Friday, February 27, 2004

Conservatism and “Class Warfare”—Why the Winners Decry Change

More definitions…

According to The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, “Conservatism” is:

con·ser·va·tism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kn-sûrv-tzm)
The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
A political philosophy or attitude emphasizing respect for traditional institutions, distrust of government activism, and opposition to sudden change in the established order.

Hmmm… So, if for example, I already have a stock portfolio valued at $35 million, homes in New York, Florida, and Grand Cayman, and a series of tax shelters throughout the world, I am likely to be a “conservative”. If on the other hand, I cannot get a job that pays more than $6 an hour, live in a 30 year old mobile home, and can’t get health insurance, I am NOT likely to be a conservative.

Let’s face it, being a conservative simply means you’ve got most of the marbles and you want to be damned sure it stays that way. So let’s take a look at the kinds of things “conservatives” want to conserve.

Prior to all the bleeding heart liberal programs enacted by tax-and-spend Democrats over the past 45 years, the United States was, let’s face it, the perfect place. Right? No hunger, plenty of high quality, affordable housing, racial equality, no crime, low taxes, and easy living for everyone. Hell, we don’t even need that horribly expensive interstate highway system that costs so much federal tax money to keep repaired. What we need is a return to the “good old Eisenhower days” when…

White men ran everything. Yep, everything. Colored folks stayed in “their place” and always rode in the back of the bus. Women stayed home, shut up, and did what their men told them to do. Taxes were low because we had “bums” who deserved to die under railroad bridges instead of politically correct “homeless people”.

Yes sirree, there’s nothing quite like a conservative viewpoint. If you’ve lost your job because your company went out of business or moved operations to China and you can’t afford your house anymore, then, tough! As any good conservative knows it’s your own damned fault. Move someplace where there is a job and stop whining!

But don’t you dare, you obnoxious, hate-filled, whining Liberal, don’t you DARE ask me to hand over nearly half of my $2 million a year in income because you have problems. No, no, no! I am one of the winners and I like it this way. If “poor people” have problems, that’s their own fault.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to confer with my broker on what to do with my $127,000 in unearned income from stock dividends this year. After all, I certainly want to make sure that I get to keep as much as I can. The wife and I are getting pretty bored with the winter home in Florida and are thinking of buying in Scottsdale. Of course, that will require a little more money. But, hey, making the tax cuts permanent will cover the mortgage. And, oh yeah, bleeding heart Liberals, you should be happy. With the new “guest worker” program, we’ll be able to keep a half-dozen foreign workers employed at $6 an hour taking care of the place!

Liberals are sickening.


Thursday, February 26, 2004

In response to Why We're Going to Die

Urm, coming from across the sea from England, this all makes me a little queasy. 'Why we're going to Die'. Yes, despite being Americans, you are all going to die. One day, eventually, a fact of life. Unavoidable, I'm afraid. You are human, like the rest of us. So, why you are alive, why not live a little, and stop spending the best years of your life losing so much hair stressing about 'what if'? Remember the Cuban Crisis? From this side of the water you do all seem like you are running around trying to invent phrases and slogans and national security alarm systems to protect yourselves from what is nearly impossible to protect yourselves against. Bare facts, if some nutter decides to blow himself up with lots of other people, no matter how evil or horrific, its unstoppable. Its guerilla warfare on home soil, Vietnam on your doormat. As frightening as this new reality must seem, all the cheesy sloganism, red alerts and cool web sites in the world isn't going to help. It might not be very 'American', but less jingoism and more sober pragmatism may be beneficial to the nation. And a little less hair loss may ensue.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004

Adolescent Name-calling and Macho Posturing—What’s Obviously Wrong with the Right

It’s just too hard to think

Apparently many of those who support traditional right-wing causes are just too intellectually overwhelmed by complex issues to take any time to actually think about them. Just like the bullies on the playground or the hackneyed caricatures we see as movie mobsters, they resort to bluster and ad hominem attacks.

Let’s take a look at some of the favorite terms and phrases used by some famous (and not so famous) Republican blowhards and give them the credit they deserve for such careful reasoning and erudite analysis.

John Kerry and the “Liberal Elite”

This one is just too amusing to pass up. Apparently one of John Kerry’s hideous and unforgivable character flaws is that he is (secretly?) a member of some shadowy and dangerous anti-American group known as the “Liberal Elite”. This, of course, makes him “liberal”, “populist”, “tax and spend”, and “an elitist” all at the same time. As the proprietor of this blog has been know to do, let’s let the dictionary tell us just what “elitism” is:

1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.

2. __
a. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
b. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

It’s painfully obvious that if that definition applies to anyone in US politics these days, it’s the Bush Administration. At no time in modern American history has a gang of ideologues and zealots practiced such heavy-handed control based upon their unquestioning faith in their own perceived superiority and social status. Could it be that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi, Wolfie, and Pearle fit the definition of elitist perfectly? Oh, and is it possible that in spite of poor grades in school and his phony “Aw shucks” façade, George Walker Bush, son of a Congressman/CIA Director/Vice President/President who has lived his entire life in irresponsible luxury might just be an elitist, too?

"Populist" and "Soft on Defense"

As the conservative wags all tell us, a “liberal” is obviously a “tax and spend” type who will throw away all of the wealthy’s hard “unearned income” on irresponsible social welfare programs. Yes, there is no one quite like a member of the “Liberal Elite” to engage in heinous “redistribution of wealth”. And, although the US Army under SecDef Donald Rumsfeld can glibly justify abandoning a 21 year long weapons development program (the Comanche helicopter) as a “money saving” move, any vote against any weapons program over a 15 year period clearly represents misplaced priorities and a clear record of being “soft on defense”. The same “reasoning” applies to support of social programs. Clearly, voting in favor of programs designed to combat poverty or provide health care for uninsured children makes one a “populist” at the least and possibly even a (shudder) “socialist”!

You are either with us or against us

To prove how taking a position contrary to “conservative” ideology is met with calm, reasoned commentary—to show how the “right” uses superior reasoning, in-depth and detailed research, and carefully crafted arguments, we need only turn to the Mother Teresa of conservative America, Ann Coulter. In fact, to show just how this paragon of Family Values and American virtue sees the world, we need only use two words. In a refreshing economy of phrase, Ms Coulter manages to title not one, but two full-length works of fiction—excuse me, non-fiction—using just two words: “Slander” and “Treason”. Enough said.

Even more to come…

This only scratches the surface. In future offerings, we will continue to examine the fascinating world of right-wing hypocrisy. Long ago psychologists identified and studied the phenomenon of transference. The classic example of this neurotic behavior is the preacher who rails against the evils of alcohol because it’s the only way he can keep his hands off the bottle. Transference is mechanism by which millions of terrified macho American males denigrate and belittle homosexuals because they are deathly afraid that they might be a little gay themselves. Transference is also the mechanism by which—to use the earlier example—a paragon of logic and reasoned discourse like Ann Coulter can use terms like “hatred”, “betrayal”, “slander”, and “treason” to describe nearly everyone who has the lack of good judgment to agree with her. It seems reasonable that it takes a fair degree of hatred to write slander that accuses others of betrayal and treason. Et tu, Ann?

Bin Laden, geniuses at Carnegie Mellon and the ultimate sucker punch

"We have the right to kill four million Americans-two million of them children-and to exile twice as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons," wrote Suleiman Abu Gheith, a former Kuwaiti schoolteacher and mosque imam of that peace-loving religion that has become the favorite of liberal democrats everywhere. The quote originally appeared on the now defunct Al Qaida site, Al and has since been quoted in several books and articles including the draft of my book that should be out next year.

There are at least two ways you can look at this. One, you can dismiss it as just another harmless example of free speech and religious freedom from any of the millions of hate-filled ravings that populate Islamist web sites and writings worldwide. After-all, nothing has happened within America since 9/11 and it is only white, republican men as a recent group of moronic academics at Carnegie Mellon recently wrote in the Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, who are frightened of Islamic terror anyway. (yes, this group of heavyweights took their sample from web-tvs and actually presented this in the journal. Their names are Baruch Fischhoff, Roxana Gonzalez, Deborah Small and Jennifer Lerner)

Number two, you can couple this with a fatwa, or religious ruling from another member of the religion of peace, Saudi Sheik Nasser bin Hamd al-Fahad who issued a fatwa, granting legal religious authority to the use of weapons of mass destruction against both the United States and Great Britain and their civilian populations. Now as a white, republican male I find this troubling and please write us at if you are a member of any other demographic group and tell me why this doesn't bother you at all.

While not as scientific as the work of the geniuses at Carnegie Mellon, I did show this to a group of 12 democratic black women friends of mine who unanimously agreed that, " we should track down and kill all of these crazy M@*@*@ F*#@#@ as soon as possible." Personally, I think it's time to check how many black, democratic women are professors at Carnegie Mellon. I know 12 who are much brighter than the four half-wits of the mentioned article.

So now we have a bunch of white republican men and 12 democratic black women who are troubled by statements arguing both intellectual and spiritual justification to use weapons of mass destruction against American and British cities. How has this turned up as a rant today?

Al Jazeera reported over the weekend that "US and British special forces have cornered al-Qaida leader Usama bin Ladin in a mountainous area in northwest Pakistan, a British newspaper has reported.
Quoting "a US intelligence source", the Sunday Express said bin Ladin and "up to 50 fanatical henchmen" were inside an area 16km wide and deep "north of the town of Khanozai and the city of Quetta".
"He is boxed in," the unidentified source was quoted by the tabloid as saying, adding US special forces were "absolutely confident" he could not escape

Now at first blush, it would seem time to get the cage ready for bin Laden. The cage in which he is led through the streets of New York on his way to the temporary pigpen we have constructed for him and 20 or 30 of his closest friends in Battery Park. Justice could be served with some tent stakes, heavy rope and about 15 pounds of animal stimulant.

It would make a great short film with the simple voice of the narrator in the background speaking in Arabic, Farsi, Pashtun and the other dialects used by the haters of democracy, Jews and Christians: "We don't care what you do in your own countries but here's what happens when you F#@* with America on our own soil." Oh, delicious irony--simple justice--true and un-adorned.

I have spoken with six of my Arab and Pakistani friends who live here in the United States and they would buy the film because of the problems bin Laden and his Jihadi accomplices have caused Muslims here in America. They are also very concerned about the threat of weapons of mass destruction used against American cities.

So now we have white, republican men, 12 black, democratic women and six Arab and Pakistani-Americans who are troubled by WMD terror. Just in case you are in a demographic group not mentioned in the Carnegie Mellon academic's study and do care about terrorism, let me explain to you why the last day's of bin Laden may not bode well for some inhabitants of an American city.

Without giving away any of my book's headline value, many in the worldwide intelligence community are very concerned that bin Laden has a nuke. A working nuke. Nobody in the American government is going to publicly admit it due to the panic it could cause. But their is great evidence and concern that he has acquired one, and the only question is: Will he use it against the U.S. or Israel? Before you write this off as farfetched, go back and look at the warnings from the CIA, FBI, MI5 and other intelligence and government agencies during the past two years. All have warned that Al Qaida is attempting to acquire and plans to use WMDs against western cities.

During one his sermons last year, bin Laden vowed to die a martyrs death in 2004 in "the belly of the eagle." Now we do not have space here today to get into a deep analysis of what he meant by that. But if he does have a nuke, and we succeed in capturing or killing him before the first Tuesday in November, you should begin to be concerned if you live in Washington, New York or Los Angeles.

The liberal democrats will use the death or capture of Bin Laden as evidence that the war on terror is over. There will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth from all but white republican men, 12 democratic black women and six Arab and Pakistani-Americans that it is time to divert energy and resources elsewhere.

It will be time for the ultimate sucker punch. For as Bin Laden said in an interview on Al Jazeera, "the Americans never understand until you hit them in the head."

It will be a very painful path to understanding.

Monday, February 23, 2004

Why We're Going to Die

Because Americans have the nifty choice this coming November, between the guy with the big hair, who is openly hostile to strong national security measures; and the idiot with the smug smirk, who pretends he's tough on terrorists and keeping us safe, but doesn't do diddly squat when it comes to HOMELAND safety. (He, and his moron advisers, act like Iraq is where the only action is.)
Tom Ridge as head of DHS is the biggest joke and an insult to every American citizen. Remember last year when he announced to the world, and thus to terrorists, that we do not have air marshalls on certain flights? He should have been fired on the spot for that stunning security breach. And that's just one example of a gazillion instances of mind-numbing incompetence and stupidity. Yet our President praises him every chance he gets and tells Americans how much safer we are now. It's a lie. Bush should be impeached for that (not over WMDs, like liberals are saying).
That's not going to happen. So you can vote him out of office -- and replace him with someone even worse.
That means the terrorists are going to win. That's why we're going to die.
Have a peachy day.

For whom the bell tolls: What have Karl and the boys wrought?

It is late February and this vile and evil election winter lurches tediously forward. The only hope of a juicy scandal with the man who has been crowned the new JFK seems to have evaporated--there will be no spots on dresses, taped phone conversations or chubby interns with novel ideas about uses for your illegal stash of Cuban cigars. Or at least, for now, as I heard Sean Hannity insinuate yesterday from Border's in Washington.

Oh Drudge, where art thou?

Howard Dean pulled the plug yesterday--finding it is much easier to inflame and impassion those who have heard none of the political drivel before--than energizing those who have heard it all before and found no substance behind his anger. As a card- carrying member of the RNC and proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy, I will miss him. He has tapped into a vein of anger and hatred that Karl and the boys seem to not comprehend. Doctor Dean at least tried to be real and say what he believed rather than what his handler's found politically expedient. Maybe he will go and start a true third party for the growing legions of disaffected from both of the current political machines. I predict there will be many disaffected and unemployed seeking work in November, many from my party, unless President Bush begins to talk with REAL people again-but I get ahead of myself.

Gone also are Senator Joe Lieberman and Congressman Dick Gephardt--two genuinely decent and honest men in a profession populated with crooks, kooks, pathological liars, and sociopaths. While I might disagree with some of their policy prescriptions, both emanated presidential stature and competence. They should be welcome in the new third party.

Which leaves us with the four remaining democrats. We can dispense with Kucinich and Sharpton first, both running only for the joy of the campaign. Dennis Kucinich is a kook, so far out that even my left-wing friends giggle at his name. His ideas sound like conversations you heard when you jogged by people sitting around a bong in college. (Yes, I know there is a problem in Physics in that statement) But that is the beauty of the American political process, where a kook can have their 15 minutes of fame. Al Sharpton and I disagree on many more things, but of all the democrats, he's the one I'd like to spend an evening in Manhattan with. Like Doctor Dean, he has little or no filter on what he says, giving honest and unpredictable answers in a blizzard of canned, spun, predictable political swill.

Unfortunately, we do not have page space today to begin to discuss the new JFK or long-shot pretty boy Senator John Edwards yet. That is because today is a grim day for Republicans as the dark and somber bell is tolling and everybody but Karl Rove and group of political hacks and nitwits knows for whom that bell tolls.

Today, two polls have either John Kerry or John Edwards beating President Bush by double percentage points. Now Karl and the boys will spin this, but this is possibly the biggest political collapse in the history of American politics.

This is the President who led us through 9/11 and began to lower the suffocating taxes that our socialist-inspired, regressive tax structure perpetrates on hard-working people. This is the President who 14 months ago had an almost 85 percent approval rating. This is the President who is man enough to admit he has made mistakes in his life and fixed them.

This is also a president who is making the same mistake his father made and will recognize the hideous sound of the final bell in November unless he manages to actually get some advice from REAL people: The messages this year are killing you and Karl and the boys are as out of touch as some of the hacks that led your father to be booted out in 1992.

Mr. President, nobody but NASA and the aerospace industry cares about Mars. We have other problems here on earth that need fixing. Trust me, all but the brain-dead in our party see this as an absurd, cynical political machination. Did you really believe such madness would translate into votes in California, Florida and possibly democrats in Texas?

Why would a republican vote to allow still more illegal aliens to bypass our immigration laws? Oh, cynical political manipulation. Back-fired on two accounts: Predictably, Hispanic and left-wing groups want more-won't vote for you. Second, this has made many of us very angry. I know sane democrats who understand that rampant, unchecked immigration costs us billions and represents a national security issue. Karl and the nitwits should be publicly flogged and sent to look for bin Ladin for this great idea.

It's the economy stupid!! Do you remember that awful noise? Well, it's back once more and Karl and the nitwits have totally missed it like your father's group of nitwits did back in 1992. Have they ever talked with anybody who truly has to work for a living? I appreciate the tax cut although the AMT manages to somehow turn mine into another tax increase, but this has not translated into job creation anywhere near what Karl and the nitwits promised.

Which leaves us with the question of the day: How are we on the verge of the greatest political collapse in history?

Bluntly, Karl and the beltway nitwits think people like myself will just go and pull the lever BECAUSE THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION. Karl is half-right. The chance of me voting for the new JFK, another hypocritical, multi-millionaire "champion of the people," from Massachusetts is virtually nil. But if I stay at home in November, fail to contribute, money time or energy and quit trying to point out all the success stories of this administration against the growing tide of disillusionment and hate against my President, there will be no second term.

So Mr. President, maybe it's time to talk with some real people. Talk to your father. He has heard the sound before. Maybe you should get some people outside the beltway to give you advice. But you better do it very quickly. Make no mistake. The grim sound tolls for you. Like many republicans, I don't like the sound.


Sunday, February 22, 2004

Kerry and the Liberal Elite's Fetish: A Return to Camelot?

For the un-initiated, fetish, as defined by Webster's is any non-sexual object such as a foot or glove, that abnormally excites sexual feelings. And democratic-hopeful John Kerry's handlers are already tickling the Camelot fetish of downtrodden liberal elites by using what is called in the trade --- reverse black propaganda.

Kerry is denying any connection with Camelot, real or imagined. Yet, behind the curtains campaign operatives are making the connections in hope of mobilizing all those afflicted with this particularly liberal elite fetish. Already articles are popping up in international media discussing everything from Kerry's JFK initials to his dating of Jackie's half-sister. There are pictures of the new JFK boating with the old JFK. Like former President Bill Clinton, Senator Kerry had an almost religious experience from meeting the first JFK.

A casual understanding of what went on with the two deceased members of Camelot, John and Robert Kennedy and you can begun to see how pathetic those afflicted with the Camelot fetish really are. Because, by all accounts, John and Robert were men of action, too busy "collecting butterflies," as they so tastefully call it in Japan. And what a wonderful butterfly collection the two deceased members of Camelot collected.

Make no mistake about it, these Camelot boys were no Clintonian amateurs. There were no over-weight interns with hot cigar tricks nor any woman even remotely guilty of being labeled as trailer trash. The Camelot butterfly list was absolutely stellar. Just a few on the list were: Marilyn Monroe, Jane Mansfield, Marlene Dietrich, one of mobster Sam Giancana's girlfriends, Inga Artad, Angie Dickinson, Judith Campbell Exner, and a very impressive longer list of wives, ex-wives and girlfriends that should warm the heart of butterfly collectors everywhere.

Now,as an un-apologetic, non-politically correct, anti-metrosexual male I can understand why John Kerry might want to return to the glory days of Camelot. But what I'd like to really understand, and feel free to write us at is: How can any self-respecting woman take any politician seriously who tries to use a return-to-Camelot theme either overtly or in stealth mode?

I'm waiting particularly to hear from women from John Kerry's state of Massachusetts who continually help send John Kerry's good friend and only living member of Camelot, Senator Edward Kennedy to wreak havoc on the body politic. Kennedy is the most evil, morally-bankrupt politician to grace the annals of American politics. He is a cross between Golam and a hideously over-weight hyena. He doesn't have to worry about taxes so is always ready to raise yours and has never seen an immigration bill too liberal to sponsor. Here's a guy who got kicked out of Harvard for cheating, has his own machinations of an Army enlistment, and was present at a rape for which Kennedy justice, yet again, prevailed. However, unlike his deceased Camelot brothers who have only been suspected in Marilyn Monroe's suicide and one other mysterious death, Senator Kennedy was directly responsible for killing one of his butterflys.

If there was justice in the world Ted Kennedy would just now be getting out of prison, with a fancy prison-bitch name like "fudge boy," probably with dentures and certainly not in the bloated physical condition we had to witness during his recent state-of-the-union antics. For those to-young to remember, Camelot's senator was responsible for the death of Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddik in July 1969. His reprehensible, cowardly and illegal-anywhere-except-if-you're-a-Kennedy behavior is well documented from multiple sources. Yet, the voters of Massachusetts keep sending Camelot's senator back to serve beside his friend John Kerry.

Maybe it's time to think seriously about a candidate who keeps these type of friends. Or, is the Democrat's hatred of President Bush so strong they have to resort to the fetish of Camelot?


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?