Profoundly Wrong: Ready for a little guessing game? Try to figure out who made the following ludicrous statements in an article that came out today before I reveal it to you at the end. Ready? Here we go...

"Appeasement" has come to mean craven surrender to evil. But the policy of Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax meant something else entirely in the 1930s. My own view is that the word is retrievable from the ninth circle of hell."

"If we do not deep six this drive for some new empire, down the road an American city may pay the price."

======

Ready to guess? It's not Robert Fisk, Sean Penn, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, or Susan Sontag...it's....
|
|
|
|
|
Pat Buchanan -- the man who runs the magazine misleadingly titled "American Conservative". Fortunately, this was part of a Front Page Magazine symposium and Victor Davis Hanson & Michael Ledeen among others were on hand to refute Buchanan's drivel. But what can you say all the leftist nonsense that Buchanan is peddling in the name of "Conservatism?" If you want to get a good feel for what Buchanan considers "Conservatism", just take note of who "American Conservative" is interviewing for their current issue. Yes, of all people, they've chosen to interview Norman Mailer. Here's a quote from Norman Mailer about the WTC that you might find interesting...

"I'm sure that if those towers had been destroyed without loss of life, a lot of people would have cheered. Everything wrong with America led to the point where the country built that tower of Babel, which consequently had to be destroyed. And then came the next shock. We had to realize that the people that did this were brilliant. It showed that the ego we could hold up until September 10 was inadequate."

Personally, I think this war has driven Buchanan around the bend.....

I Finally Bought My First Gun: As some of you may remember, back in late October I asked RWN's readers for advice about what type of gun I should get. In the 66 posts that followed, I received some excellent recommendations. After much thought, I almost bought a Charter .38 for $260 + tax. But instead, I coughed up $367 + tax to acquire....drum roll please....an HS 2000.

You can go here to see all the details on this Croatian 9mm.

Ah, the 2nd Amendment, how sweet it is...

Union Petition: "Al Gore Please Run": At least one American union is already reacting to the recent news that Al Gore may not run for President in 2004. The Union of Comedians, Humorists, Satirists, Bloggers and Guys Who Crack Political Jokes at the Office (UCHSBGWCPJO) has begun circulating a petition pleading with the former vice president to reconsider.

"For the good of the economy...specifically our economy, Mr. Gore, please run for president," says the text of the petition. "No other potential candidate offers such rich opportunity for our profession."

While Sen. John Kerry's candidacy provides a ray of hope, since almost anyone can impersonate his dead-pan delivery, experts said he's just not inherently funny the way Mr. Gore has been for more than a decade.

"When I'm doing standup," said one comedian, "all I have to do is come out on stage and say 'Al Gore...' and the laughter starts. I'd really miss him."

If you liked this satire by Scott Ott, you can check out more of his work at Scrappleface

Quotes From Democrats And Leftists On Race & Anti-Semitism: Conservatives often believe that Democrats in general and liberals in particular get a free pass when it comes to race related remarks. Here are a few quotes that RWN has gathered up. Take a look at them and make up your own mind about the double standard......

Need Help With Quotations From The Left On Race: Many people have pointed out -- correctly I might add -- that there is a double standard when it comes to race. Conservatives get pounded on the issue while left-wingers largely get a pass.

Well, I've decided to do a series of quotes called, "The Left on Race -- The Quotations." If you have a race related quotes made by left-wingers that you'd like to contribute, please post it in the comments below. I have 18 so far and the numbers are rapidly rising. I'm looking for newer stuff mainly, although I will have a section for older quotes as well (Democrats Bull Connor and George Wallace have quotes included so far).

I would like a source if you have one so I can easily confirm the quote is legitimate. But if you don't have a source, that's fine. I'll look it up.

Barney-Cam!: The White House has released the first "Barney-Cam" home video. The video is about four minutes long and it follows the President's dog around the White House as he attacks a Christmas ornament, runs all over the place, hams it up for a crowd, and chomps on a bone. I thought it was entertaining -- but then I love dogs. If Bush had a cat I wouldn't care about this...

Warblogger -- The Game: Most of you have played Monopoly, Tekken, Madden 2002 and other "lesser games". But now, here on RWN, we're ready to introduce a new form of entertainment that'll soon sweep the internet world, "Warblogger -- The Game!"

Ok, Ok, I might have oversold you a bit in the introduction. Actually, I just decided to put something together to amuse the other warbloggers out there. But you just wait until I finish "Conservatism -- The Game." That one will have some real appeal...

Time For Lott To Step Aside: Among the prominent Conservatives, Republicans, and respected Libertarians who have explicitly called for Trent Lott to step down as Majority Leader are...

Neal Boortz, Linda Chavez, Jonah Goldberg, David Horrowitz, Jeff Jacoby, Charles Krauthammer, Deroy Murdock, Peggy Noonan, Glenn Reynolds, Thomas Sowell, Andrew Sullivan, & Armstrong Williams.

Even if you simply think Lott simply made a mistake in phrasing and didn't mean to make a statement that sounded racist, do you really think Lott can effectively lead the Senate now? It's one thing to have a bunch of ultra-sensitive liberals calling you a racist since they'll make the charge at the drop of a hat. But, when a significant portion of your own Conservative base is questioning whether you're a racist or not, you're going to be politically crippled. So I'm imploring Trent Lott to do the right thing & step down as majority leader. That's what a real leader who actually cares about the Party would do in a situation like this.

***Update***: President Bush has not asked Trent Lott to step down -- at least publicly. However, according to the Washington Post, GWB has weighed in on Lott's comments personally now. W. said...

"This great and prosperous land must become a single nation of justice and opportunity. We must continue our advance toward full equality for every citizen, which demands ... a guarantee of civil rights for all.

He has apologized, and rightly so. Every day our nation was segregated was a day that America was unfaithful to our founding ideals. And the founding ideals of our nation and, in fact, the founding ideals of the political party I represent was and remains today the equal dignity and equal rights of every American."

***Update #2***: I caught Lott's apology on radio while I was driving home tonight and unlike some other pundits, I thought he sounded sincere.

That being said -- it changes nothing. Lott is too politically crippled to be an effective Senate Majority Leader. The comments he made are sticking because he took so long to effectively address the situation and more importantly because Lott has been involved in several other small race based flaps in the past. Leaders have to be held to higher standards and unfortunately for Trent Lott, he isn't cutting it. There is no way we in the GOP can be taken seriously when we talk about how important a color blind world is when we have Trent Lott as Senate Majority Leader. To maintain credibility on the issue for the GOP, Lott will have to step down and let someone else take up the leadership role -- unless we want to do the same thing the Democrats did throughout the Clinton years and slavishly support the indefensible. The Democrats paid a heavy price for that at the ballot box and we will too if Lott remains in place...

Gore in 2004? Don't Buy The Hype About Him Not Running: In today's New York Times we're supposedly getting quite the scoop. According to the NYT's source, Al Gore won't be running for President in 2004...

"...(I)n interviews, a half-dozen friends, advisers and other close associates of Mr. Gore, all of whom spoke on condition of anonymity and many of whom expressed a wish that he would run, said his demeanor and actions since Election Day had convinced them that this was becoming increasingly unlikely.

"He is really sort of assessing whether he is the best person to take on Bush and whether the rest of the party and other people in the country would respond better to somebody new," one close associate said. "He really, really feels that the country is heading in the wrong direction. He certainly has the energy and appetite to do it. But if there's someone else who would really carry the mantle and really be who the party wants, then he's not going to stand in the way of that."

There are several things that have happened lately that might make you think this is a credible story -- at first glance. Al & Tipper's new book "Joined at the Heart" is currently sitting at 3,999 on Amazon while their book "The Spirit of Family" is at 1,707. That's not too impressive considering all the favorable press Al and Tipper have getting lately. Then their is the fact that Byron Dorgan and Barney Frank asked Gore not to run again. You also have to note that not only has John Kerry almost tied Gore in New Hampshire polls, but 44% of Democrats say they don't want Gore to run again. So should we buy into Gore stepping aside?

No way. First off, while Kerry is doing well in New Hampshire, nationally Gore has been polling the high forties while his closest rival, Joe Lieberman who says he will only run if Gore doesn't, is polling at around ten percent. Moreover, most political insiders believe that Gore will be the candidate for the Democrats is he decides to run. That being the case, we have to wonder if Gore still has any 'fire in his belly.'

I'd certainly say so. Come on, this is the guy who has been running around saying for all intents and purposes that Bush stole the election from HIM after Gore tried every dirty trick in the book to hijack the presidency in the partisan FSSC. He's also been campaigning for months with scathing attack after attack on the Bush administration. Gore flip-flopped on invading Iraq, even though it made his party look bad at the time, in all likelihood because all of the other major contenders for the presidency were supporting the invasion. So to sum it up, Gore is a political animal who has one more shot at the presidency in 2004. Personally, I think he'd sooner chop the pinkie finger on his left hand than drop out of the race.

So what is this all about? I'm guessing that Gore has decided to copy Ross Perot's strategy from 1992. Back then, nobody was particularly excited about Bill Clinton or George Bush so there was definitely an opening out there for a strong independent candidate. Enter Ross Perot. Perot is sitting around on Larry King and making it clear that he doesn't care one whit about being President -- but -- if people can get his name on all the ballot in all 50 states he'll run. The more Perot tried to give off the vibe that he really wasn't all that interested in being President, the hotter people got for him. It's that old, "people want what they can't have" effect. Eventually, Perot even pulled 30% of the vote in a national poll before he self-destructed and ended up pulling 19% of the vote.

I have to wonder if Gore is trying to use the same trick to generate some sorely needed enthusiasm for his campaign by getting a few of his friends to claim he's going to drop out. The theory being that if the Democratic base thinks Gore is about to drop out (they're going to lose him), then the base will start begging Gore to stay in. Then Gore comes out in January and says in so many words that he decided to stay in the race because of the all pledges of support he's received lately. That wouldn't be the worst strategy I've ever heard and I'd consider that a lot more plausible than a front-running Gore simply deciding to let some empty suit like John Kerry or John Edwards take "his spot." We should know for sure within a month or so, but color me very skeptical about the chances of Gore dropping out.

The American Way Of Rebuilding: They're still trying to figure out what to build at the WTC site but I love this idea...

"Several new plans for Ground Zero call for erecting what would be the tallest building in the world on the disaster site - giving terror-battered lower Manhattan a new, distinctive skyline, sources said yesterday. The new skyscraper would rise about 1,500 feet, eclipsing the world's tallest buildings, the Petronas Twin Towers in Malaysia, which stand 1,483 feet.

The bold proposals are part of more expansive plans being presented privately this week to rebuilding officials. A master plan is expected to be finalized by Jan. 31, under a new fast-tracked schedule."

There's just something so powerful, so defiant, so..so..American about those plans. You knocked down the WTC? Fine, we'll come back and build the world's tallest building as replacement. In your face al-Queda. I don't know if they'll actually go this way, but I'd really be pleased if they did...

The New Last Refuge of Scoundrels by Alan Caruba: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel," said Samuel Johnson on April 7, 1775. If the great man of British letters were alive today, he might amend that to say that, in America, "environmentalism is the new last refuge of scoundrels." I surely would.

I was reminded of Johnson's quote by two other quotes. They were by aspiring candidates for the Democrat Party's nomination to be president in 2004. The trigger was news that the Environmental Protection Agency had decided to revise the rules concerning how much "pollution" could be released by utilities upon which we depend for electricity. (Cont)

The Stars Explain What You Sheep Should Think: I'm jazzed because I finally got my hands on the statement from Artists United to Win Without War. They are a bunch of empty headed stars like Matt Damon, Mike Farrell, Alec Baldwin, Harry Belafonte, Tim Robbins, Barbra Streisand, Ethan Hawke, Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, Ed Asner, Laurence Fishburne & Martin Sheen among others. Here's what they had to say...

"War talk in Washington is alarming and unnecessary.

"The valid U.S. and U.N. objective of disarming Saddam Hussein can be achieved through legal diplomatic means. There is no need for war. Let us instead devote our resources to improving the security and well-being of people here at home and around the world."

This is of course standard lefty anti-war drivel. They claim that "Saddam Hussein cannot be allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction" but they are protesting the only possible way to take them away from Hussein. Even with the threat of imminent attack hanging over Saddam's head, Hussein is still not willing to disarm. What's the plausible alternative these stars are offering? As per usual with the anti-war movement, they don't have one.

Moreover, there is no "reversal of long-held American tradition" in Bush's pre-emptive attack doctrine. Over the years, the US has CONSTANTLY attacked other nations that haven't attacked us first. Even Clinton did it. What attack did Somalia make on us that forced us to run around trying to capture warlords over there? What about Serbia, did they attack us? Iraq was no threat to US citizens before the Gulf War. What about our invasions of Panama and Grenada? We can go on and on with this -- even Korea and Vietnam are examples of attacks on other nations that didn't directly threaten our country. Considering that Iraq is run by an aggressive dictator who hates the US, has ties to terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, and who has threatened to launch terrorist attacks at our country if we attack, this invasion meets a standard that few other conflicts have since WW2. In fact, considering that this invasion of Iraq is part of a War on Terrorism started by an attack on American soil, this is as morally justified a war as America has ever fought.

Paul Bond also shows exactly which side of the ideological divide that this group comes from...

"The best bit of levity came at the close of the hour-long event. It had been suggested by some of the dozen celebrities in attendance that Artists United to Win Without War was nonpartisan.

Asked to name a Republican among the group, Farrell claimed there were some, but quipped, "I don't want to out them."

Sure there are members of the GOP in there Mike -- we believe you! I also love this remark from Ed Asner...

"Asner was critical of the American public as well, for its support of Bush's approach to Iraq.

"They're sheep," he said. "They like him enough to credit him with saving the nation after 9/11. Three thousand people get killed, and everybody thinks they're next on the list. The president comes along, and he's got his six-guns strapped on, and people think he's going to save them."

We're big stars!!!! Either you have to do what we tell you to or you're a bunch of sheep!!! I'm Ed Asner, I used to be Lou Grant on "The Mary Tyler Moore Show" -- do you hear me out there? Pay attention you sheeple -- I was the voice of Joe the Dog in "Here's Looking at You, Kid" so you must do as I say because I'm famous!!

When stars attack -- it just doesn't get much more entertaining than this for Conservative pundits...

I Thought The Right-Wing Was Supposed To Be 'Extreme?: Left-wingers love to complain about right-wing rhetoric, call members of the GOP extreme, and claim that we inspire violence against the left.

Yet, it's amazing how much bizarre paranoia & extremism you can actually find on the left these days. Take this page called "Not In Our Name". They're anti-war left wingers with links to the real 'not in our name page', Indy Media, Buzzflash, Gore in 2004, Znet & What Really Happened among others.

But these lefties also suggest murdering a number of people including President Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Richard Myers (US Air Force), & Tony Blair.

Here's the commentary from the page...

"To the thousands of innocent people who lost their families till now and get lost their families in brief by British and U.S. bombing. Here are the warhogs and murders of your families. You have a right to kill them like they kill yours.

The murders of your families!
You have the right to kill this crimes.

It is a new valid international law to kill worldwide any people without proofs called collateral damage and decided by this persons. Send them their bombs back in terms of NEW WORLD ORDER because they told you it's legal!"

Someone ask Tom Daschle if that's as bad as being called an "obstructionist"....

Thanks to fellow VRWC member Michele Catalano at A Small Victory for pointing this web page out.

Salon's Hypocrisy: The dot.com bubble has long since burst but Salon is still holding on by their fingertips on their left hand. Undoubtedly, Salon will eventually drop into the bottomless $76.6 million money pit they've created for themselves -- but it won't be soon enough for me.

Salon has posted some pretty sick stuff before, but I think the incredible hypocrisy of their current letters page may take the cake.

First off, look at this letter that Salon has chosen to publish...

"Another reason right wingers are so keen on the supposed McVeigh-Iraqi connection is the hope that McVeigh's beliefs and actions will be distanced from their own political views. The truth is that Timothy McVeigh was the end product of rhetoric that the right still uses to further its interests."

Gee, isn't that basically the same line that Tom Daschle tried to use? Ya know, today Rush Limbaugh calls Daschle an "obstructionist", and the next day hundreds of crazed right-wing assassins start gunning for Daschle's family? Ok, so we get the left's point of view on this -- criticizing your political opponents causes a bunch of nuts to start trying to shoot Democratic Senators and blow up Federal buildings. So, then how does Salon justify posting the following letter on the SAME PAGE as the last one?

"Wow. I thought there was no good news anymore until I read your article about the McDonald's bombings. If extremists -- or even just people with healthy taste buds -- could torch every McDonald's in existence without hurting any personnel, and blow up all the KFCs to boot, the world could only become a better place.

The only thing that irks me, as an American, is that McDonald's and Americanism are considered synonymous. I've lived in America all my 47 years, and I never gave that corporation permission to represent my culture. I haven't even eaten at a McDonald's since I became old enough to know better. Let the world know that many of us Americans consider corporations like McDonald's oppressive alien entities. And pass the gasoline!"

It's amazing isn't it? Salon can print a letter blaming unspecified right wing "rhetoric" for causing Timothy McVeigh to blow up a building right after a letter talking about the merits of bombing and arson.

Furthermore, I really have to believe that this letter represents the views of Salon. I say that because after reading Salon's letter pages, EVERY OTHER LETTER on both pages seems to be either heaping praise on Salon or putting forth a liberal viewpoint that Salon would surely agree with. So wouldn't it be logical to assume that Salon is posting letters that generally represent its views?
For shame Salon, for shame...

Thanks to Crooow Blog for pointing those letters out.

The GOP Vs. Trent Lott: Some of the comments from Conservatives and members of the GOP about Lott's comments...

Rush Limbaugh had this to say about Lott's comments, "What Lott said is utterly indefensible and stupid. I don't even want to attempt to explain or defend it. Yes, there's a double standard on this stuff, but you have to take this into account before you open your stupid mouth."

David Horowitz says adios to Lott, "If he was oblivious to the implications of his outrageous remarks at Thurmond's party, that is reason enough for him to step down as Republican leader in the Senate. The stakes are simply too high to allow this kind of political stupidity (which is to put the best spin on it) to pass without consequence. It is bad for the Republican Party and for the country."

My comments from yesterday, "(I)t's absolutely inexcusable for the Senate Majority Leader to say that sort of thing... Hey, Newt Gingrich made Lott look like Jimmy Carter in the political acumen department and he had to take a bullet for the party over less than this. Maybe Trent can take a lesson from Newt and step aside. I would be pleased if he did...."

Robert George In National Review says, "Ultimately though Bush, Rove, and Co. have to ask: "an George W. Bush and the Republican party really afford to have Trent Lott (R., Miss.) be its face in the United States Senate?...Do they want someone who deserves to be Senate Majority Leader - or a man who seems to continually fantasize being white majority leader?"

Andrew Sullivan On Lott, "Trent Lott Must Go: Sorry to those who think I'm making too much of this. But it seems to me that the G.O.P. has zero credibility on racial matters until they get rid of this man as Senate Majority Leader."

Jonah Goldberg of National Review weighs in, "His remarks...were incandescently idiotic according to any criteria....On the facts, Lott's comments were dumb. Morally, they were indefensible. Politically, they served to confirm the suspicions of millions of blacks and liberal whites about what is in the hearts of conservatives and Republicans while earning him nothing but a smile from a 100 year-old man."

Armstrong Williams concludes, "Then as now, there was scarcely little condemnation amongst Mr. Lott's colleagues. This needs to change. Our Republican leaders cannot keep squinting their eyes to Lott's racial insensitivity. As congressmen, they bear a dual responsibility to represent the nation's conscience and to act as respectable faceplates for the party. By giving Lott a pass on his racist-seeming remarks, they've suggested the worst kind of stereotype: that lurking beneath the Republican party is a private identity that harkens back to a time when blacks were valued only as a cheap source of labor."

Former Bush speechwriter David Frum writes, "What came out of his mouth was the most emphatic repudiation of desegregation to be heard from a national political figure since George Wallace's first presidential campaign. Lott's words suggest that one of the three most powerful and visible Republicans in the nation privately thinks that desegregation, civil rights, and equal voting rights were all a big mistake.

These would be disgraceful thoughts to think, if Lott thought them. If Lott thought them, any Republican who accepted his leadership would share in the disgrace. So Lott needs to make it clear that he does not in fact think them. He owes his party, his state, his country, and his conscience something more - something much more - than a curt "I am sorry if you were offended." If he can't do that, Republicans need to make it clear that Lott no longer speaks for us."

Virginia Postrel on Lott, "Black voters aren't the only ones turned off by Jim Crow nostalgia. The best way to position Republicans as intolerant barbarians is to keep Lott around as Senate leader. Plus he's smarmy."

Lott is damaged beyond repair with his own party. There is absolutely no way he should remain Senate Majority leader after what he's said and the insincere sounding apologies he has given afterwards. The best argument that can even be made for Lott at this point is that he's a bumbling incompetent who keeps putting his foot in his mouth and is not a racist. Is that the sort of guy we need leading the charge in the Senate?

I know we can complain about the hypocrisy of the Democrats over Robert Byrd, Clinton's segregationist mentor, Jesse Jackson's "hymietown" comment, etc -- but that doesn't excuse Lott. I think it's time for a change -- and soon.

***Update***: Drudge is now leading with a story from the Washington Post that points out that Lott has made very similar comments before.

Not only do I think that Lott should not be the Senate Majority Leader, I don't think he will be the Senate Majority Leader when this is over. Lott could survive this sort of beating from the left, but not from the right -- and the right is hitting Lott harder than the left. Lott has forever more been politically crippled by his thoughtless words and his abysmal handling of the controversy that surrounded them. So the sooner Trent Lott does the right thing and relinquishes his leadership position, the better.

***Update #2***: Sean Hannity interviews Trent Lott about the controversy which you can listen to the interview on Real Player here. Hannity asks all the right questions and Lott certainly made an effort to sound sincere. But, I honestly think Lott has waited too long, is too badly damaged, and has raised too many legitimate questions of race. I still want Lott gone and I still believe he's toast as Senate Majority Leader...

***Update #3***: Oh *@%#, Bush has decided to back Lott...

"White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said President Bush backed Lott's apology and said Lott had sufficiently addressed the issue.

"I think that people themselves recognize how tough the job is and that you should be focused on the future and not on the past," he concluded."

I completely and utterly disagree with the President on this issue. Bush shouldn't be backing Lott, he should be leading the charge to get rid of him. This is definitely a mistake...

***Update #4***: If you want to get see Trent Lott removed from his position of leadership, feel free to email your Senators from here.

The US Gravy Train: Great cartoon from CNSNEWS...

Thanks to American Realpolitik for pointing this cartoon out.

French to Send Surrender Advisors to Iraq: Paris -- In a stunning reversal of policy, French President Jacques Chirac announced today that the French government will be supporting the War on Terror after all. Five hundred soldiers from the elite L'Abandonnement du Field d'Honneur Battalion (French Surrender Battalion) of the Legion Etrangere (Foreign Legion) are in the process of shipping out to Iraq where they will assist the elite Iraqi Republican Guards in their inevitable surrender to the overwhelming might of the American Armed Forces.

"Eet ees important to be haughty and insufferable when surrendering," said General Philippe de Peepee, the Commanding Officer of the Surrender Battalion, who has personally surrendered in over 200 battles going back to Dien Bien Phu in 1954. "We French are ze world masters at surrendering, n'est ce pas, not like you arrogant Americans who never surrender. Ha, I spit on your filthy American victories."

President Chirac also announced that his government will be sending 3000 advisors from the elite Force du Collaborateur Francaise (French Collaboration Force) to assist the Iraqis in collaborating with the Americans while pretending to be part of a non-existent resistance movement.

If you liked this satire by William Grimm, read more of his work at Broken News.

The Best Columnists In The Business: My favorite editorial columnists on the net in order...

10) Michelle Malkin: Michelle somehow manages to ferret out gripping stories no one else is talking about for her columns.

9) Andrew Sullivan: I enjoy Sully's editorials quite a bit. Now if he'd just set up a separate permalink on his blog for every post he makes he'd really be rolling.

8) Dick Morris: Dick Morris is a purely political animal and that's why I like him. His columns rarely take anything into consideration other than the political ramifications an act. Some might call that cynical but I think of it as a fresh perspective.

7) Charles Krauthammer: An insightful, thoroughly Conservative writer who doesn't get his due. He's not as flashy as some of the other people on the list but rarely does he write a bad column.

6) Walter Williams: Nobody in the business is better at taking a complex subject, particularly an economic one, and breaking it down so that it's easy to understand.

5) David Horowitz: Horowitz is a brilliant writer who never hesitates to tackle controversial subjects and who delights in savaging the excesses to the left.

4) Jonah Goldberg: Goldberg may be the most thought provoking editorial writer out there. Every 3 or 4 columns he writes something so profound that I end talking about it on RWN.

3) Ann Coulter: Unequaled in ferocity, Ann Coulter is not only never boring, she's the left's toughest critic.

2) Victor Davis Hanson: Elegant writing and Hanson's extensive knowledge of military history make VDH's Friday columns required reading.

1) Mark Steyn: Steyn is a truly gifted wordsmith who can turn a phrase, make you laugh, or hammer home a point better than anyone else in the business.

Airport Security? Our Government Is On The Case: After 9/11, airport security was a top priority of our government. Surely by now all the kinks have been knocked out right? Absolutely! Now our airport security is just as efficient and well run as other government agencies -- like the INS and the post office. Want proof? Columnist John Grogan has seen the quality of our airport security for himself...

"I was sitting in Detroit Metropolitan Airport, waiting for my flight home, when a voice came over the intercom. Because of increased security concerns, it said, agents would be conducting random searches of passengers at the boarding gate.

The suspect stood 5 foot even and had the heft of a sparrow. She sported silver hair sensibly cut, a knit sweater, stretch slacks and red suede boots. She was 80 if she was a day. She looked like she might have been Strom Thurmond's prom date."

Ah, an 80 year old grandmother -- an obvious choice! After all, who'd ever suspect her of being strapped with enough TNT to take down a plane? HA! Our airport security -- that's who!!

"Meanwhile, sitting right next to her were three very large men dressed top to bottom in - this is not a misprint - militia-style camouflage.

Hello? Earth to security? We have a reunion of Timothy McVeigh's cellmates here, and who do you single out to frisk? Grandma Walton.

Come on -- it's not the people wearing camouflage or even the young Arabs with Taliban style beards, weird bulges under their coats, and autographed pics of Osama Bin Laden they're carrying on the plane we have to watch out for, it's your Grandma. But Grogan doesn't get it -- just read this line from his editorial...

"Call me a raving profiler, but I'm willing to make the bigoted assumption that anyone born prior to the Coolidge administration is probably not going to hijack my flight. And if she did, I know I could disable her simply by sneezing on her.

Sure Grogan, that old woman may seem harmless -- until that 80 year old granny has cut your throat ear to ear with a box-cutter while she's screaming for Jihad and trying to get her sneakers to explode.

All right, enough fun and games. When are we going to fix airport security? I do realize that the habitual incompetence of the government makes them ill suited to handle airport security but since they've decided to take on the responsibility, they need to get the job done. We're more than a year out from 9/11 so as far as I'm concerned, the time for excuses has long since passed.

Could Jimmy Carter Be More Annoying?: When you consider that Jimmy Carter destroyed the US economy, crippled the military, had a disastrous foreign policy, and did such a generally lousy job that some people thought the US was going to lose its status as a super power, you'd think he'd be sparing in his advice to the current POTUS. After all, having Jimmy Carter give George W. Bush advice would be like having Andrea Yates running a seminar for new parents. In fact, I've gone so far as to call Carter a "reverse-barometer" on foreign policy. Whatever he recommends -- do the opposite. And today's comments from Carter are no exception.

To begin with, Jimmy had this to say about the United Nations...

"If there is (Iraqi) compliance, as judged by the U.N. Security Council, then I see no reason for armed conflict...The United Nations is the best place for nations to resolve the differences that always exist."

Notice that Jimmy doesn't actually care if Saddam is REALLY in compliance, it's whether or not the U.N. Security Council judges that Iraq has complied. It doesn't matter that we know Saddam is lying, that the inspectors have already found artillery shells tipped with mustard gas, or that an Iraqi Lt. General admits Iraq is on the, "verge of developing nuclear weapons." No, according to Jimmy Carter, this will only be a moral war if we get a totalitarian Chinese regime and the French & Russians (who have huge financial incentives to keep Saddam in power) to agree with us. So, if say Jacques Chirac decides he'd rather have an anti-American, terrorist friendly regime that may soon have nuclear weapons in power in Iraq so French businessmen will profit, oh well, Carter thinks the US should step aside since we couldn't get the entire UN Security Council to agree with us. Do you see why I call Carter a "reverse-barometer?"

Then Carter decides to do a little Israel bashing. Pay special attention to the words I placed in bold...

One of the key factors that arouses intense feelings of animosity in the world is the festering problem in the Holy Land, the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and the inability of Israel to live in peace with its neighbors.

"I think that is an exacerbating factor in dividing people, not only in the West Bank, Gaza and Israel, but also throughout the world."

Israel's "inability...to live in peace with its neighbors?!?!?" Well I'm sure it is remarkably hard to be at peace with nations that have wanted nothing more for the last half century than to wipe your country off the face of the Earth. I suppose that by Carter's standards the Jews in WW2 Germany had an "inability..to live in peace with...their neighbors" as well. If only the Israelis would convert to Islam or better yet, just commit mass suicide, then I'm sure all their neighbors would like them just fine. Is this what Carter has in mind? Of course not, because Carter is hopelessly naive and he thinks there is a reasonable, peace-loving pacifist inside of every power hungry, anti-Semitic dictator that's just waiting to get out. But that sort of peacenik pipe dream is not, never has been, and never will be reality. But don't try to explain that to our Nobel Peace Prize winning ex-President because he'll never be able to grasp the obvious. That was a big part of why he was such a wretched President and why he's still so annoying today...

Rough Week-End For The GOP: There was a lot of bad news for the GOP this week-end including...

The firing of Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill, and chief economic adviser Lawrence B. Lindsey: Both O'Neill and Lindsey are smart, competent guys. But, Lindsey was reportedly combative and O'Neil seemed to blurt out some dumb comment about every month or so. If the economy was humming along, both of them might have survived, but with a soft economy, firing them is a good political move - especially since both of them are easily replaceable. In fact, O'Neil's spot has already been filled by John W. Snow, a smooth talking railroad executive who'll probably be a better fit than O'Neil. Short-term, the Democrats will get in some cheap shots on this issue but long-term it's a good move.

Mary Landrieu Defeats Suzanne Haik Terrell In The Louisiana Senate Race: I thought Haik Terrell had the momentum in this race but Landrieu pulled it out. I don't suppose that this should be a big surprise for anybody since there hasn't been a GOP Senator in Louisiana since reconstruction. But, this is a significant loss for the GOP for at least a couple of reasons. Not only does Landrieu's win buoy a Democratic Party that was despondent after the 2002 elections, it also leaves the GOP majority a little thinner than I'd like. If a GOP senator were to die in a state with a Democratic governor and a GOP senator jumped or if let's say John McCain and Lincoln Chafee were to change parties, the Dems could regain control of the Senate. But that being said, both of those are unlikely scenarios and there is a silver lining -- this loss will help keep the GOP from getting cocky -- and that's a good thing.

Trent Lott's Moronic Comment: Trent Lott had this to say at a 100th birthday party and retirement celebration for Strom Thurmond,

"I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."

Of course, back then Thurmond had been nominated for President by the ultra-racist Dixiecrat faction of the Democratic Party and was fighting against "anti-lynching" laws and was heavily backing segregation. So having Lott say he was "proud of voting for him" and suggesting that "the rest of the country (should have) followed our lead" is a huge blunder.

Now I'm sure Lott only made that comment because he was trying to be nice to Thurmond at his retirement party. However, it's absolutely inexcusable for the Senate Majority Leader to say that sort of thing -- especially since it plays right into the false racist stereotype that Democrats continually try to pin on Republicans. All of this is on top of the fact that I've never been particularly impressed with Trent Lott to begin with. Therefore, I can't say that I'd be unhappy if he were ousted over this remark. Hey, Newt Gingrich made Lott look like Jimmy Carter in the political acumen department and he had to take a bullet for the party over less than this. Maybe Trent can take a lesson from Newt and step aside. I would be pleased if he did....

***Update***: Instapundit is hammering Lott and now Drudge is weighing in. Worse yet, Lott's remarks were so idiotic that I'm finding myself inclined to agree with Al Sharpton (Let the ice skating tournament in hell begin)...

"According to Sharpton: "Lott's statements are blatant racism at the highest order, and are insulting to all Americans at a time that America needs to be unified." In a time of unprecedented attacks on the American way of life, to have the majority leader of the U.S. Senate give tacit support to a white segregationist's political philosophy, is frightening and offensive."

"The Republican Party has said that it wants to reach out to minorities, whom have historically felt uncomfortable with being members of their party in any great numbers. Now the Republican Party has an opportunity to show they sincerely reach out, by repudiating Lott's statements and asking him to step aside as Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate."

Wish List: Down the road, I plan to have a couple of different type of ads and a tip jar on RWN. However, I currently make no money off of RWN -- which is fine with me.

On the other hand, I have had several people ask if there is a way to contribute money to RWN or to buy ads on the page. Well, as I said, I don't have a tip jar yet, but if you like RWN and you're so inclined, feel feel to buy something for me off of my wish list for Christmas. Anyone who buys me a Segway gets bonus points =D

Boeing to Market 'Mini-Predator': Seattle -- Buoyed by the success in the War on Terror by its Predator(r) unarmed drone plane that is able to deliver a bomb with pinpoint accuracy while being controlled thousands of miles away, the Boeing Corporation has rushed into production a miniature version to be marketed to the fathers of teenage daughters.

Fred "Sparky" Burke, Chief of Engineering for Boeing, is the mastermind behind the design of the "Mini-Predator." "Let me tell you," said Mr. Burke, "I've got five daughters ranging in age from 13 to 19, and you should see the scumbags they bring home. It's enough to give a guy a heart attack. Well, the super-sensitive spy camera on the 'Mini-Predator' allows me to keep my daughters under constant surveillance when they're out on dates. I just sit back in my La-Z-Boy and watch the direct downlink from my satellite dish. And if any dreadlock-wearing creep with tattoos and nose piercings even thinks about getting fresh with Bonnie Sue, Bobbie Sue, Daisy Sue, Jamie Sue or Cindy Sue, it's wrath of God time. I've neutralized the last six boyfriends my daughters have had in addition to two prom dates."

Many industry analysts believe that the "Mini-Predator" will increase Boeing's bottom line by a factor of ten in just the first quarter of 2003 alone. Some economists, however, are more cautious in their predictions, citing the "Mini-Predator's" potential to wreak havoc on the already weak insurance and condom industries.

If you liked this piece of satire by William Grim, you can see more of his work at Broken Newz.

RWN's Favorite Quotations From Winston Churchill: Like many Americans, I am a huge fan of Winston Churchill. He was a brilliant, prescient, and courageous man who helped save the world from being pinned under a Nazi boot. There is a lot that can be learned from Winston Churchill -- so read and enjoy these quotes from a man who can truly be considered a titan among men...