This is an interesting exchange and utterly unexpected, I must say. Our friend Dr. Turner apparently has been doing more than upgrading motherboards the past few months. I may need to stop by the tavern one of these nights and chat about this.

In the interest of pushing the the current debate forward, I think there is some value to finding a way to persuade those of differing opinions, rather than slapping them upside the head with a mackeral so others will see who's right and who's covered with fish guts. John says in the FHAQ page that he no longer has the patience to argue with those on the other side, citing what appears to be chronic exasperation as the reason. I can understand this position because some will not listen to reason. This is what John is referring to in some of his posts here: There are folks who will talk themselves silly to try to avoid stating unpleasant truths - and this can be a very annoying discussion to be in!

On the other hand, let us say, for instance, there are people on the other side who are sincerely misguided. Let us say that some of those whom John is lumping in with the "weasels" fall into this category. Would it not be a shame if the edgy caricature John propounds was responsible for hardening one of these people into an erroneous position simply because of the emotional charge "party of weasels" evokes? What if there are folks who don't have a strong opinion on some of the issues and just happen to find Michael Moore amusing - John's message might be enough to send them further in the wrong direction. Let us state it a little stronger: Would it not be a sin if this happened?

For the purpose of getting out some positive news, then, here is evidence that belief in hell can stimulate economic growth. Doesn't that give you a warm and toasty feeling? I hoped that it would.

The problem we are going to have, in trying to follow Dr. Turner's directive, is neither John nor I consider ourselves anything like spiritual leaders. Speaking for the both of us, I think he will not mind if I add we are not even very good followers, either. We do not have it figured out as of our last conversation on the matter. So perhaps if Dr. Turner has achieved some sort of breakthrough, he could let us in on the secret?

Posted by hemmingway at 11:43 | Permalink

First Angus decides to soften his critique of the Democratic candidate and now Dr. Turner has decided we are both out of bounds simply because we are critical. Lovely.

I do not spend most of my time thinking hateful thoughts toward those with whom I disagree. I think there is value in making some points strongly because there are big time rhetorical barbs going in both directions. Go to your local Borders books and check out some of the titles in the New Nonfiction section and you will see exactly what I mean. Those on the other side are numerous and heavy handed. My concept for this web log was not that it be a machine gun barrage of criticism but that it provide a place for the authors to state whatever happened to interest them at the time. There happen to be current events taking place right now which can be difficult not to take a strong position on. There's a campaign going on for goodness sakes, and heavy criticism is the major currency.

So the good doctor Turner, philosopher-king of this web site, has decided he does not care for the tone and has decided to clean up the items available at the store. Lovely. I don't think it matters a hill of beans in the long run but he has the keys so he gets to call the shots. I suppose Angus and I should feel fortunate we are even allowed to hang around, with our uncouth opinions and all.

For the record, here are the types of messages Dr. Turner believes are inappropriate:

And here is the type of thing he would like to see more of:

Now, who can argue against nice thoughts. Of course, they are nice. Not all of my opinions are nice however because plenty of things occurring in the world today do not happen to be nice.

But I know Dr. Turner means well. I know that like I know I am sitting in this chair. I will therefore give him the benefit of the doubt and respect his decision, and will take his advice to heart. Now to search the mental archives for a positive thought.......searching.........searching.......still searching.......I have found several so far but they are all rather uninteresting.......continuing to search.......

Posted by John Climacus at 11:11 | Permalink

John Climacus asks:

"You want everyone to make nice and make believe there is nothing wrong? You think we should just think happy thoughts and the terrorists will leave us alone? Do you think Western civilization is worth protecting?"

John, we are on the same page when it comes to national security. But you are fooling yourself if you think this fight is going to be won without spiritual assistance. Do you remember WHY you originally became so incensed about the war on terror, John? You said to me in September 2001 that "it's not a war on terror, it's a war on a bunch of ideologically sick people."

I understand your frustrations with those who are in power with terribly misguided priorities. It is important to make some of the points you are making. But if you really believe in God, you be thinking a little more about how He would have you accomplish your goals. I am a sinner just like you, but I have to think the devil is loving every minute of this fight among the American people. You remember The Devil and Daniel Webster, right?

Posted by drturner at 05:42 | Permalink

I am not a writer, but as web master I am going to claim the right to intervene here. There seems to be a sense that life can be improved in some way by shouting down those who disagree with us, either through sheer volume or through one-upmanship in the cleverness of our arguments. I believe this is wrong. Nobody has ever convinced anyone else of anything truly important by making the other person feel like an idiot - much less by actually calling them an idiot.

I see little persuasion being accomplished by either of the authors of this blog. You both apparently are thoughtful men, informed men, and with strong ideas. Why can't you turn this wealth of knowledge and modicum of talent into something positive that might actually make some else's life better? Has it ever occurred to either of you that, if you are so correct and so many others are wrong, you might have the responsibility to try and help them along to your level of understanding? Flash bulletin: You can't do that by calling them names.

I can understand that we get angry and need to vent. That's fine - we are all fallen and frustration is part of the human condition. But you two need to find something positive to say. It will make you feel better, it will make others feel better, and it might accomplish what you think you've been accomplishing so far.

Incidentally, I can sit here and watch the two of you make fools of yourselves for all the world to see. But I can't bear anyone associated with this web site trying to make a buck by spreading nasty messages around. So I have taken the liberty of removing all of John's angry items from the newcounterculture.com store and locked him out with a new password. Sorry, John. Think of something nice to say and I'll let you try again.

Posted by drturner at 05:25 | Permalink

Well I'll be! My main man Angus, filling in for the John-miester! Mixing it up with the folks! Cavin' in on the funny names! Feelin' sorry for the Francophile! Showin' his age, showin' his age.

No, honestly I am deeply grateful for the great work of the esteemed Mr. Hemmingway during my unexpected absence. He adds a thoughtful perspective and I wish he had been here all along through this crazy sick ride we've been ridin' on.

Now let's see where we are at: The Party of Weasels cannot decide whether terrorism is a problem - this may simply be another one of the tyrannical Evil Bush's lies; the P.O.W also cannot decide whether any of them are fit to challenge Evil Bush, as the Top Challenger has a history of going wishy-washy at decision time and the Angry Challenger-to-the-Challenger can't decide how angry he really needs to be; the world has decided the whole WMD issue was a chimera and Saddam was the victim of a sycophant conspiracy, which has made Western intelligence agencies look sillier than Charlie Brown at kickoff time; there's whale meat all over the freeway in Mystic, Connecticut; and poor ol' Joe Republican is coming face to face with the fact that his Party has left him behind.

Let's take a stroll down memory lane, do you remember those hazy, crazy days with Boola Boola Bill? Can you join me - Lowell Weicher, I'm talkin' to you! - a one, a two, a three:

REPUBLICANS FOR LIEBERMAN! REPUBLICANS FOR LIEBERMAN! REPUBLICANS FOR LIEBERMAN!!

C'mon Joe. It is your DESTINY!

I would love to regale you all with storied of my exploits and bitter failures of the past three weeks, but I must dash out into the chill of the evening as I have lingered too long at the desk already today, and my heterosexual-marriage partner is expecting to go out for dinner sometime before midnight.

Oh, incidentally, the drama does appear to continue.

Posted by John Climacus at 06:43 | Permalink

The time may have come to lighten up on Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, lest we be accused of exaggerating the menace out of proportion to reality. It may be inappropriate even to continue Climacus' convention of lampooning the candidates' names. So for me, for now, we speak of John Kerry.

Our recent rumination on what may be in store for Mr. Kerry should be augmented with the observation that the bombs are falling hard and fast. If he wins the nomination, I predict he will be a soft target for President Bush and his re-election committee.

This would point to a vulnerability in the context of the general election:

Turns out I was giving Kerry too much credit. Rather than take a side--albeit the one he thought was most expedient--Kerry actually stood on both sides of the first Gulf war, much like he did this time around...

This is a little catty - but also grist for the hardball politics mill:

"If we are going on personal experience, then John Kerry can't really speak to the middle class tax cut, in as much as he is a kept man," Coulter told Fox News Channel's 'Hannity & Colmes' as McClean looked on.

"He lives off the money made by other men and left to their daughters or wives," she explained. "He's a gigolo and a cad. His income comes from pursuing lonely rich women..."

And this is a taste of things to come:

A vote for Kerry is a vote for the Security Council, except in 1991 when that Council wanted war.

A vote for Kerry is thus a vote for American paralysis. No one is going to question the patriotism of a highly decorated combat veteran. But his judgment is fair game, and his judgment is deeply flawed.

Can you not imagine the Bush commercials already?

Posted by hemmingway at 07:52 | Permalink

When I was a younger man, I used to get worked up over government actions that did not make sense to me. I had a rather high blood pressure as a result, and did all kinds of things with my body and mind that I shouldn't have been doing if prolonging my life was a priority. I probably lost a few years over the 1980 Olympics boycott alone, which saddens me particularly because I no longer hold the Olympic games in such high esteem.

Some years ago, I figured out the government is going to baffle you and baffle you again, until you finally quit trying to hold it to a rational standard. I no longer allow my political beliefs to darken the tone of a conversation with old friends, I no longer allow the worries of the day to impinge on my time with family, and I no longer expect anything like rationality from the government. I enjoy life more since I have made these changes.

I am thinking, if you live in Israel, you'd have to have this sort of attitude in order to deal with this sort of thing....

A suicide bomber exploded inside a bus on the corners of Gaza and Arlozorov streets, near the Prime Minister's residence in Jerusalem's Rehavia neighborhood at about 8:45 Thursday morning.

At least 10 people have been killed and possibly 50 wounded, at least 10 critically.

....when this sort of thing is taking place precisely at the same time:

Military jets carrying prisoners to be swapped in a long-awaited deal between arch enemies Israel and the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah touched down before dawn Thursday under tight security at a military airport in Cologne...

..."We are releasing another 400 Palestinians with a very heavy heart, because we know that these 400 will return very quickly to the cycle of violence," Peled said...

....Since Israel's founding in 1948, Israel has participated in several dozen prisoner exchanges with its Arab neighbors, many of them lopsided in the Arabs' favor....

....Many Palestinians expressed disappointment with the deal, complaining that no prominent uprising figures are included....

Don't miss Allah's take on this.

But a person would have to be steeled for much frustration to live in Israel, so sitting here in the relatively complete security of my home I will not attempt to say anything for the brave residents of that country.

Here on the homefront, however, I can point out some problem areas that many of us may be trying to think through. For starters, when did the Bush administration start taking lessons in communication from a dead seatrout? Because I personally believe the dead trout would do a better job explaining the administration's position on the Iraq WMD question. A simple person might suggest, how about taking 2 minutes to state a few obvious truths which could go a long, long way toward shutting many critics up. Here, the Wall Street Journal provides the words and all the President has to do is read them before a camera:

Mr. Kay has also made clear that, stockpiles or no, Saddam's regime retained active programs that could have been reconstituted at any time. Saddam tried to restart his nuclear program as recently as 2001. There is also evidence, Mr. Kay has told the London Telegraph, that some components of Saddam's WMD program "went to Syria before the war." Precisely what and how much "is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

" The most logical conclusion is that Saddam hoped to do just enough to satisfy U.N. inspectors and then restart his WMD production once sanctions were lifted and the international heat was off.

But instead, as you and I and many, many, many, many others sit and watch, some genius is nudging our President toward the stone wall.

There are arguments to be made that are just not getting made, on this and related topics, and someone at the highest level of government - someone with the intials GWB - ought to be making them:

Returning the CIA to its elite status will take five to 10 years and will require constant pressure from the White House and Congress. They must start at the top, where Mr. Tenet has set the tone and direction of the CIA for almost a decade, largely to the agency's — and the nation's — detriment.

If the present course of action is not changed quickly, the administration's going to be pilloried on several issues, and the 'stonewall' charge could become an election-year issue.

A press conference could do wonders right now, both for George W. Bush's prospects in the November election, and more importantly for clearing up confusion among those Americans who get their news from the mainstream. A joint press conference, with that decent, eloquent man in Great Britain, would be a very good idea indeed.

Posted by hemmingway at 06:39 | Permalink

Good day, and thank you for joining us. We pick up now where we left off last evening, observing the gradual, inexorable turning of many minds to the topic of the tall fellow, like the scales of a dragon separately catching the light as it lumbers out into the sun. Will St. Jacques stand and fight, and will he be effective? Or will he, like his Furious predecessor, simply crack under the heat before the first real blows have been struck?

Well, if Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry, crude as it is, is any indication, the Frenchman has a fight on his hands. This was referred from Kate O'Beirne's latest column, No Vets’ Vet, which seems to promise more of the same. And it is not just about the war record; no, they're going to be examining the gentleman from every possible angle:

It is on this basis that the campaign sought early on to preempt questions of his wife's wealth — which also reminds voters why Kerry's populism rings rather tinny and staged — by claiming her money is off-limits. Her ability to direct money, however, even to otherwise permissible causes, is still subject to criticism should it appear designed to influence the election. A quid pro quo involving a tax-exempt organization, if it could be proved, would be impermissible at any time — not just in a campaign season.

This is healthy, mind you. I make this point lest there be any sense that the press is "ganging up" on the young man. There are things, very important things, that may be revealed with a bit of digging around. It's not dirt-digging if it simply reveals facts from the public domain that even Jacques' supporters probably have an interested in knowing. And for this of us who are still deciding what to think of the fellow from across the pond, we ought to be getting up to snuff in a jiffy.

Posted by hemmingway at 01:26 | Permalink

Hello and good evening. My name is Angus Hemmingway and I am pleased to join the Alpaca Burger Forum which until now has been constellated solely with the sharp observations and opinions of our own John Climacus. John was very kind to assume the duties of creating fresh material for this Web site while the rest of us have been tending to our various lives. It would have been even kinder if he had told us his life needed tending and he was going to take over two weeks off without telling anyone, but that is really neither here nor there. If we had taken the time to read the Forum more regularly we would have noticed the lag between entries, so shame on us as well.

For those who are interested, I will tell you that John has been overcome by a bout of chuckling that began about 8:00 pm last Monday night and he has not been able to lick it; perhaps this has contributed to his absence from the keyboard. I was able to locate his notes for upcoming postings and I will be happy to include these here for his many fans to enjoy.

I assume these need no context nor introduction:

"Smiling the smile of a man who's slaughtered a legion of his foes."

"Smiling the smile of a man who's just broken out of jail."

"Smiling the smile of a man who's tricked a schoolgirl out of her lunch money."

Well, that is enough of that.

I think by now the memory of Howard Dean, aka Mr. Furious, in his prime, is a poignant one. Those were fun days, funny days, and now they seem so distant. We don't have the Hateman to kick around anymore, it seems, just a mellow fellow who has ceded the center stage and will most likely slink home to the land of syrup and other confections. (And he may have been the only one with the right stuff to solve the North Korea problem). It's all too bad, really too bad, but it was fun while it lasted.

Now we have the big guy, French military standout, who is earning some deserved respect for his war record, as well as some scrutiny, and more scrutiny, and we expect much, much more in the near future. Under mild questioning during last week's debate he for an instant showed the pallor of the husband caught with lipstick on his collar. I believe the answer he was attempting to deliver had to do with what exactly he thought he was voting for when he voted to give the president authority to prosecute the war in Iraq. His hemming was vastly overshadowed by Mr. Sharpton's hawing on the Federal Reserve, however, and we can note that the latter will likely go down in history as one of the most sympathetic moments the Reverend will ever garner from a national audience, 99.9% of whom knew they were in for a spectacle before the question had even left the cruel Peter Jennings' lips. We laughed, we cried, then we laughed some more.

But it will be interesting to see how Jacques responds when the big dogs start to sniff him out. Because they are coming, you betcha, you betcha-betcha. And who knows, maybe Howard will get a second life. Lord knows there's enough time between now and the Brokering - I mean, the Convention.

Posted by hemmingway at 12:59 | Permalink

Oh golly, it rarely gets better than this.

O'NEILL: Yeah, and the other thing that's good, today the book is going to be available, and this red meat frenzy that's occurred when people didn't have anything except snippets -- as an example, you know, people are trying to make a case that I said the president was planning war in Iraq early in the administration. Actually, there was a continuation of work that had been going on in the Clinton administration with the notion that there needed to be regime change in Iraq.

COURIC: So you see nothing wrong with that being at the top of the president's agenda 10 days after the inauguration?

O'NEILL: Absolutely not. One of the candidates had said this confirms his worst suspicions. I'm amazed that anyone would think that our government, on a continuing basis across political administrations, doesn't do contingency planning and look at circumstances. Saddam Hussein has been this forever. And so, I was surprised, as I've said in the book, that Iraq was given such a high priority. But I was not surprised that we were doing a continuation of planning that had been going on and looking at contingency options during the Clinton administration.

Now, here is the helpfully filtered version of the event provided for you by the mainstream.

Posted by John Climacus at 11:29 | Permalink

When we first heard the phrase about 25 years ago we thought it was witty as all get out. Having just run across it several times in the course of a weekend - including here, here, here, here, and finally in Cal Thomas' latest column - we realize its time has passed, and resolve that until we come up with something different, we are simply going to say, "if anyone exemplifies XXXXXXX, it is YYYYYYYY."

Whether or not this decision of ours effects a worldwide change in the human condition, we are sticking with it, and let the chips fall where they may.

Posted by John Climacus at 09:52 | Permalink

Plenty of good talk going on about the immigration proposal.

For:

Andrew Sullivan

Captian Ed

Professor Bainbridge

Against (so far the nays have it, big time):

Mark Alexander

David Limbaugh

Kate O'Beirne

Diana West

Mark Krikorian

Middling:

Jonah Goldberg

William F. Buckley

Much discussion at The Corner yesterday and today.

Posted by John Climacus at 05:41 | Permalink

[The President George W. Bush Report is the first issue of a new online periodical published by the communications staff of Joe's Original Alpaca Burger corporate headquarters and the authors of newcounterculture.com.]

[This occasional newsletter is directed solely to President George W. Bush, carrying news and information of which we believe President George W. Bush really ought to be aware. We truly would like President George W. Bush to succeed because we believe he is a decent man and good leader. We suspect, however, that President George W. Bush gets bad advice at times, and we see it as our duty as citizens to try to nudge him back onto the right path.]

[It may seem unrealistic to think we will ever get this publication before the eyes of President George W. Bush, but we are betting that if we repeat the phrase 'President George W. Bush' enough times it will get picked up by the search engines. We are reasonably sure President George W. Bush has information people and security people scouring cyberspace on a regular basis so we do hold a slim hope that one of them may actually forward this to President George W. Bush. We have sent letters by e-mail and regular mail on various topics to President George W. Bush in the past but have concluded that tactic is slightly less effective than putting a note in a bottle and tossing it into the Potomac River, so we are going to rely on The President George W. Bush Report for all future correspondence.]

[If you happen to actually BE President George W. Bush, welcome to the Alpaca Burger Forum! Thanks so much for visiting and we hope you can find time to stop by regularly in the future. We promise always to get quickly to the point and let you get on with the nation's business.]

The President George W. Bush Report

Vol.1

January 7, 2004

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH:
YOUR 'BASE' IS GETTING A LITTLE CONCERNED HERE

President George W. Bush is being informed that a large segment of his conservative supporters are worried as a result of the announcement of his proposal to overhaul the U.S. immigration system. The details of this proposal have the base even more concerned than when the prescription drug program for seniors was announced. These Bush supporters believe the immigration plan will reward lawbreakers, make the U.S. less secure and depend on an unreliable 'honor system' to ensure temporary workers' return to their home countries.

Most importantly, conservatives believe the potential political benefit of expanded support from the Hispanic community is a pipe dream, and the Bush administration's obvious attempt to win votes in this way seems out of character. As a young conservative supporter said: "This is practically clintonesque. Why does he need to curry favor with anyone? He's the first president in my adult life to exhibit character and his popularity is growing because of it. This better be some kind of joke."

Other conservative supporters point out that Bush is more likely to score significant political gains by demonstrating principled leadership to potential 'Bush Democrats' in the Midwest and even California. One supporter who is now 'getting on the fence' said: "This year, he could win over former Democratic voters who may disagree with some of his positions but respect him as a person. If he loses that respect, he's going to lose liberal AND conservative voters regardless of his positions. There are a lot more people concerned about lax immigration policies than there are potential immigrant votes for Bush."

Some members of the conservative base have speculated that the immigration plan could be a ploy - designed to be shot down in Congress but still allowing President Bush to take credit for the gesture. These supporters advise that this course of action could backfire, especially if the eventual Democratic presidential nominee takes the likely tactic of running 'to the right' of the president on the homeland security issue.

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

THIS CONCLUDES THIS ISSUE OF THE PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH REPORT

Posted by John Climacus at 06:52 | Permalink

This is just great:

Arab translators cheered Sept. 11

FBI Whistleblower: 'Questions of loyalty' tainted interpretation of al-Qaida chatter

Take a moment to read the entire article just so's you'll know what we're dealing with because it is a big problem in Iraq as well. We have to rely on the good intentions of the locals in order to communicate. Not exactly a position of power. Unfortunately, as you already know if you're one of those who tried to delve into this after Sept. 11, it ain't pig latin.

Posted by John Climacus at 08:16 | Permalink

More death and destruction threats from al Qaeda, courtesy of Allah:

'We Are Capable of Destroying an American City'

Al Qaeda Threatens to Nuke New York on February 2

Al-Qa'ida's Al-Ablaj Warns 'Zero Hour' for Strike Inside US Has Been Set

Officials Say Terrorists May Be In Mexico Planning Attack

Posted by John Climacus at 06:07 | Permalink

This is interesting as a thoughtful and constructive response to the exploding head dilemma. It's well worth reading the whole thing. On whether it promotes a realistic possible direction for the Democratic Party, we at Joe's Original Alpaca Burger corporate headquarters cannot say for the simple reason that we don't spend much time with liberals on the basis of life being too short. But Andrew does and bully for him for taking a positive, serious approach to political phenomena that many of us can only lampoon, grumble about or - finally - gaze at blankly, like watching a paper bag blow across the road in your rearview mirror.

I think his hatred of Bush will shine through, and give a voice to millions of people who feel the same way. I think his belief in the supreme importance of government in people's lives deserves debate, and represents what the Democratic party is ultimately about....The Dems haven't given themselves an opportunity to vent about the way they really feel - about those benighted rednecks, dumb-ass preppies, preposterous puritans and economic snake oil-salesmen they believe are now running the country. It would be really unhealthy for America and the Democrats to repress that any longer...

Posted by John Climacus at 10:31 | Permalink

Gallup says Americans are happier than at any time since it began polling on the question in 1956.

Wealth, unsurprisingly, and marriage seem to be good indicators of happiness. But so is Republican Party affiliation. Who'da thunk it? And at a time when the best the other side can offer is the guy whose smile is the smile of a man about to steal your purse.

Can't we all just take a chill pill and 'Move On' past all the anger? Americans are happy. Republicans are happy. Investors are happy. Who are these few miserable whiners, weasels and crackpots trying to sell us on how bad we have it? If these are indeed normal people, whose wiring happens to get short-circuited every time they have to look at President Bush, perhaps they should just sit the next election out for health's sake, and come back out to play when they're feeling more like themselves.

Posted by John Climacus at 10:14 | Permalink

From Frontpagemag, this report that Chirac's decision to support banning the veil worn by Muslim women from French schools could be a big problem in a country with a huge and growing Muslim population:

In just one day, Chirac lost the lofty standing he had attained after many years of pacifying rogue Muslim states. As a result of his decision on the hijab, he has now acquired three lethal enemies: Hizbullah, the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran, meaning that France is now facing very imminent 'veiled' threats from two major terrorist networks and the largest terror-sponsoring state.

The proposal is not going over well with the mullahs.

And the controversy may be arising in Germany.

Yet at least one prominent voice within Islam says France is acting within its rights and Muslims can obey the law.

This is an important issue to watch because a central theme of islamofascist ideology concerns those Muslims who have not sufficiently taken up the cause. This is from the publication titled 'The Al-Battar Training Camp: The First Issue of Al-Qa'ida's Online Military Magazine':

The Muslims today love this world, hate death, and abandon Jihad, and therefore Allah has subjugated them to the infidel nations that humiliate them. This is the divine punishment meted out to anyone who abandons Jihad…

Oh Mujahid brother, in order to join the great training camps you don't have to travel to other lands. Alone, in your home or with a group of your brothers, you too can begin to execute the training program. You can all join the Al-Battar Training Camp.

The recurring theme of 'crusaders' in the publication is significant, and is explained in some detail in this article by Jonathan Riley-Smith in NRO:

It is this radical vision of crusade history which has suddenly and spectacularly forced itself on the outside world. Although merely a fantasy to the West, it finds expression in many Muslim societies. It is said that in mosques in Egypt, the word 'crusader' has become a synonym for 'Christian.' In Indonesia last year, local preachers were referring to the dead at Bali in the same terms.

Posted by John Climacus at 09:26 | Permalink

...we feel your pain.

This tender observation comes as a result of a recent visit with an old friend, an all-around good guy and Really Smart Guy, who happens to have gotten in the wrong line when they were handing out political affiliations. Actually we both got in that same line in the late 70s when we were in high school, but I got out of line around 1986 after: reflecting on my daughter's existence and changing my view on abortion; understanding Christianity for the first time after reading Kierkegaard's 'Philosophical Fragments' for about the third time; reading an article by Joseph Sobran called 'Pensees' (in a 1985 National Review, but sorry I can't find it online); and coming to realize that Ronald Reagan wasn't such an idiot after all. Thereafter a number of additional events reinforced my conservative viewpoint, and that process has continued pretty much every conscious moment.

My friend, who is arguably smarter than me and unarguably more successful, has remained in the liberal/Democrat camp, and for that reason we rarely discuss political issues anymore. When we do, I use him as a periodic sounding board to get an idea of the logic behind various liberal positions, and he views me as a candidate for exorcism as he tries to determine exactly when I sold my soul to the Original Conservative, Lucifer.

Mostly, though, we discuss family and books and movies and such, and we only see each other once or twice a year, this is as it should be.

This past weekend, however, I had a vague feeling that perhaps his views may have become more conservative in light of current events, so I brought up a number of questions on which I thought we might have some new common ground. Hours later, it was vividly clear to me that one should never undertake any kind of serious endeavor when inspired by vague feelings. The tenor of the conversation ranged from exasperation to vituperation and no minds were changed.

From my perspective, it was instructional to see firsthand how an intelligent person handles the chore of remaining true to what I consider radical tenets of the left-liberal ideology in light of real-world events that seem to challenge those ideas. In sum, I would describe it as follows: It's a difficult and desperate chore that makes one very angry and progressively ever angrier.

It takes work to argue: George W. Bush is a numbskull and has always been a numbskull, and nothing he has ever done was right unless it was forced upon him by a much smarter person. Nothing he has ever said was right unless it was written for him by a much smarter person.

It takes work to argue: Bush's economic policy is a disaster and will surely result in financial doom for most Americans.

It takes work to argue: The U.S. is generally on the wrong track in terms of prosecuting the War, and the capture of Saddam has not made us safer.

It takes work to argue: Howard Dean is correct about (pick any topic).

It takes work to argue: The mainstream media is biased...to the right.

It takes work to argue: Fox News is successful either because it owns the neanderthal demographic or because most Americans are stupid.

It takes work to argue: We'd all be better off if U.S. foreign policy followed the recommendations of the French, Germans and the U.N.

And when you are a very intelligent person who nonetheless is committed to doing all this work, and whose dedication to these tenets and the Party (of Weasels) which promotes them is akin to a diehard sports fan's lifelong commitment to their favorite team, I believe you keep running into the wall of reality which opposes your tenets with facts. And evidence suggests this makes you madder and madder, hitting that wall harder and harder, so you suffer a kind of cognitive dissonance and eventually your head will explode. That's what it looks like, anyway.

Watching Howard 'Mr. Furious' Dean, I saw this as a humorous predicament, but watching one of my friends go though it makes me realize it is a sad thing.

So to all the exploding head liberals out there, I extend my sympathy. When I was younger I worshipped the Dallas Cowboys, and whenever they lost to the Redskins it was like a dagger that kept stabbing me until the next game. Living in the D.C. area, I grew resentful and very nearly hateful of the 'Skins and their fans. So I know the feeling. But I could always count on the fact that eventually the Cowboys would whip the Redskins and all would be right with the world. For those on the left who will not change teams and are starting to realize that the next victory may never come, these appear to be dark times indeed.

Posted by John Climacus at 06:14 | Permalink

Continuing story, in Debka:

1. Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in northern Syria...

2. The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija...

3. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon...

If Debka is correct it puts the State Department in a 'delicate' situation, so don't expect to hear much about this until an escape hatch for Assad is found.

ADDITIONAL: Here's more on this, from WND.

Posted by John Climacus at 04:06 | Permalink

Realizing we are in danger of violating our sole 2004 resolution, we nevertheless cannot help ourselves when Rich Lowry unloads his 16 questions for the Really, Really Angry One. This is just a sample:

Did you have any favorite ski spots during the Vietnam War?

You have at various times said you supported NAFTA, and said you opposed any agreement like NAFTA. You have both said, "NAFTA is here to stay," and advocated negotiating a "New Deal" with Mexico. What the hell?

You say that Bush doesn't understand the needs of middle-class families. Yet your proposed full repeal of the Bush tax cut could, as some of your opponents point out, result in a $2,000 tax increase for a middle-class family of four. What do you understand about middle-class families' hunger for higher taxes that the rest of us don't?

Yes, it is all good fun but frightening at the same time, so not entirely silly.

Posted by John Climacus at 03:57 | Permalink

Let us hope this is the harbinger of an outbreak of common sense:

When Bush first ran for president in 2000, I found both his politics and his campaign methods anathema to the American concept of justice. I was with the many who questioned whether his intellect, interest and experience were commensurate with the demands of being the leader of the free world...

It wasn't until the president stood with firefighters and rescue workers at Ground Zero that I began to wonder if perhaps I'd misjudged him. Previously wooden while delivering prepared speeches, the man who shouted into the bullhorn from where the World Trade Center had stood in New York demanded to be heard. And I listened — the whole world listened.

I began to hope that our country finally had a leader who'd have the moral fortitude to say to our enemies around the world: Enough.

What's left unsaid is, I looked at the choices presented by my own party and was aghast that the only decent one among them was in fact a Republican.

After Joe 'Republican' Lieberman, one of our favorite non-weasel Democrats is Zell 'If I wasn't quitting politics I'd have switched parties by now' Miller, who penned this gem (sorry, registration required but it is free):

Memo to Terry McAwful

May the Democratic leaders get the anger they deserve.

....As this Park Avenue-born Vermont governor makes his maiden voyage South, with Southern strategist Al Gore beside him, I don't think he has to worry about pickup trucks or "God, guns and glory," as he puts it. Not in the primary, not this trip. But he should be forewarned. These folks are called "Value Voters." They go to church to seek salvation, not argue about bike paths. And they are just waiting to be heard from later. And they will be, loud and clear. And that's when you might hear certain folks really start cussin'.

The terrorists really did spoil the Party.

Posted by John Climacus at 12:48 | Permalink

Enlightening stuff from this recent book, Kenneth Timmerman's 'Preachers of Hate: Islam and the War on America', Crown Forum, New York. 2003. pp. 61, 190-191.

This is not a simple political dispute over territory, boundaries, and national sovereignty. It is a deep- seated hatred and denial of the other that has clear historic precedents and has found fertile ground in a Muslim world that has been in steady decline since the collapse of the Ottoman empire after World War I. Understanding this hate is of paramount importance for Americans, since we are seen as co-responsible with the Jews for the decline and fall of the empire of Islam...

The enmity being preached against America and the West has nothing to do with politics or support for Israel. It stems from the simple fact that we are not Muslims. This is the message that preachers across the Muslim world have been drilling into the minds and hearts of the faithful. "The Jews are the allies of the Christians, and the Christians are the allies of the Jews, [and] they are against you, O Muslims..."

In such a conflict there can be no peace, no negotiation, no accommodation, no coexistence. From the pulpits of Gaza and the West Bank, this is the message Palestinians are being taught: The conflict between Muslims and Jews is total, it is eternal, and it will end only when the Muslims have murdered the last Jew hiding behind a tree or stone, wherever he may be.

Depressing information, yes, but it explains the duplicity and intransigence of the PA and other terrorist organizations. This is not a war on 'terror,' it is a war on islamofascism. The only concessions the enemy will accept are our souls or our lives.

Posted by John Climacus at 06:05 | Permalink