. But, I ask you, who among the Blogging Tories wouldn't qualify as low-hanging fruit? Who in that collection of pompous windbags actually has a blog that's worth reading on a regular basis that doesn't contain constant errors of simple fact, or that doesn't present howlingly hypocritical arguments with a perfectly straight face?

You want more intellectually-challenging criticism? Fine -- point out some Blogging Tories that actually post something worth reading and critiquing. Seriously. I'm open to suggestions.

AS I WAS SAYING ... Can you even read this entire piece without gagging? Or this one?

Great moments in Canadian political punditry.

So you Blogging Tories really are as slow as they say.

Dear Adam: You keep using that phrase "unfettered capitalism" ...

Apparently, a wide-open, free economy -- unchained by any of those annoying and counter-productive government regulations and where the market is free to "decide" almost anything -- is just the ticket when it comes to, say, making a corporate decision to boycott the Dixie Chicks from the airwaves, but it's an absolute travesty when it involves bookstores who might be taking a pass on stuff that makes Ann Coulter look positively thoughtful and nuanced.

I'd give that argument a little more thought if I were you, Adam. Consistency might be hard work, but it does pay big dividends in the end. Or so I've heard.

Careful, Charlie ... he's probably packing.

I know -- I really do -- that I should drag my attention back to the cement-headed imbeciles allegedly governing this country (and I use the word "governing" in its loosest, most flexible and most utterly inaccurate sense), but there's just so much GOP-related crunchy goodness happening down south that it's hard to tear one's self away.

The latest entertainment is here:

Harlem's newly powerful Rep. Charles Rangel wants to stick it to his White House nemesis Vice President Cheney - by taking over his spacious House office...

"Mr. Cheney enjoys an office on the second floor on the House of Representatives that historically has been designated as the Ways and Means chairman," Rangel mused. "And, I've talked with [future Speaker of the House] Nancy Pelosi … and I'm trying to find some way to be gentle as I restore the dignity of that office to the chair."

I'm not sure why Rangel feels any need to be polite about it. It's not like Cheney needs that office space, what with his spending most of his time in his undisclosed, secure location. If I was Rangel, I'd just leave a voice mail: "Yo, Dick. I'll be movin' my shit into that office first thing Monday morning. Whatever's still there goes to Goodwill, know what I'm sayin'?"

Although, given Dick's passion for firearms, if I were Charlie, I might bring a couple of bad-ass homeboys from the 'hood with me. From what I hear, Dick's in a pissy mood these days and you just never know when he's going to decide to shoot someone in the face, so I'd want to be in a position to return fire, if you know what I mean.

God help us if they ever marry and have kids.

Proud to be Canadian's Joel Johannesen touts the other-worldly pontificatory brilliance of that proud "Canadian," Ann Coulter (emphasis eye-rollingly added):

This week Ann Coulter plays on the fact that Democrats had to pretend to be conservatives in order to win their mid-term elections; and the fact that the mid-term elections prove only how unpopular the Democrats are.

Any additional commentary on my part would just be cruel, don't you think?

Democrats: A sneaky, sneaky people.

Apparently, Democrats have no shame whatsoever. It must be time for another blogger ethics panel or something.

Compare and contrast.

• Donald Rumsfeld is a visionary genius.


• Donald Rumsfeld is an idiot.

I'm guessing history might have something to say about this.

Excuse me while I remove this image from my brain with an icepick.

I'm really not sure how to make this any more tasteless than it already is. But it occurs to me that, now that Daddy's little girl has pledged her chastity and told Daddy what he wants to hear, it's Mommy's turn to take little darling aside and teach her what she really needs to know.

First, though, Mommy needs to find a banana.

Blogging Tory irony, midterm-election style.

From dissonance and respect, we get the following gem:

President Bush had better uncap his veto pen, if he doesn't want Congress to turn Iraq into another Vietnam.

Yes, by George, the GOP almost had this thing in the bag, the insurgents were in their last throes, a bunch of desperate "dead-enders" and all, and along come the Democrats who threaten to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but that's all right as long as George W., in the spirit of co-operation and bipartisanship that he's famous for, reaches across the aisle and stabs Democrats in the eyeballs with his veto pen over and over, after which Iraq will, as a consequence, turn into another Vietnam, which will, naturally, be all the Democrats' fault.

You know, there are people who actually charge for sarcasm this cutting and rapier-like. I hope you folks don't start taking me for granted.

The danger of teh gays.

Shorter Spanky: "My God, he's right! Same-sex marriage does drive prominent evangelical pastors to drug addiction and hot man-on-man action!"

It's beginning to look a lot like ... hang on, then, what's this?

Apparently, in the same way that a gay couple getting married in Nova Scotia will destroy the sanctity of, say, a God-fearing, Ward and June Cleaver hetero union in Canmore, Alberta, the thought of Canada Post not clubbing you over the head 24 hours a day with the gagging incantation of "Merry Christmas" will somehow suck the very essence of joy and mindless celebration out of Canada's religious whackjobs, who have had it up to here with all this left-wing, communist "Peace on Earth" and joy bullshit.

Joel wants his "Christmas," by God. And he doesn't want to hear another single fucking mention of "joy" out of any of you moonbats. You got that?

Blogging Tories and silver linings.

Apparently, every single death of an American soldier in Iraq from this point forward will be the fault of those cut-and-run Democrats:

Good. Now that the cut ‘n’ runners have control of both the House and the Senate, they’ll have to stop kvetching about President Chimpy McHitlerBushHalliburton and actually DO something.

And in 2008 they won’t be able to say … if we only had control of the Senate we would have been able to do sooo much more ...

Yes, this is indeed the point where, with the car lying in the ditch upside down, the driver turns to the passenger and says in a pissy tone of voice, "Well, if you hate my driving so much, why don't you take the wheel, then?"

Fucking Democrats. How could they let this happen?

"And Harris, you play left quarterback."

Apparently, there's a backup position. Who knew?

When reality is just too much of a burden.

Oh, the fun you can have with a search engine:

G-damned, fucking liberal sons of whores. They have finally done it. Rumsfeld is resigning. I hope they are happy. Why don't they just invited the gawd-blessed terrorists to come to America?

Son of a bitch. Motherfucker. Christ on a stick. Let's just all roll over and play dead. I am so pissed at W for allowing him to resign.

Although I'm sure you can appreciate the intellectual level of that blog by its first comment:

Can you explain it in simple terms to a not-politically involved person who doesn't watch TV or read the newspapers, what is happening? I don't have any idea even who Rumsfeld is really other than knowing his name and that he's famous goverment person wise.

Um ... yeah. He's kind of famous. At least, most of the Muslim world knows who he is. Apparently, those towelheads like to stay up on current events, like who's responsible for blasting them into kibble and killing their kids. They're curious that way.

I feel so chastised. Well, actually, no, I don't.

And somewhere in Canada, a town no longer has a village idiot. He's a Councilor now.

I'm guessing that's a step up. Being a Councilor probably pays better.

Oh. My. Freaking. God.

Rumsfeld resigns. And the best part of that article:

Last week, as he campaigned to save the Republican majority, Bush declared that Rumsfeld would remain at the Pentagon through the end of his term.

I don't ever want to hear another right-wing, pissant wanker bitching and moaning about the sleaziness of convenient, political timing. Ever.

NOT EVEN EMBARRASSED ABOUT IT: Check out the video over at Think Progress, where George W. McDumbfuck openly admits, with not even a hint of embarrassment, that he lied about Rumsfeld's status last week for purely political purposes. But, as we all know, exposing a serial sexual predator of teenage boys before an election is so totally, totally inappropriate.

How do these people even live with themselves?

Dear Dems: Enjoy it while it lasts.

And, true to form, it didn't even take 24 hours for the Democratic "leadership" to start doing unspeakably, indescribably asinine things.

Someone needs to take Rahm Emanuel into a dark alley one night and make sure he never comes out again. What a wanker.

The GOP train wreck.

Over at MyDD, Chris Bowers has a summary of the GOP implosion, but here's the most eye-opening observation:

Republicans shut out: No House, Senate, or Governor pickups for Republicans. That breaks every record for futility. No one can ever do worse than they did this year.

Is that correct? Was there not a single one of those seats that changed hands from Democrat to Republican? That's pretty astonishing. I'm not sure it's even possible to get bitch-slapped more thoroughly than that.