Since Rush hadn't bought any painkillers from his former maid in more than a year, I had hoped that he had gotten clean since then. However, given that Rush is checking into a drug rehab center for 30 days, we now know that's not the case.

Some people have pointed out that Rush was hypocritical for being a staunch proponent of the war on drugs while being an addict himself. That's true, Rush was being hypocritical. However, in my mind, it's better to be a hypocrite who's failing to do something right than to advocate doing something wrong just to be consistent. Rush's actions were wrong, but his position on the drug war is right.

Moreover, Rush's own experience with drugs confirms the damage that they can do to a human life. Here's a man who's wealthy, incredibly influential, & who has job that most of us can only dream of. Yet, he risked it all because he couldn't control his addiction to painkillers. Although it has yet to be determined how much damage this will do to Rush's show, you can be certain that it has tarnished his reputation and given his enemies another attack they can level at him. Furthermore, we have to consider the damage Rush did to his own health with his drug addiction. According to the story in the Enquirer, he almost died once and as I noted when I talked about this story previously, it's possible that the drugs Rush took may have been what caused him to go deaf. Rush's story is indeed a cautionary tale.

Also, it would be easy for me to make excuses for Rush since pain killers aren't exactly heroin or cocaine. Heck, I can imagine just about ANYBODY taking Vicodin because they're in chronic pain and getting addicted to it. But that being said, if Rush were to face charges -- which as I've mentioned before, luckily looks to be unlikely -- I wouldn't suggest that he be given a break. The strict laws we have, including the mandatory minimum sentences, help deter people from damaging their lives the way Rush has and that's a good thing.

Last but not least, I'm sincerely rooting for Rush to keep his chin up and make the most out of his time in the rehab center. He's a brilliant man who has done a lot for conservatism and I think he still has a long, successful career in front of him. Personally, I wish Rush the best and I have to say that I'm looking forward to the day he gets back on the air. When Rush returns, I'll be listening and I suspect the overwhelming majority of people who were his fans before this whole thing broke will be listening too.

Allah Is In The House had this to say about me linking his blog in my up & coming blogs post...

"(W)hen the most profane Jew John Hawkins layeth down a link, then, infidels, there shall be trouble in Paradise. Tell me, Hawkins, when do you plan to interview Allah? Allah has long dreamed of the day when you and he face off in a climactic interrogation reminiscent of the final scene in "A Few Good Men". Allah shall be Nicholson and you shall be the latently gay yet charismatic prosecutor Cruise, doggedly trying to badger a confession out of Allah even while Allah's macho alpha-male charm commands the room. You shall demand the truth about shari'a and Allah shall tell you that you cannot handle the truth, and then you shall demand to know whether Allah ordered the code red on Anwar Sadat and Allah shall tell you YOU'RE GODD@MNED RIGHT I DID. It will be awesome, kufr. Seriously, think it over."

Interview you? I'm sure that would go over really well with my Zionist masters. I can just imagine that conversation with Ariel Sharon...

John Hawkins: Oh by the way, I just interviewed Allah and put it up on my Zionist propaganda front blog, Right Wing News.

Ariel Sharon: Oh that's OK, no problem. I can't wait to read it.

John Hawkins: Really sir? I thought you'd be furious with me...

Ariel Sharon: Why would you think such a thing American lackey? To the contrary, (slaps me on the shoulder) I love it when you don't follow orders & promote my greatest enemy on a page we created to promote Zionism. It truly fills me with delight...

John Hawkins: Ehr...when you slapped me on the shoulder, your ring pricked me. You didn't just poison me did you?

Ariel Sharon: Don't be silly! Now you go on home and get some rest, you're not looking well. I'll see you soon...or I won't, who can really say about such things?

You think I'm going to voluntarily put myself through something like that Allah? Then think again!

This story illustrates another one of my pet peeves about the way our out-of-control legal system works here in America...

"The parents of a girl paralyzed in a car wreck caused by a drunken football fan have sued the National Football League, claiming it should be held responsible for the girl's injuries.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday, contends the league promotes the type of behavior that led the fan to drink 14 beers at a New York Giants game in 1999 and then drive home."

Sadly, stories like this are all too common these days. A greedy family and their money grubbing lawyer want to sue for injuries suffered, but the person responsible doesn't have enough cash to make it worth their wild. So what do they do? They claim that some person or company with peripheral involvement is responsible for no other reason than because the target has money.

Just ask yourself; "What do they have to lose by suing the NFL"? The honest answer is very little. On the other hand, the NFL has a lot to lose. Sure, it may be a longshot that the NFL will actually lose the case, but you never know -- stranger things have happened. Furthermore, because the NFL has to spend legal fees defending themselves in court and because losing a case like this could set a very damaging precedent, the NFL is going to be tempted to settle. That's because it may make more business sense to pay someone $50k to go away and not discuss the case (so no one else gets the same idea) than to pay a few hundred thousand dollars in legal fees fighting this in court against a girl who people are going to have sympathy for because she was paralyzed in a car wreck.

So while I'm terribly sorry about the injury that poor girl suffered, it doesn't give her, her family, and her blood sucking lawyer the right to rip off the NFL. The fault lies solely with the fan who made the irresponsible decision to get plastered at the game and drive home, not with the NFL. The National Football League sold a legal product to an adult who had every right to consume it. If the guy who caused that wreck got trashed and made a decision to break the law by driving home, that's his mistake and his mistake alone. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the NFL has no more responsibility for that wreck than the makers of the car the drunk was driving at the time.

If we had a loser pays system, sham cases like this would never even make it to court. That day can't come soon enough for me.

***Update #1***: Eddie had this to say in the comments section...

"Sorry, but I beg to differ on this matter.

I hope the poor family comes out owning the Giants and the NFL. Screw the macho football fans and their legal drugs (alcohol)!!"

Sure drinking is legal & millions of NFL fans drink at the games and make it home without incident every single year, but this girl is paralyzed and the NFL has money, so we have got to abandon all rational thought and stick it to them. Thanks but, no thanks.

I'm not picking on Eddie here, but I wanted to respond because I think his comments are typical of the thinking of a much larger group of people. Really and truly, all it comes down to here is that we have the family of a little girl we all feel sympathy for suing a big corporation and the attitude is, "Right or wrong, it doesn't really matter. I feel bad for the kid and the NFL isn't going to miss a few million dollars".

But it does matter folks and it matters a lot. All the costs of these ridiculous court cases get passed on by the businesses to us. Then either the rest of us pay more or the company goes out of business. Furthermore, this is a much bigger issue than just football tickets or the cost of concessions at Giants stadium. Think about it. If the NFL has to pay out for selling a legal product to an adult who is legally able to purchase it, despite the fact that they make tens of millions of similar sales every year without causing a similar problem, then should....

...a Walmart be sued for selling a knife to someone who stabs a little girl to death?

...a water company be sued for selling water used to fill someone's pool if a neighbor's child later drowns while swimming there unsupervised?

...a hardware store be sued for selling a hammer to someone who later uses it to cripple a little kid with?

The reality here is that someone CHOSE to get drunk, CHOSE not to have someone else drive him home, CHOSE to break the law by driving home while he was sloshed, and through his irresponsible actions severely injured an innocent child. The NFL did not force him to make those choices, they didn't force him to break the law, he CHOSE to do it on his own. The driver -- who has been sent to jail by the way -- is responsible for his own actions and he's the one who deserves the blame. What happened to that little girl is terrible, but that doesn't mean her family should be allowed to play lawsuit lottery with the NFL because the real culprit didn't have enough money to suit them.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) today introduced a new, more challenging test for baggage screeners after Congressional critics claimed a previous test was too easy.

Here are some sample questions from the new test:

How do threats get on board an aircraft?
a) They buy tickets and walk on, like everyone else.
b) Because it's politically incorrect to target them for searches.
c) They climb through a loophole in our immigration policy enforcement
d) All of the above.

Why is it important to screen bags for improvised explosive devices (IEDs)?
a) Because IEDs are likely to be hidden somewhere, rather than brandished openly.
b) It's the least you can do when you're getting paid $38,000+ per year to stare at an x-ray monitor and grope through luggage.
c) Explosive devices might contain peanut fragments or dust, which are prohibited aboard all domestic flights due to potential allergic reactions among a fraction of one percent of airline passengers.
d) Because you get to see all kinds of interesting things inside passenger baggage, and that helps you stay awake until the end of your shift.

What is your primary responsiblity as a TSA screener?
a) To ensure that funding keeps flowing to a new, massive government bureaucracy.
b) To add to the anxiety of people who are already afraid of flying by introducing the fear of being frisked, and the fear of publicly revealing the holes in their socks.
c) To avoid frisking anyone who might accuse you of "profiling"
d) To create the illusion of tough security in American airports by wearing a faux police uniform and speaking in brusque, monosyllables.

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

Hey look! It's another group of college students studying RWN! This time it's a bunch of crazy kids from the, "English 155 Fall 2003" class from California State University Northridge! Their assignment is to visit 4 webpages (of which RWN is one) and then they are to, "answer the following question: How does this writing compare to the academic writing we have been doing?"

Because I, John Hawkins, care so much about the education of our nation's youth, I am going to help these kids out by doing their homework for them! Yes, I am going to compare RWN to academic writing give academic writing the figurative beating it so richly deserves.

The most important thing you need to remember about academic writing is that it's HIDEOUSLY boring. I'm talking about claw your eyes out with a fork, throw yourself into traffic, practically a Geneva Convention violation it's so dull, writing. I mean let's be honest here, the teacher's assistant who's going to be grading your papers will probably have to drink like Ted Kennedy at a bachelor party just to make it through the week.

Now you may think, "OMG, Hawkins is saying I'm a boring writer! How will I ever live with the shame?!?!? That's it, I'm quitting school and sitting on the corner and begging for spare change for a living," but it's not your fault your writing is so boring. Academic writing is boring BY DESIGN! How do you think the leftist eggheads who are professors at your college keep their cushy jobs? It's all a scam! They get to spend their days playing Everquest in their office, hitting on impressionable young freshmen, and mocking the teacher's assistants who do all their work and you know why? Because only handfuls of normal human beings can make it through the soul sucking monotony of reading those academic papers! Why do you think Glenn Reynolds, a well-adjusted human being who's a professor, has time to make 4543534 posts per day on his blog? It sure isn't because he's digging through a thick stack of academic writing every night.

So don't listen to your professor's delicious lies about how she's teaching you how to write. She's turning you into Ross Gellar from Friends. I know, I know, you're probably thinking, "Wow, Friends? I like that show & oooh, Ross slept with Jennifer Anniston! This sounds pretty good...," WRONG! Not that Ross Gellar. Your professor is turning you into the Ross Gellar who drones on and on about dinosaurs until the other character's eyes glaze over and they look desperately for a way out of the room like a fox with its front paw pinned in a trap. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT? To be even more insipid than listening to Al Gore & Joe Lieberman discuss what kind of tie makes Al look more like an alpha male?

I'm only telling you this because I care...or because I want you to fail the course, I'm not saying which!!!

Just for the heck of it, here are a few blogs I've found particularly entertaining &/or interesting as of late. No blogs that advertise with me or that are on my referrer's list are eligible. I also tried to stay away from the better known blogs because I think most of you already know how good blogs like Little Green Footballs & Tim Blair are. So here we go...

Allah Is In The House
Blackfive
BushBlog
Capitol Hillblogger
The Hedgehog Report
HobbsOnline A.M.
Insults Unpunished
Joyful Christian
Outside The Beltway
Ravenwood
The SmarterCop
The Southern California Law Blog
Viking Pundit

The U.N.'s Committee on Rights of the Child isn't pleased with Canada. It seems that those Canadian barbarians are spanking their children and the UN doesn't approve...

"...A United Nations committee has ruled Canada should bar parents from spanking their children.

The ruling cannot supersede national law, the Post said, but Ottawa wants to comply with the regulations to bolster the U.N.'s attempt to encourage international norms."

Maybe it's just me, but I think Canadian parents should be the ones to decide whether or not they spank their children, not some committee of unelected busybodies at the UN. The very idea that a bunch of UN Bureaucrats should be instructing Canadians on how to raise their kids should be repellent to anyone who actually cares about their own country's sovereignty. I know some people may say that this isn't something to get hot and bothered about because the UN ruling cannot "supersede national law," but the point is that it's none of the UN's business to begin with.

Fortunately, we here in the US were smart enough to ignore the internationalists who think a global nannystate is a good thing and we did not to sign on to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. So unlike the Canadians, we don't have to stand by and grit our teeth while the UN's clumsy fingers pry away at the autonomy of American parents. That suits me, and I suspect the overwhelming majority of Americans, just fine.

***Update #1***: Lauraw posted this in the comments section and I thought it was funny...

"My Dear Kofi,

Your humble servant,
Hans"

I know I've been going to the DU well a lot over the last three days, but they keep producing such FANTASTIC material I haven't been able to resist. Here's one from a thread that hits the same theme Hesiod did in the post yesterday -- the American people are simply too stupid to know what's good for them (just to be fair, I want to note that there were people who disagreed with them)...

What we MUST realize in order to win - Americans are stupid and uninformed

Janekat: "This is very important because in order to win we must understand the way the average American thinks. I'm afraid WE have nothing in common with them.

THIS is what we are fighting against people. In order to win we will need to start pandering to the masses."

PROGRESSIVE1: "I would prefer 20%-25% voter turnout!!!! There are very few... people on either side of the aisle who understand the issues!

The masses can be so easily mislead that they really should not vote!"

mreilly: "Janekat is right... knock off the "elitist" accusations

Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. History has proven once again that as Janekat said the majority of people in this country aren't that bright. This factor is how the GOP gets into office again and again, despite their string of proven failures in the past.

You all can refer to this as "elitist" and complain it will alienate voters, but the current strategy of trying to explain the issues to the mental midgets out there isn't working. The GOP has benefited from dumbing down their platform so that the lowest common denominator stupidly thinks the Repubs are "just like me." Unless we want to keep losing elections, we'd better adjust to the fact the majority of the voters can't handle anything more complex than the political equivalent of a Happy Meal - enticing package, predictable contents, and fun toys."

I do so love it when the mask slips and people say what they really think...

Arnold is going to be governor of California, but his previous experience was acting and he has a big task ahead of him balancing the budget. So I was thinking, "Hey! He needs my advice!" So here is some advice to Arnold to be the bestest governor since Ronald Reagan and close that budget gap:

* No more groping; people want decency from their governor. People are less attractive at the capitol than Hollywood anyway. And, though your wife is related to the Kennedys, she deserves your respect.

* People need to respect you. If someone makes fun of the way you talk, smash his head between your two massive hands while shouting, "Dah!" That will be a good warning to others.

* The LA Times is obviously biased against you, so storm their headquarters with an M60 and kill them all. They probably won't like that, but they won't be alive to give you biased, negative coverage of the event since they'll be dead. NOTE: No one take this out of context and say I advised Arnold to murder a bunch of people. I'm telling him to kill journalists; leave the janitorial staff at the LA Times alone.

* You have to work with a Democrat legislature, and we all know they fear neither God nor man and wish the worst for everyone. When it comes time to vote on a budget you propose, run into the capitol and start throwing people around. This will intimidate them to vote your way.

* There are millions of illegal aliens in California, and they cost the taxpayers money. Since it's too hard to go around and find out who is an illegal alien and who isn't, just deport everyone in San Francisco.

* If you need more money, you could set up lemonade stands around your borders and sell to the states around you. Mmm... lemonade.

* To set the pace of budget cuts, whatever bureaucracy in California is wasting the most money, blow it up.

* Keep a dog with you at all times. If you are really successful, you may cause the downfall of the Democrats in the future. Thus, those future Democrats may send back a robot disguised as a man to kill you. Dogs are good at identifying those.

* I know you campaigned saying you're for gun control, but come on; you're Arnold. Liberalize laws on guns and then save money by cutting the police force in a program called "Shoot Your Own D@mn Criminals".

* The Indians have been having a free ride ever since we stole their land, enslaved them, and kept relocating them. It's time to make their casinos pay their fair share.

* If people are going to reduce spending, you need to set an example for them, Arnold. Instead of storming into a room firing two guns at once, use only one.

* I'm usually not for taxes that target the rich, and I know you promised you wouldn't raise them, but why not put a tax on Hollywood types who speak out for wacky causes. We'll call it the "Being a Pr*ck Tax".

* Another tax idea: just like their are extra taxes on things we consider harmful like alcohol and cigarettes, being poor is a drain on the economy, so tax that.

* Finding a way to make all the money fit in California could be hard, so find a state that doesn't have problems with their budget and set up a meeting with their governor. Then, when no one is looking, switch budgets. Muh ha ha ha!

* If all else fails, burn down California and collect the insurance money.

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

Reason's Editor-in-Chief Nick Gillespie busts out his....uh..."interesting" strategy for finding the Valerie Plame leaker...

"Bush said that "everything we know the investigators will find out," but told reporters: "I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is -- partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers."

Bush is compounding an ugly situation by such misdirection. It's insulting, at the very least."

So how is Bush supposed to make this happen? Should he use his psychic powers to probe the mind of his staff? A Vulcan mind meld maybe? Surely, no one can possibly be so naive as to think that all it will take is Bush ordering, "whoever made the leak to admit it and resign"?

Given that Bush has already asked his staff to cooperate, I think he's done about everything any reasonable person can expect to do. Especially since it's highly unlikely that any of his staff are going admit doing something that will get them fired & prosecuted when they have little to gain by revealing the truth and there's not much of a chance they're going to get caught.

If the leakers are caught -- and quite frankly that's unlikely -- it'll probably be because some reporter rats them out or because the DOJ tracks them down, not because they'll just decide to admit that they broke the law.

Roger Simon & Andrew Sullivan both make TRULY HUGE overreaches while trying to assign significance to Arnold's win. Ironically, Simon's article is practically self-refuting...

"Well I have news for them—something much bigger than they know, probably than Schwarzenegger himself knows, is going on here. We are not witnessing a Republican victory. The Republican Party in California remains a minority party. Most of the Republican true believers voted for McClintock.

...Perhaps I am being optimistic in how I read this. I admit it. Schwarzenegger has already been surrounded by the usual group of Republican apparatchiks, but we the people are watching...."

Excuse me for being a bit skeptical here, but when a Republican who is "surrounded by the usual group of Republican apparatchiks" wins an election, I hardly thinks that foretells "the death of the two-party system".

I probably wouldn't have even bothered to comment on this, but Andrew Sullivan actually agreed with Simon's analysis...

"Roger Simon gets the basic point: the Eagle revolution. It's a potentially excellent development for the state of California, for punishing a certain type of interest-group-beholden Democrat, and really, really good news for the future of the Republican party nationally. (Can you imagine how gloomy Alan Keyes is this morning?)

...Arnold also shows that Eagle politics can work - fusing low-tax conservatism with social tolerance and a tough foreign policy is the great missing politics in America. We may have just found our first truly charismatic candidate."

Look, the reality is that what just happened in California was a complete fluke. Just about EVERYTHING broke Arnold's way. Think about it...

-- Gray Davis is the most incompetent and disliked governor in America. For most California voters, Gary Coleman, Mary Carey, a chimp making policy decisions based on what type of banana he wants to eat today, any of them would have been an improvement over Davis.

-- Arnold's main Democratic rival, Bustamante, was a personality free pol who refused to renounce his ties to MEChA, a racist group that supports taking the Southwestern United States back from the United States. On top of that, Bustamante took millions in Indian Casino money and then defied a judge's order to stop showing commercials with the money. Bustamante was practically a dream opponent for Arnold.

-- Furthermore, the super short run-up to the recall was of tremendous benefit to Arnold. Over the long haul, Arnold's less than stellar grasp of the issues & the scandals would have worn him down as the excitement over his celebrity diminished.

-- On top of all that, California is one of the most, heck maybe the most, liberal state in America. Arnold's left-of-center positions on social issues would have been an albatross around his neck in most states, but in California, it helped him.

So is Arnold's win the start of a "revolution"? No, it's just an example of someone who was in the right place at the right time.

I wanted to give a big thank you to all of RWN's advertisers! They help make what RWN does possible. So first off, thanks to our returning advertisers...

Delta Star
Electric Venom
Ghost Of A Flea
Lex Libertas
Right Wing Nut
Right Wing Stuff
VitaminUSA
Widgets
Zogby Blog

Also, much thanks to our new advertisers,

DANEgerus Weblog
Neowhig 2004
RightNation
The Sake Of Argument

I would really appreciate it if you could check out a few of these blogs.

Deposed California Governor Gray Davis declared his candidacy for the Democrat nomination for President this morning.

"I have the best name recognition," said Mr. Davis. "I'm better known than any of the other nine candidates. My track record is equal to any of them, and better than some. And now I have some time on my hands "

Gov. Davis gives credit for his strong showing in the recall election to the help of former President Bill Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore and the former Rev. Jesse Jackson.

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

One of the things I've picked up on over time is that people on the left tend to get even more wacky than normal after they get hit with what they believe is a big loss. And yes, having Arnold "terminate" Gray Davis qualifies as a, "big loss". Just to show you what I mean, here are the titles from a few threads on the Democratic Underground along with a quote from each one...

---

It's official...American's officially most stupid people on Earth...

Nazgul35: "After decades of crappy public education, the American public has become so inept at practicing democracy that they have gone two in a row in electing vapid wastes of human skin to high offices in this country. And make no mistake, Bush will do everything in his power to ensure that Arnold succeeds...thus putting the gem of the Democratic Party into play...

edited for grammer and spelling...my excuse is stress...what's yours America!!! >:>"

---

It is painfully clear democracy is DEAD in America

screaming_meme: "Hate to say it, but it's true. And this is just the beginning.

People of California, WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU? You were our shining hope of being a model of liberal tolerance, open-mindedness, environmentalism and socio-economic justice. Now you're throwing it away to elect a groping satyr with a bad accent as your leader. I weep for our future."

---

Looking for the silver lining in a Nazi / Rapist / Racist victory....

Starpass: "Honey, everything that you just posted will totally go over the heads of Cal-a-forn-ee-uns and Amurekans. They will assume that everything will be peachy keen and one year from now will be totally convinced that Arnulllld terminated the problem. I am now living to see this pathetic nation die...it's the only sport left."

---

The New American Revolution Starts Now

Resistance Is Futile "A war of real information and real issues alone is doomed to fail. The Texas Fascist Party carries elections by drawing the hordes of stupid white men who are itching to 'get even' for decades of imagined slights. Arguing issues with these people is pointless.

The way to approach this vital segment of the electorate is not with issues but rather with propaganda. Speak to their hatred and direct it not towards the goals of the Texas Fascist Party but rather against them. Make them hate not liberals for raising taxes but rather offshoring that deprives them of their jobs. Make them hate big government which takes from hard working people such as themselves and gives it to the rich. Chanelling hatred, not addressing issues, is the challenge for resistance propagandists."

---

Will you finally admit there was a coup d'état in the United States?

Zhade: "I've been saying it for a couple of years now - we will see another civil war, possibly followed by a revolution if the true criminality of the neocabal is laid bare and their followers turn.

All I can say is: get your supplies ready, and keep your eyes sharp. It's going to be brutal."

---

Tin Foil Thoughts: Do they know who is gonna win before the election?

Kentuck: "I'm listening to Chris Matthews, Tom Brokaw and others talking as if they already know who the winner is and the polls aren't even closed yet?? I'm getting very uncomfortable conspiratorial feelings that it is all a fix. Why even vote at all? They know who they want to win ahead of time and play all of us citizens like fools. Until we get paper ballots with honest people to count them, I do not think I can ever trust our political system. The propaganda system is just too obvious. Sorry. I am not happy with the way our elections are held. After all, it doesn't matter how many people vote - all that matters is who counts the votes"

---

Keep in mind that all of this weirdness and angst is over a loss by the most incompetent governor in America to a left-leaning actor running as a Republican. Amazing...

***Update #1***: Here's part of what popular lefty Hesiod has to say about the recall over at Counterspin,

"POSTSCRIPT: Incidentally, I've learned my lesson. Never underestimate the stupidity of the American voter. Just when you think they can't be bigger f*cking idiots, they prove you wrong. That's not meant to be cynical. It's just a recognition of reality. 80% of the folks who voted for Arnold were f*cking idiots. And, that amounts to around 3 million people in the State of California alone.

Sorry to be harsh...but that's the only way."

I love it when people on the left get emotional & let what they really think about the American people slip out.

***Update #2***: Whoops! It was actually Hesiod, not Atrios as I originally said, who made the comment above. I have absolutely no explanation for why I posted the wrong name.

You just can't win with the left when it comes to voting machines.

With punch card ballots, the left doesn't like them because -- let's be totally honest here -- a certain percentage of people on the left are too dumb to correctly punch a hole in a piece of paper. The ACLU even tried to stop the California recall because they said, "8 million California voters could be disfranchised by what it described as defective machines that still use punch card ballots." Yeah....sure. That's silly given that we've been using punch card ballots for decades, but if you do believe that, the solution is to move to electronic voting.

But the left has a problem with electronic voting too. We're constantly hearing claims from people on the left that electronic balloting is too easy to rig. That's not an unreasonable concern. In fact, I've had concerns about that myself although unlike many people on the left, I'm not a crackpot who cries "fraud" every time someone in the GOP loses an election. But the reality is, anytime you work with computers, there is always an offhand chance that some malevolent cyber-genius is going to figure out how to abuse the code.

So what we have to face is the reality that there is no such thing as a perfect "fraud proof" system of voting. So which is it? Electronic voting, punch cards, or something else? Personally, it's all the same to me. We could even just make "x's" on sheets of paper beside of the candidate we want as far as I'm concerned (although that still might be a bit too complex for Palm Beach Democrats =D). In the end, we can make any of these systems work, it's just a matter of picking one and dealing with the fact that it has strengths and weaknesses.

The election isn't even over yet and the DU is already claiming it was rigged =) These results are from a thread entitled, "Who thinks the Recall is rigged and/or a fraudulent election?". There were four questions, one of which had no responses. Here are the current results from the three that were answered by 89 DUers so far;

The sane answer, which reads, "Nope, Schwartzenegger is leading fair and square" pulls 18% of the vote. Hooray for sanity! 18% of the people responding aren't crazy!

Then the answer called, "Probably, but I just dont want to think about right now" pulls 11% of the vote. Uh...and this is based on?

Last but not least, the #1 answer selected was, "Of course (it was rigged). Can you say electronic voting?" 71% yes 71%, of the people responding picked this answer. Welcome to crazytown! First stop, Moonbat lane!

Since the election is tonight, I wanted to go on the record and predict that Davis will be recalled and Arnold will win by a healthy margin over Bustamante. There are predictions that turnout could reach 65%+ and you have to think a lot of them are people who normally wouldn't vote, but are dying to cast their votes for the "Governator". Some people probably think the LA Times articles about Arnold's happy hands will sink his campaign, but I think the Times attacks will written off as nothing more than last minute partisan sniping by most Calfornia voters. We should know tomorrow morning...

***Update #1***: Straight from the Drudge Report to you...

"Latest Exit Polls Show 59% Vote 'Yes' For Recall, Top Campaign And Media Sources Tell Drudge Report, 51% For Schwarzenegger, 30% For Bustamante, 13% Mcclintock... Developing..."

If the margin turns out to be that big, I expect to see, "THE GOP RIGGED THE ELECTION" threads on the Democratic Underground =)

Here are few generalities about American politics that I believe to be the case. They're not always true, but they're good rules of thumb to keep in mind. (Cont)

***Update #1***: jayd42 writes in the comment section,

"-- You convince conservatives with logic, liberals with emotion, "

Why is it that conservatives are the ones that believe in God?"

Ah, if only all Americans who believed in God were conservative! Then the right would have an unbreakble veto-proof majority on every issue! Oh how sweet it would be! However, I think there quite a few people on the left who'd probably resent being cast as atheists and agnostics by definition. Heck, last I heard, there was even a left-wing reverend running for President although you certainly don't hear the media whining about it the way they would if Sharpton were a conservative.

That being said, is believing in God a matter of logic, of emotion and faith, or something else? Well, the answer to that is....ha, ha, ha suckers, you think I'm going to emesh myself in an argument like that? Why each person believes in God is a deeply personal thing and I'm sure you'd get answers all over the map on it. In any case, reread the short intro to the article,

"Here are few generalities about American politics that I believe to be the case. They're not always true, but they're good rules of thumb to keep in mind."

So when I say, "You convince conservatives with logic, liberals with emotion, and moderates with a mix of the two" it's not true in EVERY, SINGLE CASE. But I've found that's how it usually works.

Here's an exchange from the interview I did with David Limbaugh...

"John Hawkins: Here's another quote about the left and religion from Ann Coulter. She said,

David Limbaugh: I've said that liberals approach their politics almost as a theology too. They adhere to their liberal principles much as religious people adhere to their theology and their religion."

You want to see a perfect example of what we were talking about? Check out the end of this Johnathan Foreman op/ed about Arnold Schwarzengroper's happy hands...

Apart from the testimony of the groping victims, both of whom were convincing, the most honest thing I heard came from film producer and Codepink activist Patricia Foulkrod.

"If Arnold was a brilliant pol and had this thing about inappropriate behavior, we'd figure a way of getting around it. I think it's to our detriment to go on too much about the groping. But it's our way in. This is really about the GOP trying to take California in 2004 and our trying to stop it."

A lot of people who aren't really into politics believe that conservatives and liberals are simply mirror images of each other with different ideologies. In some respects, that's true. But there are a lot of differences as well. One of them is that many people on the left tend to look at their ideology much like religious doctrine. Now do some people on the right do that too? Yes, but to a much lesser extent.

For example, take Trent Lott. There would have been a barely a whimper about his comments at Strom Thurmond's birthday party if he had been a Democrat. On the other hand, do you think any Republican would have been treated like anything other than scum of the earth by HIS OWN PARTY if he had gone to Baghdad and tried to help out Saddam Hussein like Bonior & McDermott did? Any member of the GOP who did that, whether a Democrat were President or not, would be a pariah until they were voted out of office at the end of their term.

Then look to Kosovo. Many people in the GOP opposed it because they said it wasn't in our interests to go. But then President Bush was acting as if he wanted to go to Liberia...and still, most of the Conservative columns I saw were against it.

On the other hand, when Bill Clinton was talking about WMD, terrorists, & invading Iraq, a lot of prominent left-wingers were for it. But when Bush was talking about WMD, terrorists, & invading Iraq, many of those same Democrats opposed doing the exact same thing they supported vociferously when Clinton was in office. I bet you that if Al Gore had been in the White House, 50%+ of the people on the left who were against the war would have flipped sides and supported it while the overwhelming majority of conservatives would have held the same position.

You see to many of the protestors, it wasn't necessarily about the war itself, it was about who was in charge when we waged it. All those petty little motives they attributed to Bush like a "war for oil," "revenge for daddy," "trying to help out business buddies," etc, wouldn't have been an issue if a Democrat was in the White House, because he would have been on their side. Whereas Conservatives would have looked at the issue largely in the same way because most of them made their decision based on whether they thought about the issue, not out of blind loyalty to their party.

Like I said, to many people on the left, their positions are more like religious doctrine than positions they've come to hold because of any sort of logical thought process. To them it's "the left is good, the right is bad", and any scruples or principles they might have get tossed to the side if they get in the way of supporting "their team". Like religion, it's not about logic with them, it's about an unshakable faith that their side is right no matter what evidence can be produced to the contrary. That's why I've always said that you're not going to convince liberals to change their minds with logic. If they were logical people, they wouldn't be liberals to begin with.

"Dah!" Arnold Schwarzenegger yelled as he picked up his desk and snapped it in two.

"You have to calm down," President Bush told him, "You have to expect these kind of attacks from evil people like Gray Davis."

"Woman have boobies and I like to touch them!" Arnold shouted, "Why is that wrong?"

"Hey, I don't make the laws," Bush said defensively, but then thought for a moment. "Well, I do sign them."

"And I don't like Hitler!" Arnold said angrily, "Nazis are puny! I crush them! I am Ah-nuld!"

"We all know that; I wouldn't worry about it."

"By the way, thank you for coming to support me, President Bush person," Arnold stated more calmly, "You are very wise."

"Well thanks," Bush answered, "but I actually came down here to visit Disneyland." Bush's hands shot up into the air. "Pirates of the Caribbean!"

On T.V. was Cruz Bustamante giving a press conference. "It is disturbing to me that Arnold gropes women while praising Hitler," Bustamante told the press, trying to look serious and concerned.

"Dah!" Arnold screamed, crushing the T.V. with his fists. "I will kill that fat bald man! I will kill Davis too. They are puny! I will crush them! I am Ah-nuld!"

"Hey, the election is tomorrow," Bush told Arnold, "I'll tell you the same thing I told Rumsfeld: Wait until the polls close to go on a murderous rampage."

"You are a smart politician," Arnold said, "but I must go by what I know, and that is the solution to all problems is bloody vengeance!"

* * * *

"I myself would never grope women," Bustamante continued, "Why, even now, I make sure to get written permission before touching my wife. Also, I never praise Hitler on a daily basis."

A large figure in a black leather jacket and wearing sunglasses appeared before the podium. "Are you Cruz Bustamante?" he asked in a low voice.

"Uh... yes."

"You will be terminated!" Arnold shouted, grabbing Bustamante and lifting him into the air. "See that brick wall over there? He is your new friend. You go meet him up close and personal." Arnold then threw Bustamante so hard that he became embedded into the brick wall.

"Arnold killed Cruz Bustamante!" shouted a reporter.

Arnold turned to stare into a camera. "You are next, Davis!"

* * * *

"He's after us!" Gray Davis's aide exclaimed as he watched the T.V.

"Bah!" Davis yelled, "We will hit him with so many allegations that he will be paralyzed! No one can stop me from finishing my incompetent term as governor! No one!"

"But putting out allegations that he supports Hitler!" the aide exclaimed, "That's so extreme it's almost a self parody!"

"I say come up with even worse allegation!" Davis yelled, "Where are my loyal trolls from the Los Angeles Times?"

The slimy trolls emerged. "We are here to serve the Democratic Party, master."

"Put out a story that an unnamed source witnessed Arnold having gay sex with Satan."

"Certainly, master."

"Wait, I have an even better one," Davis said, "Allege that part of his bodybuilding routine was to make an energy shake by putting a puppy in a blender."

"That's so evil and ridiculous no one will believe it!" the aide shouted.

"Silence!" Davis screamed, "Flying monkeys take him away!"

"Noooooo!" the aide yelled as he was dragged off by the winged monkeys.

"We will go print your allegations, master," the trolls said as they left the office.

Davis then laughed evilly to himself until he was interrupted by the voice of his security officer over the intercom. "We're being assaulted by Arnold Schwarzenegger wielding a minigun!"

"That means a really small gun, right?" Davis asked.

The only response was the sound of automatic gunfire. Soon his door was kicked in and there stood Arnold. He tossed his minigun aside and said, "Instead of Gray Davis, you will now be known as `Black & Blue' Davis!"

"Ha!" Davis answered, "Everyone always underestimates me, but I'll show you!" Davis then charged Arnold and threw a punch at him. It landed with no effect.

"Dah!" Arnold shouted as he punched Davis, sending flying backwards and smashing it apart. "You are puny, Davis! I crush you! I am Ah-nuld!" He approached the wounded Davis. "You said you wanted a debate? Well now you will get to debate St. Peter on whether you are allowed through the pearly gates."

Davis held up a remote control. "If I can't be the incompetent governor of California, no one can! Muh ha ha ha!"

As Davis hit the button, Arnold jumped out of the window, plunging three stories as the governor's mansion exploded behind him.

Bush, wearing a Goofy hat, quickly ran over to help Arnold off the ground. "So is Davis really gone for good?" Bush asked.

Arnold looked to the rubble of the governor's mansion. "We will know for certain soon. I am Ah-nuld!"

TO BE CONTINUED TOMORROW AT A CALIFORNIA POLLING PLACE NEAR YOU!

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

As most of you probably already know, this week-end, in response to a suicide bombing that killed 19 Israelis, Israel bombed a an Islamic Jihad camp in Syria. Predictably, there was outrage at the UN...

"We think this attack is an unacceptable violation of the international law," said France's Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan condemned the air strike, and a statement from his office said the UN chief was concerned that the "escalation of an already tense and difficult situation has the potential to broaden the scope of current conflicts in the Middle East."

So following "international law" means that you have to stand by helplessly while Syria aids terrorists who are trying to kill you? Let me respond to that by paraphrasing Dickens; "If international law supposes that, then international law is an @ss, an idiot".

As far as I'm concerned, there is absolutely no difference between terrorists supported & sheltered by Syria murdering Israelis and Syria's military murdering Israelis. It's a half-dozen of one, six of the other. The end result is that there are Israelis being murdered because Syria is trying to make it happen.

Oh, and these complaints about "escalation"? In my opinion, Israel's problem is exactly the opposite of what most people think it is, they don't escalate things ENOUGH. The idea that terrorists should be able to set up camps in surrounding nations and attack Israel at their leisure while their host countries aren't held responsible is simply ludicrous.

Just imagine what the reaction of United States would be if let's say Hizbollah, with the full support and cooperation of the Mexican government, started setting up terrorist camps across the border and then started sending suicide bombers into Arizona and Texas. You don't think we'd bomb their camps? Hell, we'd secure the border by any means necessary, destroy the camps, and we'd put Vicente Fox on a slab just to make sure that everyone understood that sort of activity wasn't going to continue.

So good for Israel, I support their attack 110%. In fact, I think their biggest mistake was not doing it sooner.

On Friday, I got together on the phone with David Limbaugh to talk about his new book, 'Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging War Against Christianity'. It was a fascinating discussion that ranged far and wide across the landscape where religion and politics intersect. We discussed a variety of things including constitutional issues, the left's problem with religion, school prayer, religious "litmus-tests" for judicial appointees, and even Mel Gibson's film, "The Passion" which Mr. Limbaugh has actually seen. I think you'll enjoy the interview. (Cont)