In Defense Of Rick Santorum: The vast majority of the criticism that Rick Santorum is currently receiving is unfair and in some cases is designed to deliberately distort what he actually said. Since his critics are continuing to pile on, I thought he deserved a stronger defense than the one I gave him earlier this week.

To begin with, Santorum was airing a very valid concern in the interview that got him into trouble. If the sodomy law in question is overturned by the Supreme Court based on the "right to privacy", then it's very possible that a number of other sex acts might be defended using the exact same argument. I'd say bestiality and incest between adults would probably fall into that category. That would not be a problem if the law were rescinded locally, but if the Supreme Court shoots it down because of the "right to privacy" then it does have wider implications. (Cont)

I Want To Tell The Millions Of People Listening That I've Been Silenced: The, "Help! They're Squashing My Dissent Club" gets larger and more ludicrous by the day. In this case, it's Paul Begala going off the deep end on the Don Imus show. Here's how Newsmax described it...

""Everybody who supports Bush kind of knows in their bones that he is kind of our Kim Jong-il," the bitter-sounding Clintonista told radio host Don Imus. "[He's] sort of the befuddled ne'er-do-well son of a former leader. We know he's not quite up to the job, so we overreact."

Defending the Bush-bashing Texas singing group the Dixie Chicks, Begala continued the comparison between Kim and Bush, complaining that "any criticism of the beloved leader [draws the response] 'They must be hanged, they must be imprisoned, they must be silenced.'"

First of all, who are these people who have been "hanged", "imprisoned" & "silenced" for criticizing Bush? Did the FBI sweep in on the Dixie Chicks after their interview with Diane Sawyer and send them off to Guantanamo Bay? Is Michael Moore being hung by his ankles in some dank hellhole in the Texas desert? Could Tim Robbins be on his knees begging Don Rumsfeld to shoot him instead pulling out another one of his fingernails at this very moment? Come on, Paul give us the scoop on this horrible oppression.

Furthermore, it's very ironic to hear a man who rips Bush to shreds day in and day out on his TV SHOW WITH CNN going on a radio show with 15 MILLION LISTENERS and complaining that people who do what he does every day of his life are being silenced. Can I be oppressed and silenced like this sometime? I mean if getting your views out in front of 15 million people on top of having your own TV show is the terrible price you have to pay for dissent in America, sign me up to be squashed anytime...

An Interview With Condi Rice By Frank J.: This is the biggest coup RWN has ever pulled! Step aside Steyn, Hanson, and Horowitz, Frank J. has gotten RWN an interview with none other than Condi Rice herself...ehr, so he says! Read and enjoy! (Cont)

The Quote Of The Day From Zimbabwe: As the people of Zimbabwe starve, demented strongman Robert Mugabe is living the good life. Here's an example of that,

"Among the businesses paralysed by the strike was Zimbabwe's most profitable vehicle company. Its workshops were locked up, 10 new Mercedes Benz E240 saloons inside them awaiting delivery to Mr Mugabe's cabinet. A further 22 are due to arrive later this week. The total cost of the order has been estimated to be equivalent to two weeks' fuel supply for the entire country."

Yes, while people in Zimbabwe are literally starving to death Mugabe is ordering up 32 new Mercedes Benz. This prompted our quote of the week from a striking worker,

"If only George Bush would come here and Saddam us. But he won't and so we will have to strike, and be arrested and beaten. We have no choice. The ministers break the cars that we pay for and get new ones and we pay for those too. We have no fuel, no food, no medicines at the hospitals, and Mugabe doesn't care."

Sorry, but Mugabe isn't a terrorist supporter so that means if Zimbabwe is going to get any help, it's going to have to come from Europe & the UN. Unfortunately, Mugabe may deliberately starve millions in Zimbabwe (and I'm serious about that) before something gets done. Remember all of this when you see almost all of the other African nations blindly supporting Mugabe at the UN and when that swine Mugabe is hanging out with his buddy Jacques Chirac.

Constant 'Joke' Calls From White House Putting Further Strain On Relations Between US And UN: WASHINGTON, DC -- Sources have revealed that the rash of prank calls to the UN have finally been traced to the White House. Administration insiders have revealed that President Bush and Donald Rumsfield have been gathering in the Oval Office late at night to harass members of the UN, and have fun at their expense. A recording of one of the conversations has recently been released (Cont).

Michael Moore to Go Shirtless on Mag Cover By Scott Ott: In the wake of the Dixie Chicks attempt to blunt criticism by appearing mostly naked on a magazine cover, Academy Award-winning documentarist Michael Moore has agreed to appear shirtless on the cover of an unnamed periodical.

"There's nothing like a little skin to change the tone of the debate," said Mr. Moore. "Since I have more skin than most folks, it should really alter the mood of the discourse."

Among liberal political strategists, nudity is considered a highly-effective tactic. It's credited with almost single-handedly changing the image of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals from 'a bunch of wackos' to a 'a bunch of naked wackos'.

Before the Iraq war, numerous groups of naked people were photographed spelling out the word 'Peace' with their bodies. Sources in the Pentagon say that those naked people lying on the ground forced the military to abandon its orginal 'shock and awe' strategy.

Congressional Democrat leaders Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Tom Daschle said they're waiting for the results of focus-group testing before they launch their own semi-clad protest about the President's tax plan.

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

Squashing The Dissent Of The Dixie Chicks: As we all know, dissent is no longer allowed in America, especially from celebrities. Why any celebrity who dares to challenge George Bush or who doesn't wave a big enough flag at their concerts is blacklisted McCarthy style and the media is forbidden to ever speak their names again! Meanwhile, back in the real world, you can't turn around without hearing from some celebrity who has supposedly been silenced.

Take the Dixie Chicks for example. Judging by all the caterwauling on the left, you'd think that Congress had convened a special session for no other purpose that to revoke their First Amendment rights -- yet, here they are nude on the cover of Entertainment Weekly (By the way has Natalie Maines pic been doctored? She looks 20 pounds lighter than the last time I saw her).

Then if we look at this article about the Dixie Chicks on Yahoo, we see that they have been interviewed by Diane Sawyer for "Primetime Thursday". Their album "Home" remains the top-selling album on the Billboard country chart - 19 weeks at No. 1 - and No. 30 on the pop chart." Hell, according to the article, they even TURNED DOWN, "a request to be interviewed by The Associated Press."

So this is what it's like to have your dissent squashed in the US? Well then sign me up to be squashed, I need the publicity.

Maybe The Iraqis Would Have Been Better Off If Saddam Were Still Around: The lengths that today's Democratic party will go to in order to take shots at Bush just boggles the mind.

Here's what Howard Dean, a man who actually has an outside chance to win the Democratic nomination for President had to say when Wolf Blitzer asked him if the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam....

"We don't know that yet. We don't know that yet, Wolf. We still have a country whose city is mostly without electricity. We have tumultuous occasions in the south where there is no clear governance. We have a major city without clear governance."

Translation: Sure Saddam was a murderous tyrant who oppressed his people, but he kept the trains running on time. Maybe the Iraqi people would be better off if he was still around...

How can anyone, especially someone running for President of the United States have such a low regard for freedom? Just think about what Howard is really saying.

According to Human Rights Watch, Saddam had 200,000 to 300,000 Shiites assassinated in the last two decades, but on the other hand there are "tumultuous occasions in the south where there is no clear governance," so that's a wash. Sure, "(p)ast cases of Iraqi Torture have involved medical experimentation, beatings, crucifixion, genital mutilation with an electric carving knife, committing rape while the victim's spouse is forced to watch, nailing the tongue to a wooden board, and using bees and scorpions to sting naked children in front of their parents." But on other hand, let Howard Dean remind you that the power in Baghdad isn't back on yet so who's to say which is better?

Come on, even an anti-war Dem like Dean should at least be able to admit that the Iraqi people are better off with US there trying to help them build a Democracy than with Saddam Hussein's goons working on people's genitals with electric carving knives. But no, Dean can't even admit that because Bush is at the helm and that would mean giving him the credit he deserves. The fact that a hack like Dean is a serious candidate for President just shows that the Dems are still a bunch of McGovernites at heart.

The US Is Obviously The Most Benevolent World Power In The History Of The Planet: Apparently, Mark Goldblatt created quite a bit of controversy last week when he, "mentioned that the blame-America mindset characteristic of the antiwar movement's true believers was difficult to maintain, "in light of the manifest truth that America is the most benevolent world power in the history of the planet."

Of course, that's plainly the case and as Goldblatt states, "the rest of us are left to ask who are America's chief competitors for the title of most-benevolent world power? Ancient Greece or Rome? The Mongols under Genghis Khan? France under Napoleon? The British Empire? Nazi Germany? Imperial Japan? The Soviet Union?"

If you believe that any of those nations was more congenial than the US, then either you have no grasp of history or you're so blinded by anti-Americanism that you're not able to admit the truth.

But, if you want to "proof" that America is a "gentle giant", you see the evidence of it at every turn. Our neighbors Mexico and Canada have mediocre militaries not only because they don't fear a US invasion, but because they're confident that the US would protect them if they were ever attacked. Then look to the anti-American natons in Europe that rely on powerless international agencies like the UN and the WTO to protect them from the eeeevvviiiiillllll American hegemon. If they really feared the US, wouldn't they have already built real militaries to defend themselves? Even monsters like the Taliban and Saddam Hussein consistently moved their troops into areas filled with civilians because they knew we'd make every effort to avoid killing innocents in a war. Last but not least, just look around the world in the "hot spots". Who's standing between Taiwan and China? Which nation has been leading the charge to make peace in the Middle-East? Is it American or France that India and Pakistan bring in when those nations move to the brink of nuclear war? Is it Switzerland, Belgium, or the good old USA that has been keeping the peace on the Korean Peninsula for decades? I could go on and on with this. In short, if you're a nation in trouble, who ya gonna call? If you need a hint, it isn't China, Germany, or Russia.

So why can't everybody just admit that America is a greathearted nation? Well as Goldblatt points out, there are people like Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal who make a living smearing the US. Then there are leaders like Chirac and Schroeder who think they benefit politically at home and perhaps all across Europe by attacking the US. Moreover, there are plenty of cultural "snobs" in Europe who just can't understand how a bunch of "barbarians" in the US can be outperforming them. Of course, plain old envy figures in as well.

Then there's what I think of as the "fairy tale effect." That comes from people comparing the United States to ideals that could never exist anywhere except in fairy tales then deciding that we don't cut the mustard. "Oh the United States slaughtered the Indians, had slavery, and used dirty tactics across the world while it was fighting the Soviet Union. That means the United States is a terrible country!" Whenever I hear people using that line of reasoning, I always think of people who sneer at the rich because they'd, "give all the money they had away if they were wealthy". Sure, that's very easy to say when you're not wealthy just like it's very easy for other nations to talk about how much better off the world would be if they were as powerful as the United States. But, when you look at the nations that have actually been as mighty as the US is right now or at least close, you'll discover that we have been far and away the most magnanimous and benign power of our size that the world has ever seen.

I Get Letters -- A Few Hate Mail Samples: Just for entertainment value, here are a few samples of the hate mail that I receive. This is pretty much run of the mill stuff....

From a man of few words named Joel Lively...

John Hawkins ...is an idiot."

Here's one from someone named Mike Bloxham asking if I'm for real or not. Yes, there are people out there who are so insulated that they can't believe that there are people out there who disagree with them. I know that from personal experience because one of them was the editor of my school paper in college who was completely shocked that someone wrote a letter to the paper praising an anti-abortion piece that I wrote...

"when i started to read your article i assumed it was a joke but as i read on i realised you were serious.my only problem i am left with is do you believe this load of rubbish or is it just more propaganda for thick right wingers?

you are pathetic,"

Here's another one from Clair Kruesel at IA State that's along the same lines. Hopefully this is a phase she's going through and she won't end being permanently "Streisanized"...

"Hi... I read your website pretty thoroughly after being linked by a friend, and I am not sure if the content is serious or in jest. The FAQ page is convincing of the former, but I just can't convince myself that someone would actually be proud of such political views. I hope your website is a joke (and a very good one at that) but if not, well... I suggest that you remove the "Quotes" page, because I find most of the Democratic quotes to be quite rational and convincing against the Republican views expressed by your page. I am not a Democrat or Republican, but I assume you wouldn't want to convert any of your Republican readers to the "other side" inadvertently. I do have to say that the "Democratic translation page" is pretty accurate and amusing. Anyway - those are my ramblings."

Here's one from RSMK that's sort of disjointed & kooky...

"9/11 SCAM

Enough said.

Organised by the well known cheat George Bush and Co.

? one better than Pearl Harbour

Certainly better than the "attack" on the Mexican Parliament

Whats next?

Killing a million innocent women and children in Iraq. Will get a big laugh on the Lenno show !

SICK SICK AMERICA."

I also get hate mail that doesn't really seem to jive with anything I'm saying on the page. This email from Christopher Giardina is a good example...

"It is piece's of sh!t like you and this web site that are the enemy of America, NOT MUSLIMS! The problem with you are the lies that you put out there, you are trying to persuade the weak minded people in order to further your SICK agenda. America will be victorious in Iraq, capture u mama bin layin, and with the grace of the ALMIGHTY LORD and JESUS CHRIST bring some hope to the youth of the oil rich nations so they will stop sacrificing themselves for people like you and the oppressive regimes that hijacked the middle east."

This one from Jordan Bernard treats a humor piece about the rain forest (I think they mean this one) like it's a hard hitting editorial...

"Is this a website a parody of the right wing? I seriously can't tell. Your humour is pretty dumb and mostly an obvious, poorly done rip-off of The Onion. Your war news fails to report such things as Iraqis refusing humanitarian aid when it is supplied by America, and how hundreds of civilians are being "liberated." If thats what you call being bombed. We bombed a house where two families were taking shelter. We hit the house dead on. There were no military targets in the area, yet you still claim to be liberating Iraqis. Does John Hawkins really think what he was implying in his rain forest article? That liberals are only concerned with animals and plants? So taking that out destroying rain forests is a great idea right? No, its not. You know those big green leafy things called trees? They help make oxygen. Oxygen is neccesary for all forms of life. Including humans. So go ahead and cut down the forests and see how you feel when you cant breathe. Also, I guess it was just coincidence that the company that has received the largest reconstruction contract previously boasted Dick Cheney as C.E.O. Especially when he still has great financial interest in that company. Its amazing how things can work out."

There are plenty of others I could have posted, but these give you a pretty good idea of the type of stuff I get. The only ones missing are from the white power freaks complaining because I make fun of them in the ACPOTI page. Of course, all the hate mail I get can't be as creative as this email that I received during the Afghan war. Now that was an amusing piece of "hate mail" =D...

Robbins Backs Lott Reinstatement By Rip Rowan: Tim Robbins, best known for his strong anti-war stance, has come out strongly in favor of returning Trent Lott to his position as US Senate Majority Leader.

Lott stepped down from that post after critics blasted his comments at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party. At that party, Lott said, "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 all these problems over all these years, either."

Lott's gaffe was interpreted by some as a pro-segregationalist comment.

"To punish people for their beliefs is to acknowledge our democracy's defeat," said Robbins. "Now that I hold very unpopular views, I sympathize with Trent Lott. I know what he feels like. Therefore, I am leading an effort to reinstate him."

Robbins continued, "Any instance of intimidation to free speech should be battled against. Any acquiescence or intimidation at this point will only lead to more intimidation."

Fellow anti-war activist Susan Sarandon took the opportunity to distance herself from Robbins' statements.

"Tim is well-intentioned, but wrong," said Sarandon. "The fact is, there are good positions and bad positions. People with good positions, like supporting motherhood or opposing the war, should never suffer repercussions from people who disagree with them. People with bad positions, such as people who disagree with me, should be labeled Nazis and impeached."

If you liked this satire by Rip Rowan, you can read more of his work at The Skeptician.

Dennis Miller Blackballed By Hollywood Liberals For Showing Their Ignorance: Dennis Miller has been blackballed from Hollywood, according to celebrity spokesperson Janeane Garofalo, because he is "articulate, intelligent, informed, well-read and does not take himself too seriously and thereby we have decided that he does not 'fit in' with the rest of us." Garofalo went on to say that the decision, made by Hollywood's little-known Celebrity-Masonic-Tri-Delt-Union, was "absolutely not personal and certainly not related to politics. It is just that things run more smoothly in a group situation if people are on the same level, and as Dennis is not an utter knothead, like the rest of us, it makes people such as myself, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Sheryl Crowe and so forth feel really uncomfortable."

Reached for comment, Sarandon concurred, saying that "Dennis knows a lot of big words, too, and I mean, he knows what they mean. It's not like when, say, Jessica Lange uses big words she's learned from her personal 'big-word tutor.' I mean, then she's just regurgitating them at pointed moments in sentences. With Dennis, he knows where to use them all by himself. It makes the rest of us feel ill at ease and you know, it probably makes him feel badly too. We're certainly thinking of him."

According to an inside source, Sean Penn is said to have been the one who first pushed for Miller's eviction from Tinseltown. The star of such films as "Fast Times at Ridgemont High," and "I am Sam" was reportedly enraged at Miller's appearances, earlier this year, on Chris Matthews's and Phil Donahue's primetime news shows. During his appearances Miller expressed support for the war in Iraq, support for President Bush and contempt for Saddam Hussein. "Who does he think he represents," a furious Penn apparently asked, upon seeing Miller with Matthews and Donahue. "He's not a politician. He's not even an actor. I represent the people. Didn't you see 'I am Sam'? I represent the retard in all of us. And that's more than Dennis could ever say!"

If you liked this satire by Marni Malarkey, you can read more of her work at Broken Newz.

Rick Santorum Isn't Another Trent Lott: Rick Santorum, R-Pa has gotten the "outrage industry" all upset with his recent comments about Lawrence v. Texas, a case dealing with sodomy laws that is in front of the Supreme Court. Here's the money paragraph that has been getting the most play...

"And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

That statement was part of a case that Santorum was making to support the anti-sodomy law. There's more in this short interview with Santorum and it's probably worth reading just to get a feel for the whole argument Santorum is trying to get across.

When I think about this case, I hearken back to the famous quote from James Otis which reads. "one of the most essential branches of English liberty is the freedom of one's house. A man's house is his castle." That being said, I'm not in favor of sodomy laws, because I think the government has no business peering into the bedroom of your "castle" to see you're having sex with and what positions the two of you are getting into.

I'm sure Rick Santorum would counter what I've just said by saying that, "if you say that sodomy is legal, you're opening the door to, "bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery." It's a "slippery slope" argument and to be honest, I don't think it's totally without merit.

So on the sodomy law, I'm in favor of gingerly taking that baby-step down the slope and hoping that we're not setting a precedent that we'll regret 20 years down the road when some slick lawyer is arguing a bestiality or adult incest case.

As far as homosexuality itself goes, I think Santorum obviously finds it to be deviant and immoral behavior and to be honest, he's probably in the majority. You can argue about whether that's right or wrong, but when you get into people's sexual mores & their religious beliefs, you're probably not going to change anyone's mind. Furthermore, Santorum didn't say that he thought gays should be attacked or locked up in camps, he just made it clear that he didn't approve of their behavior. I don't think that he said anything he needs to apologize for, although I think it was appropriate for him to clarify his remarks. Maybe some people don't like what Santorum said, but anytime you start discussing what's happening the bedroom of people's "castles" and move it into the public arena, it is going to be controversial. That's how it has always been and probably how it always will be...

***Update***: After much reading and thought on this subject, I have changed my opinion. While I do think states should repeal sodomy laws, I have come to the conclusion that we shouldn't even take that, "baby-step down the (slippery) slope" in this case. Here's an editorial that explains my thinking on this issue in more depth.

The Canadians Shall Feel The Wrath Of The Zionist/VRWC Alliance!: I have an Israeli friend that I chat with on ICQ. I thought you might find part of our conversation from last night entertaining -- especially if you live in "New Israel" -- ehr Canada. I did edit this a bit and he wanted to remain anonymous, but otherwise you're seeing it as it was said...

John Hawkins: Trust me man, I think you Israelis are soft -- the whole area would be nothing but parking lots and puppet dictators if we lived there.

Anon Israeli: Well, you're warmly invited. Wanna swap? :-)

John Hawkins: Hell, we could just give you guys some land out in North Dakota or Montana -- we got plenty of room.

Anon Israeli: Not really sure where it is, but I wouldn't object leaving this horrible area, and move next to the US, or even be part of it! :-)

John Hawkins: There's only what -- 6 million on you? That's nothing dewd -- we got lots of room =)

Anon Israeli: You have room for another star on your flag? :)

John Hawkins: Another star? We can incorporate you -- or we could take part of Mexico or Canada's land if you need your own country -- they don't have militaries per se anyway =)

Anon Israeli: Excellent, it's settled then. When is it convenient for you to do that? Oh, and we better notify Bush and Sharon at some stage, so they won't be surprised.

John Hawkins: Well let's not get ahead of ourselves -- do you want part of Mexico? The desert might be more like "old Israel" or do you want part of Canada? Canadians have funnier accents, "Eh, what ya doing taking part of our country, eh? We might have to file a complaint with the UN, eh!"

Anon Israeli: Hehe, Canada sounds better. Israel has the most diverse climate, from deset in the south to snow in the north, even though we're so small.

John Hawkins: Yah and Israel is like the one spot in the whole region with no oil. If you guys had picked Saudi Arabia as your homeland you'd be on the UN Security Council right now...

Before anyone gets upset -- we were just kidding, don't take it seriously -- it's going to be at least 2 to 3 years before we have time to invade Canada and moving all those Holy sites over here isn't going to be easy either....

Neocons = Conservative Jewish Hawks To The Kooks?: I probably wouldn't even bother to comment on this article from "Arab News" entitled, "Protocols of the Elders of Neocons" if I hadn't seen the sentiments in it slipping into mainstream leftist and Paleocon thought. But, since there are some people out there who buy into this sort of garbage (probably more so than many of them are willing to admit in front of a camera), I thought it was worth shooting down. Here's the opening paragraph that gives a good general idea of what the writer is trying to get across...

"In this weekly telephone report Paul Wolfowitz expressed his anxiety to Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister about the situation in the Middle East. "How are you doing?" asked Wolfowitz. "OK, OK," answered Sharon, "but you must go to Syria." Wolfowitz pondered, "this will be tougher to get the president's okay on." Sharon could not help but scream, "He does not know Damascus from Des Moines, Iowa. Move it Paul. You can always tell him that this man of peace thinks it's kosher," concluded Sharon with a hysterical laugh."

The idea here is that these "neocons" have an insidious influence on the Bush administration. Their goal? To manipulate Americans in general and the Bush administration in particular into doing Israel's dirty work. Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle are the two most often cited although I've on occasion heard David Frum & Douglas Feith's names mentioned. You even hear some people get all skittery about the influence of pundits like Jonah Goldberg and Bill Kristol.

I have no idea how rational people can buy into this cockeyed theory. If you look at the big four players in Bush administration foreign policy, you'll find three hawks (Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice) & then there's Colin Powell who is a bit more dovish. Then there's the President himself who seems to work out of the Ronald Reagan cowboy diplomacy playbook. I could add that more than 70% of the American people supported the invasion of Iraq in the last poll I saw including a majority of Democrats. So how can anyone look at this overwhelming support for an invasion, pick a handful of Jews and go, "you caused this to help Israel!" It's just ludicrous.

Furthermore, I hate to break this to Pat Buchanan, Arab News, the French, the anti-war movement, etc, but Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Jonah Goldberg, etc, have mainstream Conservative views on foreign policy. The overwhelming majority of American Conservatives are hawkish, Pro-Israel, and strongly supported using the military to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Furthermore, the majority of all Americans would have supported invading Syria in the last poll I saw so I'm sure the numbers among Conservatives are probably 70%+ there as well. So again, there's nothing unusual about the positions taken by the prominent Jewish Conservatives who kooks think are somehow manipulating the President into settling scores for Israel. Just how do you look at foreign policy position supported by almost every prominent Conservative in the US from Rush Limbaugh to Ann Coulter and go, "See! See! There are some Conservative Jews who support it too! That means it's all a plot the Jews have come up with to support Israel!" Of course, that makes no sense whatsoever.

That's why I always suspect anti-semitism when I hear someone ranting about "neoconservatives" (by which they usually mean Jewish Conservatives) influencing Bush administration foreign policy. There's simply nothing to distinguish the views of people like Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle from their superiors other than their Jewishness. So to pick that out and spin conspiracy theories about it says more about the person doing the spinning than the "neoconservatives" they're speculating about...

***Update***: Here's a guide I wrote to Blogosphere Jargon a while back that clears up what a neoconservative actually is as opposed to how the term is commonly and incorrectly used these days.

With All the Different Types of Governments to Choose From, How Can You Go Wrong? By Frank J: So now the question is what kind of government should we, the benevolent U.S., establish in Iraq. Before they had a dictator, which made them a dictocracy. Most people want to now establish a democracy, but that doesn't just magically make a good government like some people think. What if the people voting are all jack*sses and they elect crack mayors like in D.C.? So here are some other government suggestions.

Republic: This is where Republicans rule the government. This is the one we have and the best of the imperfect governments.

Monarchy: A monarchy is a government ruled by a monarch. According to my dictionary, a monarch is a type of butterfly. This government probably occurs in Europe where people are pansies and might be scared of butterflies. Come on; it's just a butterfly! Bloody coup!

Anarchy: This is where you loot things and smash windows. It's a lot of fun until finally you're like, "Hey, there are no more windows left to smash! Isn't someone going to fix the windows?" and someone else says, "No, dude, this is an anarchy." So then another government has to be set up so the windows can be fixed. Thus anarchy can only last in spurts.

Feudal System: This is a system that involves a lot of arguments, or "Feuding". I think it's stupid, but others may violent disagree, and then we'd have a feudal system.

Autocracy: This is a government ruled by intelligent automobiles. It is the current government of Japan.

Plutocracy: This is a government ruled by Mickey Mouse's dog, Pluto, who is tough but fair. Contrary to popular belief, it has nothing to do with the planet Pluto, which I tell you is one day going to collide into Neptune. Yeah, the scientist say that ain't gonna happen, but I don't believe them. For God's sake, stay off of Pluto!

Ninjatocracy: This is a government that involves a lot of flipping around and cutting people's heads off. It's totally sweet.

Smurfaucracy: This is a form a government where one Iraqi would be the leader and named "Papa Iraqi" and everyone else would get names based on their personalities, like "Brainy Iraqi", "Brawny Iraqi", "Greedy Iraqi", and "Perverted Iraqi." One woman would be named "Iraqette." I'm not sure what would happen to the other women. Also, Iraq and Iraqi would become a universal words that could mean anything - adjective, verb, or noun - just like the f-word but not vulgar. Plus, I think everyone would have to live in mushroom houses. In the one instance this government was practiced, everyone looked happy, but you could sense a deep sadness behind their eyes that told you that everything was not quite so Iraqi.

Popadopalocracy: This is a form of a government that... okay I made this one up.

Chiracracy: Rule comes from a cowardly weasel. Popular in Old Europe.

Benevolent Dictator: This is the theoretical perfect form of government, where one all-knowing and all-caring individual would rule the country... so this is like if I ruled Iraq. But I have a fulltime job and this blog to keep up, so rule your own damn country.

If you liked this satire by Frank J., you can read more of his work at IMAO.

Misc: A few things of note...

-- First off, I have a new email policy which largely consists of ignoring most of my email =D. Unfortunately, despite the fact that I delete spam and answer a certain percentage of my email as it comes in, in a typical week I end up trying to sort through and answer 150-200 emails every week-end. Up until this point I've made a real effort to answer the majority of my email, but it has gotten too difficult to keep up with. Plus, the number of emails I'm receiving isn't going anywhere but up over the next few months. So sadly, unfortunately, I will no longer be replying to most non-business related emails. While I'd prefer to answer them all, there are only so many hours in a day...

-- I'm going to be doing a FAQ on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and I may dip into some related conspiracy theory ideas as well. So if you have any questions or want to post any questions that you've seen, hostile or not, kooky or not, post them in the comments section and I may answer them in the article which will probably come out Monday.

-- I have already sold out all of my button advertisements for next month and I'm looking into some other ways to do advertising on the page as well. Maybe banner ads or ads that go directly to links in the daily news section? Anyway, I'm open to suggestions for any form of money making endeavor or advertising that doesn't involve pop-ups. Feel free to post suggestions in the comments section.

PS: Yes, T-shirts are on the way although I'm still working on designs.

-- How about showing our advertisers for this month that they made a smart decision by advertising with RWN by taking a look at their web pages? Take a gander at Between The Coasts, Zogby Blog, Electric Venom, Deserve Victory, & Belly Flop.

***Update***: Is Patriot for real or a prank? The answer: a prank. From an email I received...

"Hello, John Hawkins.

Lev Trubov
a.k.a. Milodar
a.k.a. Jango Fett
a.k.a. patriot"

Well, if you're Conservative stuck in Berkeley, I imagine it might drive you a little batty too =D

***Update 2***: I'm toying with the idea of linking 20 websites in the daily news section every Saturday and Sunday. Since I don't upate the daily news on the week-ends, why not promote some other blogs? If you have any comments on this, I'd like to hear it in this thread.

The Iraqi Museum Was Looted -- Big Deal: In my opinion, the whole hubbub about the Iraqi museum being looted is much ado about...well I won't say nothing, but quite frankly it's not all that important in the scheme of things. I know, I know, I'm a philistine because obviously these ancient antiquities were lost and it's such a terrible loss for civilization, etc, etc, etc.

First off, the overwhelming majority of the people who are trying to make this into a big issue probably didn't even know there was a Baghdad museum before the war and if they did, they had no idea what was in it. It's just like ANWR which was just another wasteland in "nowhereville" Alaska that 99% of the population didn't even know existed until we wanted to drill it for oil and then it became a "pristine wilderness" that had to be protected.

Furthermore, if the artifacts in that museum had been sitting in a Saudi Sheik's mansion, Uday's love pad, or even a delicatessen in Brooklyn, it wouldn't have made one bit of difference to the Iraqi public for the last few years because they were barred from entering the museum. That may be why most of the horrible angst we're seeing over the looting / inside job robbery at the museum seems to be amongst anti-war liberals in the United States & Britain who are desperate to find something they can complain about in one of the most successfully orchestrated military campaigns in human history.

My guess is that the Iraqi people are more concerned about things like, "when is the power coming back on?", "can I go back to my job?", and "what is our new government going to look like?", than whether or not the FBI is going to be able to find any Sumerian vases before they end up on EBAY.

Personally, I find stories about families being killed by stray bombs, friendly fire deaths, or children being murdered by Saddam's Fedayeen to be far more tragic and deserving of coverage than the loss of some valuable relics. While I am sorry that the museum got robbed/looted, it's the sort of thing that should have appeared on page 4 of the New York Times and then largely disappeared from view. If the media wasn't trying to find some new fly to throw in the ointment of an overwhelming US victory, this story would have already gone to the graveyard of forgotten news.

***Update***: Armchair Analyst & The Scatterbrained Syncretist weigh in.

The Arafat Obituary: As some of you may have heard, CNN accidentally posted pre-created obituaries for a number of prominent figures including "Reagan, Hope, Fidel Castro, Pope John Paul II, Nelson Mandela, Gerald Ford and Dick Cheney." But RWN reader NC noticed one prominent figure who didn't make the cut -- Yasser Arafat. So in an effort to help out CNN, NC put together an appropriate obituary for the man who is perhaps the world's foremost living terrorist -- if Osama is taking a dirt nap as I suspect. Without further adieu, the Arafat Obituary (hit the back button to get back to this page).

They're Coming To Take Me Away -- Ha-Ha!: I was perusing the Democratic Underground today and I ran across an interesting, although not necessarily out of character thread for DU. It seems that there are more than a few members of the DU who fear that the Bush administration is going to declare martial law, cancel the 2004 elections, and rule America with an iron fist forevermore! That would probably happen right after Bush grows a long handlebar mustache so he can twirl it evilly as he laughs like so...Muhuhahahahahahah! Here's a sample...

bluestateguy: "What if there is another attack? If it is as bad or worse that 9/11 I am almost more afraid of the US government than the terrorist perpetrators. Will "Red Alert" be declared? Concentration Camps for Arabs and Muslims and other "troublemakers"? Curfews? Cancellation of the 2004 elections? Confiscation of all firearms? I really don't know what I would do if it came to this, but I get more worried about it every day, especially when I see and hear the neo-fascist, jingoistic views being expressed by so many people."

ComerPerro: "I fear this as well. It doesn't seem likely, but who really knows. It all depends on what the ignorant masses are made to believe."

RC: "What I think will happen is that if they do not win the 2004 election, they will cause an incident shortly after those elections, as an excuse for martial law. They have already hinted. One way or another they intend to keep their power. They know if they lose, there will be investigations up the kazu and they will be sent to jail."

Pastiche423:...negative light" is not something the * administration gives a whit about. Where have you been for the past two and a half years? People are already disappearring or are being held in jail, w/o being charged. And some have just plain been killed. The * admiistration has done so many ubelievable things, I no longer am surprised. If it does look like * might not be able to steal another election, I truly believe martial law will be ordered. For the 1st time in my life, I want our citizenry to be armed to the teeth."

dssenter: "I'm very concerned as well....and nfortunately, it IS going to happen prior to the 04 selections"... But then again...maybe not. Since they can rig the elections with the computerized voting machines...maybe they don't need to go through all the trouble. But if it does happen...only the rest of the world will know what is really happening within the US. "Murikans" are so friggin naive they'll actually believe that its a "good thing" to have martial law."

deek: "I have feared this since he was selected and increasingly more so as the weeks have dragged by to the present. I have no doubt martial law will eventually be declared. It's all in the plan, similar to Hitler's playbook. How do we plan for this? Many of you are talking about arming yourselves. I'm not sure how that would play out. Explain, please, and talk about the other "plans" we could be making."

These people have about the same sort of tenuous grasp on reality as the cultists Jim Jones talked into drinking poisoned Kool-Aid at Guyana -- which is why we should lock them away in camps for their own protection --- J/K with ya you DU kooks!

Psycologists need to come up with some sort of name for the disorder that these people have -- you know, buying into bizarre delusions about their political opponents. Maybe Chomskyphrenia or Rallomania...

The Music I'm Listening To Right Now: Just for entertainment value on a lazy Easter Monday, here is the current playlist I'm listening to right now on my computer...

Barenaked Ladies -- One Week
Big Brovaz -- Nu Flow
Counting Crows -- The ghost in you
The Cure -- Lullaby
Dido - Thank you
The Donnas -- 40 boys and 40 nights
Enya -- Only time
Filter -- Take my picture
Aretha Franklin - Son of a preacherman
Kid Rock - American bad*ass
Avril Lavigne -- Sk8tr Boi
Natalie Merchant -- Carnival
Motorhead -- It's all about the game
Nappy Roots -- Awww naw
Rage Against The Machine -- Vietnow
DJ Sammy -- We're in Heaven
Smashing Pumpkins -- Landslide
Tatu -- All the things she said
Type O Negative -- Black #1
Leane Womack -- I hope you dance

U.S. Finds Iraq Contractor with No Political Ties By Scott Ott: The U.S. government has awarded a $7.9 Billion contract for the redevelopment of Iraq's oil industry to the only company it could find that had no political connections.

The White House, under pressure from Democrats to avoid awarding bids to major campaign donors, located the contractor in rural Howard, Pennsylvania.

Bob Yoder, of Howard, who runs a small engine repair shop, salvage yard and "groundhog mitigation service", said he would do his best to get Iraq's oil industry "up and humming again."

Mr. Yoder has never contributed to any political campaign and has never voted in an election.

"Between the engine shop and shooting groundhogs, I really don't have time for politics," said Mr. Yoder. "My old lady and I are excited about this deal because we've never flown in an airplane before."

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

Ask A Random Person: Hollywood Censorship By Shamus Young: Many leading Hollywood players have taken bold and controversial stances against the war, and have had to deal with unpleasant public backlash as a result. Many stars, such as Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Eddie Vedder, Madonna, and Martin Sheen, have complained that this is unfair censorship. (Cont)