It would be tempting to write off this article as the scribblings of a pie-in-the-sky idealist who no one would ever take seriously if there weren't already a US Senator and Democratic Candidate for President who have previously come out in favor of his silly idea. What is the idea we're talking about you ask? Why, a Department of Peace, of course! I'll let Coleman P. Gorham explain ramble on nearly incoherently...

"Can we say that our goal is to promote peace? Or are we a nation of warriors? If some were to say that we are a peace-loving nation, why don't we have a Department of Peace to counterbalance our Department of Defense? Where are the peace academies to counterbalance the military academies?

The national attitude that war can resolve issues has failed miserably. A Peace Department and a Peace Academy could slowly move us from a war mentality to one of love, hope and peace."

This idea is actually so ridiculous that it reminds me of the "Underwear Gnomes" episode of SouthPark. Except in this case, it's...

Step 1: We create a Peace Department!

Step 3: We have Peace!

Of course, there is no step 2, there's just a bunch of meaningless pap about moving to a " love, hope and peace" mentality that means less than zero to the sort of people who want to fly airplanes into our buildings.

Can't you just imagine Gorham, or for that matter Kucinich or Harkin coming up with this idea? It probably went about like this...

"Wow, wouldn't it be great if we were at peace man? Then all people, in all nations, would be friends and the whole world would be like one giant, peaceful, tie-died commune where we'd all spend our days playing frisbee & hackensack! But, how can we do it, how, HOW? Wait a second, why hasn't anyone ever thought of this before??? We'll use the government to fix the problem; the government can fix anything! Once we create a Department of Peace, harmony on earth is guaranteed!"

It all sounds so great doesn't it? But what the Coleman P. Gorhams of the world do not understand is that thugs like Bashar Assad, Kim Jung-Il, & Muammar Qaddafi, have absolutely no interest in cooperation or peace unless they're afraid you might just be capable & willing to kill them one day. Deny if you like, but it's human nature and it's not going to change anytime soon...

Howard Dean today announced that one of his first acts as president will be to create what he called the "United Blanco College Fund."

The $4 billion fund would provide scholarships to "progressive" universities for promising students who don't yet understand racial issues.

Mr. Dean's announcement followed his remarks to a reporter in South Carolina that, "Dealing with race is about educating white folks."

"The United Blanco College Fund demonstrates my commitment to educating the people whose ignorance results in most racial problems," said Mr. Dean. "We shouldn't disparage these people, who simply suffer from a lack of education. It's clear that 12 years under the tutelage of the National Education Association is insufficient to fully educate white folks. Whether because of genetic factors or poor upbringing, these white folks need our help. After all, a white mind is a terrible thing to waste too."

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

"It was trailed as a "unique chance to rewrite the law of the land". Listeners to BBC Radio 4's Today programme were asked to suggest a piece of legislation to improve life in Britain, with the promise that an MP would then attempt to get it onto the statute books...."

That's certainly an interesting concept, although I'm not sure why you need to have a contest to get a representative to propose legislation that the people want. Isn't that the essence of what their job is; to serve their constituents? It's like having a contest to decide who's going to get their order filled at McDonald's.

But in any case, things went horribly awry when ***gasp*** the "little people" actually asked to be able to legally defend their homes against burglars. Who do these peons think they are?

"...26,000 votes later, the winning proposal was denounced as a "ludicrous, brutal, unworkable blood-stained piece of legislation" - by Stephen Pound, the very MP whose job it is to try to push it through Parliament.

Having recovered his composure, Mr Pound told The Independent: "We are going to have to re-evaluate the listenership of Radio 4. I would have expected this result if there had been a poll in The Sun. Do we really want a law that says you can slaughter anyone who climbs in your window?"

I can't speak for our British brethren, but here in America we feel it's our right to, "slaughter anyone who climbs in (our) window" and I guarantee you that our crime rate would be MUCH higher if that wasn't our attitude.

It's preposterous that this MP believes it's "ludicrous, brutal, unworkable" to protect your home, your life, and your family from some burglar/rapist/serial killer coming in your window at 2 AM in the morning. My advice to any Brit who has someone breaking into their house would be to incapacitate or kill them in any way possible and then hope that a lawyer can keep you from going to jail. Like the old saying goes, "it's better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6".

Patton turned 2 years old yesterday...

Here is a comment from, "The Problem With The Minimum Wage" post that I put up on Friday...

"...We don't need a higher minimum wage, we need a maximum wage. Say, $10 million per year. That's easily too much money for any rational person. Anyone who makes more than that doesn't deserve it. The obscenely rich will hardly notice it. That money will 'trickly down' _instantly_ into the economy. Result: the standard of living of 99% of our population goes up." -- RanDomino

So why not have a maximum wage?

Well, we have to remember that people, even the "obscenely rich" as RanDomino calls them, will change their behavior if circumstances change. In this case, if we limit the amount that people can make, the people who hit that limit will for the most part do 1 of 2 things; Either they will find a way to get around the law by being compensated in perks, stock options, or other ways, or their level of effort will precipitously decline when they max out the amount of money they're allowed to make. That's just human nature and it applies to the rich just like it does to the rest of us.

For example, let's say you get a sales job and each month, you get $10 a widget for the first 500 widgets you sell and nothing for any beyond that number. Furthermore, let's say you sell 500 widgets in the first week of the month. Well, what's going to happen then? You're going to coast and do the absolute minimum that you're required to do for the rest of the month. Again, that's just human nature. People don't work for free, they work for compensation.

Well, the same thing applies to the rich. Just ask yourself; if there had been a $10 million dollar ceiling on people's earning, do you think McDonald's, Walmart, Microsoft, Ford, or any of the other big corporations would exist in their current form? I can tell you definitively that they would not. Why would Ray Kroc bother to sell McDonald's franchises if he couldn't make money off of them? What sense would it make for Microsoft to continue rolling out new products if Bill Gates wouldn't be able to legally make a dime off of them? There would be no point to it, just as their would be no point to you trying to sell that 501st widget if you weren't going to be paid for it.

Besides, if a person or corporation is willing to pay someone $10 million for their services or if the owner of a business has such a terrific product or service that they can get rich off it, who are we to arbitrarily decide that they're making "too much money"? As far I'm concerned, we should let people earn as much as the market will bear.

Like many of you, I am going to be taking tomorrow off. So there won't be an update on RWN. I know, I know...first it was a week at Thanksgiving, then half a week at Christmas, and now New Years. Well don't sweat it; it's just that time of year. I'll be back on my regular schedule starting Friday, which means about a vacation day per month until we hit the holiday season next year.

But, before I take the rest of the night off, I just wanted to let you know that December was my third consecutive "best month ever". As of today at 10 PM EST, RWN has had 183,390 daily uniques and 351,123 pageviews. Just to give you a rough idea of how much the page has grown this year, RWN only pulled around 200,000 pageviews in January of this year.

I'd like to thank all of RWN's readers, all of the blogs and websites that linked RWN, and all of RWN's advertisers for helping the page to grow. I've had a great time writing for all of you and I look forward to doing it again all through next year. Until RWN returns, feel free to check out some of our advertisers...

Amaravati: Abode Of Amritas
The American Mind
The Bully Pulpit
DANEgerus Weblog
Delta Star
Mark Dubbin's "Shadow Patriot"
Electric Venom
For The Sake Of Argument
Ghost Of A Flea
G. Gordon Liddy's Stacked & Packed Calender
Joanne Jacobs
Lex Libertas
Moxie
Neowhig 2004
RightNation
Right Wing Nut
Right Wing Stuff
The Southern California Law Blog
The Steel Cage
VitaminUSA
Widgets

Have a merry New Years celebration and I'll see all of you on Friday!

Here are my favorite blogs of 2003, ranked from 1 - 41. As per usual, do keep in mind that these sort of lists change frequently over time based on a variety of factors. For example, there are three blogs in my top 20 that wouldn't have made my top fifty 6 months ago. So don't sweat it if your blog didn't get included....

41) QandO
40) Cam Edwards
39) Cut On The Bias
38) Israpundit
37) Outside The Beltway
36) Cox & Forkum
35) Jihad Watch
34) Croooow Blog
33) Kim Du Toit
32) Joyful Christian
31) The Daily Rant
30) The Southern California Law Blog
29) HobbsOnline A.M.
28) For The Sake Of Argument
27) The Volokh Conspiracy
26) JunkYardBlog
25) Sgt. Stryker's Daily Briefing
24) Balloon Juice
23) USS Clueless
22) Daily Pundit
21) Ravenwood's Universe
20) Electric Venom
19) DANEgerus Weblog
18) Vodka Pundit
17) Political Wire
16) Gut Rumbles
15) Pejmanesque
14) Damian Penny
13) Samizdata
12) Inoperable Terran
11) The Bleat
10) Dean's World
9) Allah Is In The House
8) A Small Victory
7) The Corner
6) Andrew Sullivan
5) Right Thinking From The Left Coast
4) Tim Blair
3) Betsy's Page
2) Little Green Footballs
1) Instapundit

PS: I decided that IMAO & Scrappleface should be ineligible since I use their material so often.

After being on the receiving end of numerous attacks from his Democratic rivals throughout the weekend, Howard Dean had reason to be optimistic today when a new poll showed he could become the next president of the United States -- if enough people get totally plastered before voting.

The poll indicates that if a significant portion of the population drinks at least eight beers, two bottles of wine and/or a pint of whiskey on Election Day then Dean might obtain enough votes to carry him through the White House.

The poll also suggests that Dean could win if the overwhelming majority of likely Bush voters oversleep, catche spontaneous amnesia or stay home to read weird endings to online satire articles.

If you enjoyed this satire, check out the Chortler.

James Lileks captured a thought I've had for a while now but haven't gotten around to writing about,

"...(W)e live in an era of non-contiguous information streams. I believe one thing; someone else believes another – and the bedrock assumptions are utterly contradictory. This is what drives me nuts about discussing current events with some people. It’s like discussing the Apollo program with people who think it was all faked, or discussing archeology with those who believe the world is six thousand years old. I think the Iraq Campaign was part of a broad war against Islamicist fascism and the states that enable it; others think it’s all about oil and Halliburton jerking the strings of a Jeebus puppet. No. Middle. Ground."

Lileks is right about discussing current events in general and the war in Iraq specifically. It's absolutely impossible to rationally discuss the invasion with many people on the anti-war left. It does not matter what facts you trot out, what arguments you make, or how many mistaken assumptions of theirs that you correct, because they are opposed to the war based on unverifiable feelings that they have about George Bush's "real" motivation for the invasion. At it's root, their position is basically, "I believe George Bush is bad, so everything he does must be a bad thing". You can't ever "prove" them wrong because their position is based on feelings, not logic.

That's why their positions so often end up coming across as inconsistent. Just to point out one example out of many, you'll find a lot of people who justified bombing Kosovo without UN approval solely on humanitarian grounds. Yet, they'll tell you they were adamantly opposed to going into Iraq, despite the fact that we freed 25 million Iraqis from Saddam's tyranny, because we didn't get UN approval.

Once you understand what's really going on, all the contradictory positions, bizarre theories, and dubious arguments that people on the anti-war left trot out make much more sense. The truth is that many people on the anti-war left are just grasping at any straw, no matter how flimsy, because they're embarassed to admit the truth; that their position on the war is based on little more than their dislike of George Bush.

After a year of trudging through the Democratic Underground fever swamp, I thought it would be fun to put together the 10 worst quotes of the year from the DU. Picking out only 10 was pretty tough, but after much thought, I was able to narrow it down. Enjoy the wackiness, paranoia, and venom... (Cont)

PS: This is a good one to spread around, particularly to your moderate friends who don't understand what you think is so repellent about the left...

Howard Dean has come out in favor of raising the minimum wage,

"If elected, (Dean) promised to raise the national minimum wage to $7 per hour, up from $5.15.

"Our philosophy is give the working people a little more money and they might be able to go down and spend something on Main Street," he told the audience of labor and African American activists here in Detroit."

In reality, raising the minimum wage is just as likely to put those working people Dean is talking about out of a job as it is to give them a "little more money" to spend down on Main Street.

Why is that you ask?

Well, you have to consider that there is no such thing as a free lunch. A business that pays its workers minimum wage is going to have to make changes to deal with extra costs that are being imposed on them by the government.

On the one hand, the business may decide to pass those costs on to their customers and raise prices.

However, competition may mean that raising prices isn't possible. So what can the business do then? Depending on the field and position involved, there are a lot of different options companies have...

-- They may simply end up going out of business because they can't compete.

-- It's also possible that the business may decide to fire the employee and not hire a replacement if the position isn't essential.

-- The business may replace the worker with a piece of machinery or software that now looks more attractive because of the higher labor costs.

-- Moving their operations overseas where labor costs are cheaper may become an option.

-- Two low skilled workers making the minimum wage may be replaced by a higher paid worker with more skills.

We could go on and on with different possibilities, but the important thing to remember is that because minimum wage laws make labor more expensive than what an employer would be otherwise willing to pay, jobs that are usually filled by the youngest, least skilled, & least educated among us are lost as a result.

In truth, we'd be better off completely abolishing the minimum wage because that would help more of our least employable citizens get into the work force where they could make some money while gaining skills & experience that could allow them to get better jobs down the line.

So getting rid of the minimum wage, not increasing it, is the way we should be going.

***Update #1***: In the comments section, RanDomino wrote in part,

"Hey, good points all, but you know what happens when there's no minimum wage? That's right! No wage at all! Okay, maybe not _no_ wage (because then no one would work), but not enough to be happy with. Could you survive on $1 per hour? didn't think so."

This is a common misperception that many people have about the minimum wage. They believe that if the minimum wage wasn't there, many businesses would slash the wages they pay out down the bone.

Now certainly, companies that are already paying the minimum wage to workers might try to cut those salaries since they're only paying the amount they're being forced by law to pay anyway. But, a company that's paying out $10 an hour today, wouldn't slash salaries down to $1 an hour if the minimum wage law were removed.

Now why is that?

Well, let's say that every company in America started paying their employees $1 an hour starting tomorrow. How many people would turn up late every day and leave early, take 3 hour lunches, and just skip work 2 or 3 days a week? Heck, how many people would show up at all?

Then think about what would happen if, let's call them ABC company, got sick and tired of the poor performance of their workers and decided to pay their workers $3 a hour instead of a $1. Well, all the best workers would then go to ABC company. So in order to compete, other companies in their field would raise their salaries to $3 an hour, or better yet $3.25 in order to get even BETTER employees than ABC company.

Eventually, salaries & benefits would come right back up to their current rates because companies need to have the most productive employees they can afford to help them remain competitive in their industry. That's why 97% of American workers made more than the minimum wage in 2002. Removing the minimum wage would have a very minimal impact, perhaps so small that it would be unnoticeable, on the salaries of those people already making more than $5.15 an hour.

Here's one more example of left's slide into paranoia and delusion that appears in a column written by Kurt Nimmo on the wildly popular (16k+ readers per day) Smirking Chimp website....

"Bush's fraudulent terror alerts endeavor to convince America that "sufficient threat" exists to such a perilous degree from a largely mythical al-Qaeda that not only is "covert disruption" necessary -- as the FBI memorandum sent to local law enforcement alludes -- but a wholesale decimation of the Bill of Rights is also in order. PATROIT II -- with its specification that troublemakers shall be deported -- wasn't craft on a whim by legal clerks with nothing better to do at the Justice Department. It will be enacted and used in due time.

Martial law is rarely kind to dissenters."

So there you go. The terror alerts are just to keep people frightened, Al-Qaeda is largely mythical, Bush is going to engineer a terrorist attack and impose martial law, and then it's off to the gulags with all the liberals.

I want you to think about this folks. Kurt Nimmo writes this nutty column and sends it in to the Smirking Chimp, a popular, "mainstream" leftist website. They look at it and decide that it's appropriate to post. So they put it up and it's read by thousands and thousands of liberals. Out of all those people, only 4 bother to comment and none of them takes Nimmo to task for his insane assertions. Furthermore, there aren't going to be any left-wing blogs that go, "Woah, those Smirking Chimp guys are way out there, maybe I shouldn't be linking to them." In fact, you're probably not even going to find any significant left-wing websites that will slam the Smirking Chimp for running this column.

That's because this sort of jeremiad is fast becoming almost totally unremarkable on the left. To most Americans, what Nimmo is writing here is "fringe whackery of the first order", but on the left it's just another alternative viewpoint that doesn't even raise an eyebrow anymore. That's actually kind of scary...

Sales of America's dietary staples--cow spinal fluid and brain tissue--dropped significantly last week after the discovery of a case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE or mad cow disease') in Mabton, Washington.

A quick survey of upscale cafes in the Seattle area showed a precipitous decrease in sales of spinal latte, a musky cocktail made from steamed spinal fluids and arabica beans.

Meanwhile, delicatessens throughout the city report declining demand for their formerly-popular brain-based foods.

"I used to love coming here for a cerebellum sandwich and a cup of spinal soup," said an unnamed deli customer, "But these news reports have got me spooked. I think I'm going to stick with tuna for a while, even though the mercury in tuna seems to make me unusually sensitive to temperature changes."

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued a news release confirming the safety of the "vast majority of cow central nervous system foods."

"There is no cause for alarm," according to the USDA release. "Americans should continue to enjoy a normal diet, rich in cow spinal products, temporal lobes, cerebral cortices and medulla oblongata. Especially during the holidays, we encourage everyone to eat brain, drink spinal fluid and be merry."

The USDA will launch a public service advertising campaign later this week featuring young, hip celebrities singing:

"With the thoughts you'd be thinking,
You could be another Lincoln,
if you only ate a brain."

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

For your amusement, here are some of the "best of 2003" lists that are floating around right now...

-- The Twenty Most Annoying Liberals In The United States -- The 2003 Edition
-- The 2003 American Moonbat Of The Year Award
-- The 2003 Warblogger Awards
-- Time -- Year In Pictures 2003
-- The Sixteenth Annual Awards for the Year’s Worst Reporting
-- The Twenty Most Annoying Conservatives For 2003
-- A Roll Call Of The Greats Who Left Us In 2003
-- 2003 Top Ten Campus Follies
-- The Top 10 Media Blunders Of 2003
-- The Top Yahoo Searches Of 2003
-- Pioneer Press Picks 2003's Top 10 National And International Stories
-- The AP Picks The Top Stories Of 2003

Although all the details haven't been released yet, the new Bush administration immigration plan sounds like a disaster in the making. Apparently the Bush administration intends to reward illegal immigrants for breaking the law by eventually giving amnesty to any criminal who manages to successfully sneak across our borders to look for work. The way that the American people are being sold out on this issue, among others, is so disgraceful that I almost wish Bush had a primary challenger just to force him to stop acting like such a RINO on domestic issues.

Were Bush serious about dealing with illegal immigration, let me give you an idea of about what he'd be doing...

We can get most illegal aliens to leave on their own if we...

-- Levy LARGE fines on employers who hire illegals. Flagrant or repeat violators could face jail time. Vigorously enforce this law and this will take away the jobs illegal aliens are coming here to get.

-- Allow illegal immigrants to receive no benefits or privileges other than emergency medical care. Cut off certain types of federal funding to states that provide services to illegals.

Then to get rid of the stragglers...

-- Give the police the authority and the funding to lock-up illegal aliens until they can be deported.

-- Make any illegal alien caught on US soil ineligible to ever become a citizen.

-- Do not give citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.

To discourage future problems with illegal aliens...

-- Double our manpower on the US border and equip them with radar stations and predator drones. We can control our borders; it's simply a matter of devoting the manpower and resources to the task.

-- Set up a work program with Mexico. Allow Mexican citizens who have filled out their paperwork to get work permits and come to the United States & work in a controlled and legal manner.

While these steps wouldn't solve our problems overnight, they would have a significant impact right off of the bat and within a few years, they would for the most part end illegal immigration to the US on a large scale. Too bad the Bush administration is more interested in scoring a few cheap points with business owners and Latino voters at the rest of America's expense, or he'd be proposing something along these lines...

A couple of things worth mentioning...

About's Political Humor has chosen RWN as a nominee in the "Most Entertaining Right-Wing News & Commentary" category of the 2003 Political Dot-Comedy Awards. Believe it or not, I'm currently in 2nd place w/ 14% of the vote right now even though the other contestants are right off of the "A-list" of conservative web pages. As we speak, I am behind The Drudge Report & beating WSJ's Best OF The Web Today, Free Republic, & Newsmax. It's nice to get a little recognition every once in a while.

Also, Ted Rall apparently stopped pining for another Vietnam in Iraq and mocking women who lost their husbands in 9/11 for just long enough to note that he was chosen as the Most Annoying Liberal of 2003 by yours truly...

"I'd like to (sniff) thank my cat...the food I ate...my dead friends...everyone who made it possible for me to be named No. 1 Most Annoying Liberal by the Right Wing News blogger site! This is the second year in a row that this list, which travels around the Usenet faster than the I Love You virus, has been compiled by the friendly fascists, but the first time that I beat out such worthies as Michael Moore (#2), Gov. Howard Dean (#3), Nobel Prize winning President Jimmy Carter (#7), Al Franken (#15) and yes, the Dixie Chicks (#20)!

The best part is reading the justifications for each entry. It seems that, to these brave teenagers, anyone with an original thought in his or her head is a danger to the republic. I've won many awards, but this is one is nearly as good as a Pulitzer Prize!.."

Love you too Ted =D, even if you are the walking embodiment of everything that's wrong with liberalism...

Now of course, it's not over until the fat lady sings, but anyone who follows politics knows that the Democratic candidate, especially Howard Dean, is going to have a really tough time knocking off Bush. I mean think about it; Bush is a likable President who has had a lot of foreign policy success and who is probably going to be riding a very strong economy in 2004. On the other hand, Howard Dean is perceived as an angry, anti-war candidate with a gift for sticking his foot in his mouth. Moreover, Dean is going to be running on raising taxes, support for civil unions, and getting rid of the nuclear missile defense shield among other things.

I mean it does't exactly take Dick Morris to figure out who the stronger looking candidate is here...but, you can't tell that to the people at the Democratic Underground. They apparently believe that if Dean doesn't win, it means the fix is in! Here are a few of their posts...

sventvkg: With the New Secret bill that has all the Patriot act II provisions in it and ghestapo tactics as well as the Failure of the Dems in Congress to do anything about it, I'm starting to think there has been a silent Coup in This Country...And Neocons are Dictators..Apparently we have been powerless to stop it and maybe mechanisms are in place (BB E-Voting) that are going to assure them of a victory next year and make it look like there was a Vote and we are still a democracy when in fact The Right has Seized power in a masked FAcist dictatorship..

What would you do if this does happen? If the America we knew disappeared overnight only by Stealth..Because that is the way it would be done..we are hanging on by a thread here and it's more serious then most of us want to acknowledge...Dean said this, and Clark said that, and blah blah...It's all Bull$#$...We are in serious chrisis and on the verge of losing our country and way of life to a bunch of Fanatics..but i'm sure i'll get flamed for being crazy and paranoid...Oh well, remember my words when you finally come out of denial because this is what I see...Plain as day...

FarLeftRage: Well, if that does indeed happen and there are enough po'd people around, there will be either a revolution or a civil war...

Skittles: ya THINK ??? The BUSH II PLAN was *ALWAYS* for eight years; maybe 12 if you tack on Jeb. There is no way in HELL a fair election will happen next year.

rchsod: it started in 2000 and in three short years the country is now in the hands of fasists. it`s a judeo-christian take over of the united states and a crusade against the muslim religion and it`s peoples. the media in the united states has been the driving force to futher the programs of those who intend on doing this. information is closely controlled by the whitehouse and then released to their loyalists in the news outlets thus influences what people should believe. the only people who see this are those who understand what is going on-the left and the far right neo nazis and that is what is truly scary

Q: "..there has been a silent Coup in This Country"

- Some seem to think that they'll be 'riots or a civil war' if the Bushies screw us again in 2004. But I think the people will once again do nothing. BushCo* knows that the people and their representatives are powerless and in no position to stop them.

kayell: We are all slowly being boiled like the oblivious frogs in the soup pot. This was my experience with my family too this holiday. Mind, these are people who are politically more aware than most Americans. They marched in the peace protests in the DC area, they subscribe to dem email lists, they read the news and not just the US propaganda media, they've all read Greg Palast... And yet, they are sure that nothing REALLY bad can happen, because the courts will save us, the American people would rebel, etc. Even my mother who 2 years ago said that * reminded her of Hitler says it can't happen here. I tried to get our family to sit down together and talk about making a contigency plan if things go really wrong. No doing. Things will never get that bad, we aren't germany in the '30s, it can't happen here.

You know, I've been covering kooks like this practically since I started RWN and many times I've had people tell me that it's not worth doing because these people are on the "fringes". But, I'm here to tell you, this is not the patter of lunatics that will be laughed at by most "responsible" liberals. There are a lot of people in the "mainstream" left who take this poppycock very seriously. Just look to Dennis Kucinich saying the terror alerts are a scare tactic, Jim McDermott saying we timed the capture of Saddam of help Bush, and Howard Dean floating the idea that maybe, just maybe "Bush knew" about 9/11. These "crazy" ideas from the "fringe whackos" at the DU boards sure do seem to keep popping out of the mouths of "mainstream" Democrats, don't they? That's because they may be in the minority on the left, but they're not on the "fringes"...

If you like the idea of a round eyed, pretty boy teaching the Japanese what being a samurai is really all about, then you're going to love "The Last Samurai". Of course, there are also some great action sequences & lots of "Return of the King" like walking around sequences featuring Tom Cruise and Samurai "Bob," but at least this movie doesn't feature hobbits hugging each other incessantly.

As I said, there were some truly impressive combat sequences in the movie, which is great news since it'll keep you from focusing too hard on the convoluted, bottomless, well of nonsense that is the plot. Try to follow this if you can; the "good guys" are the samurai, rebels who are rebelling against the emperor, who they consider to be a God by the way, for his own good. Later in the movie, we find out the Emperor can apparently stop their "rebellion" at any time just by asking, but instead he hires Tom Cruise to kill them all. O....K. Know why the samurai are rebelling? Well, they're basically luddites who want to "preserve" Japan's traditions. Traditions which include defending the Emperor with swords, bows and arrows. Meanwhile, the bad guys are the eeeeevvvvviiiilllllll Americans who want to sell the Japanese rifles, canons, and gatling guns and the Japanese capitalist who want to modernize the country.

You almost have to think there wouldn't have been a movie at all if a conversation like this had happened,

Head Samurai Guy: Emperor, we are rebelling against you so that you will see value of the old ways.

Emperor: I see. Well, let me ask you a question; if the Russians show up and start shelling our coast with cannons, what do you propose to do about it?

Head Samurai Guy: We will die bravely in a vain attempting to row out to their ships!

Emperor: Well see, I don't want you to "die bravely". I want you to fire cannons back at them and sink their ships. You know what else? I don't want people to spend all day riding across country on horseback carrying a letter when they can use a telegraph to send it immediately instead. Furthermore, do you understand how convenient it is to take food from one side of the main island to the other on a railroad?

Head Samurai Guy: Yes, but...

Emperor: But? Did I hear you say "but"? Ok, let's try something...I want everyone who's a living God in this room to raise their hands right now (raises his hand). Are you raising your hand? No, you're not are you? So let me tell you what you're going to do; You're going to learn to use a rifle, use a cannon, & use a gatling gun. You're also going to teach your men to do it. Now, if you don't want to ride on the railroad or use a telegraph, don't do it. Spend your time making tea, tending your orchard, preying to Buddha, or whatever it is you primitives like to do to pass the time. But, you're going to stop rebelling and get with the program, do you understand me? Kneel before ZOD!

Head Samurai Guy: (Kneels) Yes Emperor, I will obey.

That's probably all it would have taken to save thousands of lives and keep us from having to watch a drunken Tom Cruise alternately mope over his past and moon endlessly over how great the samurai culture was.

So is it a "thumbs up" or a "thumbs down"? Well, if the idea of seeing "Dances With Wolves" redone with better battle sequences and samurais instead of Indians is your cup of tea, then it's definitely a "thumbs up" for you. Otherwise, let's just call it a thumbs in the middle. If you think seeing great action outweighs the nonsensical plot, catch the film. If not, then be happy that I saved you from wasting 2 1/2 hours of your life.

To celebrate the capture of the Ace of Spades; Al Jazeera, in conjuntion with K-Tel, have announced that a collection of video and audiotapes featuring Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein will be offered for sale starting tomorrow via the internet.

The collection, entitled the "Death to America" series, is a "Best of" of Bin Laden's and Hussein's speeches, rants, invocations, incitements and hate-filled incomprehensible babblings and will retail at $199.99.

"It's a great offer," glowed Al-Leslah Moonvesbooba, CEO of Al-Jazeera. "Normally, if you bought all these speeches and videos and threats separately, it would cost you well over $1000. But we're bringing them to you at a cut-rate and not only that, we're offering you a gift if you purchase in the next ten days." The gift is a video of Bin Laden and Hussein's offscreen moments, bloopers, bleeps and practical jokes. Says Moonvesbooba, "On it you can see the world's number one terrorist sending two dozen pizza with ham on them to devout Muslim Mullah Omar's cave; you can see the crazy Iraqi dictator accidentally putting the wrong person through a shredder -- whoops, sorry!; you can see Bin Laden beat his daughter senseless with a switch when he caught her watching what he thought was 'Exodus' but actually it turned out to be 'The Hustler.'

It's just hilarious." Responding to criticism the collection was sick, twisted and a vile way to make money, Moonvesbooba said "balderdash! It's a moment of distraction in a strife-ridden world. It's the perfect gift for the insane Jihadist in all of us."

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