Sorry if I went heavy on the humor and light on the political commentary today, but I was hang dog, tongue hanging out, bout to keel over tired all day. I was looking about like my dog Patton does after I play ball with him for about 30 straight minutes...

...and I just was not able to write the amount I normally like to before I had to go to sleep.

On the other hand, I have some sweeeeet articles planned for Monday, so make sure to tune in then...

***Update #1***: In the comments section Slayerdaddy asks...

"Is Patton one'a them Right Wing Attack Dogs?"

and vrwc_overlord responds...

"Ya'll must be kiddin'..Patton is Chomps' little brother;-)...Can't you tell, he's got that same ferocious hippy hating look in his eyes;-)"

Oh yeah, Patton could handle the part of Chomps' little brother...

Unfortunately, he'd be too wild and unruly to actually star in a movie, but I bet he'd look great on a RWN t-shirt...

IMAMS: "YOU HAD US AT 'SORRY'"

Washington - The recent apology of US President George W. Bush for abuses by American military prison guards continued to reverberate around the globe today, as the White House was again inundated with with a flurry of "apology accepted" notes from world media, governmental leaders, and Islamic fundamentalist clerics.

Typical of the responses was a personal note from Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, who wrote "aww, dude, you know I can't stay mad at you," saying that the apology had prompted him to immediately dismantle his country's secret nuclear weapons program. In a postscript, Assad added, "good luck to the Rangers this year."

"Now was that so hard?" joked Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat in an email to Bush. "Now get out of here ya knucklehead, before we have to do one of those awkward man-hugs."

The apology also prompted an outbreak of gratitude in the Arab street, as hundreds of thousands of Muslims took to the streets Friday in an impromptu demonstration of thanks. In Gaza, a cheering crowd estimated at 30,000 waved American flags and banners reading "No Prablem Bosh" [sic], while in Damascus throngs gathered in the Square of the Martyrs chanting "U-S-A, U-S-A".

"I used to dream about dying in a glorious fireball of martyrdom," said Ali Ahmed Amoud, 23, a marcher in the first annual Infidel Appreciation Days parade in Nablus. "But that apology was so nice and sincere, it just seems kind of petty to keep nursing a grudge."

In Tehran, the ruling council of Iranian clerics ordered a "national day of celebration and family fun" to commemorate the historic apology. "The Great Satan has given our honor back, so it's time to move on and let bygones be bygones," said Ayatollah Rafinstani in a nationwide radio address. Rafinstani also announced Iran's immediate nuclear disarmament, and cautioned celebrants not to drink and drive.

In Cairo, local clerics were equally enthusiastic and appreciative of Bush's gesture. In his weekly Friday sermon, Egyptian Imam Muqtaba Salim urged followers to show their appreciation by "reaching out and hugging a Zionist."

"Sure, they're a little pushy and abrasive, but c'mon guys -- let's take a deep breath and count to ten before we go all 'martydom operations,'" said Salim.

Perhaps the biggest reaction to the Bush apology occured in Saudi Arabia, where leaders of the fundamentalist Wahabbist sect issued a rare commendation of the president.

"It's just been such a catharsis for all of us," said Imam Abdelkarim Matwalli, prayer leader of the Grand Mosque in Medina, choking back emotion. "All we really ever wanted was a simple 'I'm sorry,' and Mr. Bush delivered. Thank you, America."

The president's apology was no less well-received in Europe, with dozens of newspapers blaring effusive, pro-Bush headlines. The Parisienne Le Monde declared "All Is Forgiven, George" while the Manchester Guardian lionized Bush as "an Apologizer for the Ages"; the tabloid Sun carried a simple "Dubya, We Lubya" above a flattering photo of the president festooned with garlands.

The apology also appeared to have created a thaw in the United States' sometimes icy relationship with continental political leaders. French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder issued a joint communique welcoming the United States "back in the fold of civilized nations," and vowed to introduce a UN resolution asserting the US right to exist, following scheduled week-long pro-Bush demonstrations across Europe.

Newly elected Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Zapatero also commended the President's contrition, and said that "I would gladly once again pledge Spanish troops to the War on Terror, if the whole terror thing ever becomes a problem again."

Domestic reaction was generally favorable, led by Congressional Democrats who drafted a resolution prasing the President's "bold, thoughtful groveling for world peace," and calling on Bush to "stop beating yourself up." Progressive websites such as DemocraticUnderground, Daily Kos and BartCop urged readers to "forgive, forget, and send a nice thank you card to the White House."

Despite the outbreak of world geopolitical harmony, not everyone was satisfied with Bush's overture. In a scathing OpEd in today's New York Times, columnist Thomas Friedman demanded an additional apology from the President.

"Fess up, Mr. Bush," said Friedman, "that was my idea."

If you enjoyed this satire by Iowahawk, you can read more of his work here.

Senator John Kerry, Democrat candidate for President, said yesterday during an address to the American Chamber of Commerce, that if elected he intends to give back the Louisiana Purchase to France.

“America owes everything to France,” said Senator Kerry. “No other country has treated us so poorly over the years. If it weren’t for France, what would self-loathing liberals like myself do?”

Legal experts say that Kerry’s proposal is based on a dubious understanding of the law and could result in years of litigation. The same legal experts say that the years of litigation stand to make legal experts extremely wealthy and so they are in favor of Kerry’s proposal.

If you enjoyed this satire by William Grim, you can read more of his work at Broken Newz.

Lookie, lookie! RWN has inspired an urban legend at Snopes. That certainly doesn't happen every day...

Democrat presidential hopeful, and Vietnam veteran, John Forbes Kerry today said President George Bush is "not fit to be disgusted" at photos of U.S. military prison guards hazing Iraqi prisoners.

The president recently granted two interviews with Arab-language TV networks, telling reporters that he found the actions of the prison guards to be "abhorrent."

But Mr. Kerry immediately held a news conference to challenge the president's credibility on the issue.

"While I was commanding a swift boat in the Mekong Delta, George Bush stayed stateside with the National Guard," said Mr. Kerry. "He never had an opportunity to commit atrocities against the enemy, like I did, so he's not fit to judge the abuses in Abu Ghraib prison. America needs a commander in chief who knows the harsh reality of war and man's inhumanity to man…the darkness that lurks in the soul of even the most cultured, erudite and refined among us."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, "Senator Kerry is entitled to his opinion. I think the president was simply reacting to the photos the same way most Americans did."

A spokesman for the Kerry campaign said Mr. McClelland's remarks represent another example of "Bush's right-wing attack dogs questioning Senator Kerry's patriotism."

Later, when asked by a reporter on his campaign plane what he thought when he first saw the prisoner-abuse photos, Mr. Kerry said, "I was disgusted. They were abhorrent."

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

Here's aging rapper, MCA of the Beastie Boys, on why he doesn't like George Bush...

"He's just a sick f***. I think we'd be hard-pressed to get someone worse than Bush. I think if you had to sum it up he's an incredibly selfish man and his administration in my opinion puts Americans ahead of people in other countries."

(***Shocked Gasp***) You take that back MCA!!! How dare you accuse the President of the United States of putting OUR interests ahead of the interests of the rest of the world! It's scandalous I tell you, scandalous!

Seriously, what planet is this guy from and what's wrong with the people who live there?

Putting "Americans ahead of people in other countries" is what the President is supposed to do. What kind of moron thinks the POTUS should be putting the interests of other countries ahead of the wants and needs of Americans?

If anything, we already spend far too much time, money, and effort catering to countries that don't make much of an effort to cooperate with us, talk us down at every turn, and offer us very little in return for what we do for them. Most of our "allies" in the Middle-East anyone? How about a large chunk of "Old Europe"? Canada & Mexico? The United Nations? Ahem...Nato?

One of these days the American people are going to take a long, hard, look at our "allies" around the world and ask "what have you done for me lately" vs. "what are we doing for you". If people across the world aren't particularly happy with us now, just wait until the day comes when we start actually expecting our "allies" to you know -- act like allies -- if they want to be treated as allies...

It goes without saying that the Paleocons and anti-war left have written some squirrelly things about Iraq. But, I have to admit that I haven't seen many columns about Iraq more off kilter than this one by wildly popular "Big L" Libertarian Lew Rockwell.

In all seriousness, I cannot imagine how any knowledgeable person could read Rockwell's of mixture warped left-wing drivel, complete lack of knowledge about what's happening in Iraq, and bizarre suggestions, and continue to take him seriously.

There are so many hours in a day and it would take thousands and thousands of words to fully correct all the dubious assertions made in Rockwell's delusional column, so let me just hit some of high spots and add a bit of commentary....

Rockwell begins the column by saying...

"The US has lost the war. Now its efforts in Iraq will be defined for the history books by the photos of psychosexual torture methods used by US soldiers and civilian contractors in Baghdad. There is no avoiding this."

This fairly minor incident perpetrated by a small number of degenerate goofs at one Iraqi prison that has been blown all out of proportion by the Western media because of the seedy pictures that have emerged. But a year now? It'll be a historical footnote like Enron, Gary Condit, & JonBenet Ramsey and all the other media firestorms that dominate the news cycles for a few weeks and then for the most part drop off the radar screen.

Now here's where Rockwell starts to go way off the rails...

"Clearly, nostalgia for Saddam is sweeping all sectors. The experience of Jasim Muhammad Saleh demonstrates this. He is a former general of Saddam's Republican Guard. When the US pulled back from Fallujah – the first really smart thing the US has done in this entire war – he drove into the city wearing his old uniform and was cheered. He was the de facto head of state in that city, his legitimacy deriving entirely from his association with the old regime.

So too with the new commander of Iraq's army, Amer Bakr al-Hashimi, who publicly announced that he is "proud" to have served Saddam. What is the US to do? Making such statements only reinforces his status. Punishing him does the same. Replacing him will only destabilize matters more. Day by day, the US is realizing that the status quo ante is the only way out, but US officials are unsure how or to what extent it can go back."

How can any person who's actually keeping up with what's going on Iraq believe that "nostalgia for Saddam is sweeping all sectors"? There are practically no Kurds or Shias who want Saddam back and polls that have been taken in Iraq show that even vast majorities of the Sunnis are glad he's gone. Furthermore, putting a few Baathist generals back into the army does not mean we're trying to go back to the "status quo" either. As a matter of fact, before we even went into Iraq, the word was that we intended to use some of the Baathist generals and units that didn't fight as security right off the bat -- it just didn't work out.

Back to Rockwell...

"Yes, the troops ought to come home. When? As soon as they can get packed. The same goes for the phonies calling themselves the "Coalition Provisional Authority." All these bureaucrats need to admit is that they have no legitimacy at all, but rather acted as civilian cover for a martial law junta that ruled by blood and lies. Then the UN can work with Islamic clerics, the merchant class, and other Iraqi leaders to fill the void, not with force but with peace."

So Rockwell thinks we could just pull out and the UN could "fill the void, not with force but with peace"? You'd think a 15 year old Berkeley high school student wrote this. Even anti-war stalwarts like Howard Dean understand that if we pull out, Iraq would explode into civil war. Moreover, it's entirely possible that Turkey and Iran would take advantage of the situation to grab land & oil. But Rockwell seems blissfully unaware of all of this.

Then Rockwell advocates apologizing and afterwards bizarrely swerves again...

"Perhaps the US can assist in establishing something resembling a representative democracy in Iraq, or at least not deliver the final death blow of permitting an Islamic dictatorship to arise in what used to be the most liberally-minded nation in the region. This cannot be done by the US as such, but under the guidance of an international delegation of the sort that Jimmy Carter has led in the past, operating again under the aegis of the UN."

Let me get this straight. There are 150k+ Coalition troops in Iraq right now trying to help them establish a representative democracy. But Rockwell thinks we'd be more likely to get results by yanking out all those troops and replacing them with Jimmy Carter and few members of the UN striped pants set? I don't know what to say beyond "how can any thinking person believe this"? It boggles the mind...but not as much as the direction Rockwell goes in next...

"...Saddam must be immediately released and escorted back to Iraq under the protection of an international delegation. At that point, Carter can supervise elections with Saddam among the candidates. And yes, it’s not impossible that he might win.

In fact, there is no other option for Iraq at this point. Phony polls aside, the US has made Saddam more popular than when he was in power. The US can choose between keeping Saddam locked up and thereby continue to stir the pot, leading to ever more violence, or it can release Saddam without any charges against him – let alone by Ahmed Chalabi's son – and have a hope for reconciliation and peace."

You know, I've seen polls, commentary from people who've been to Iraq, read hundreds of articles about what's happening there, & perused various Iraqi blogs and off the top of my head, I can't think of ANYBODY, and I mean ANYBODY, except Rockwell who seems to think Saddam is wildly popular in Iraq.

In fact, it's such a bizarre allegation that I think it can be fairly compared to claims that the Pentagon was hit with a truck bomb and not a plane or that the Illuminati are giving George Bush orders behind the scenes.

How in the world did Lew Rockwell get so popular pumping out this sort of loopy "crankery"? Un.Be.Lievable.

Officials of the presidential campaign of John F. “Frenchy” Kerry have admitted that Senator Kerry has secretly divorced his multi-millionaire wife Teresa Heinz-Kerry and will wed billionaire investor Warren Buffett.

Citing “irreconcilable financial differences,” lawyers for Senator Kerry allege that Ms. Heinz duped their client into marriage with false claims of her being the “world’s richest Democrat.”

A source close to the Kerry campaign who wishes to remain anonymous, told this reporter that “Senator Kerry feels used by Teresa Heinz, but harbors her no ill will, especially since he will be getting a substantial settlement as per the terms of their pre-nup and will now have the opportunity to marry the substantially more wealthy Warren Buffett.”

Broken Newz has learned that Senator Heinz asked Bill Gates, a registered Democrat and the world’s richest man, to marry him, but was rebuffed by the Microsoft founder when he discovered that Senator Kerry’s office computers operate on Linux.

If you enjoyed this satire by William Grim, you can read more of his work at Broken Newz.

Are you sick and tired of listening to people compare George Bush to Hitler? Do you want to do something to fight back against all the demonization? Well, let me tell you how to do it.

Take these links I'm about to give you and send them out to your friends.

Bush pauses to comfort teen
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/05/06/loc_moment06.html

"...Lynn Faulkner, his daughter, Ashley, and their neighbor, Linda Prince, eagerly waited to shake the president's hand Tuesday at the Golden Lamb Inn. He worked the line at a steady campaign pace, smiling, nodding and signing autographs until Prince spoke:

..."The way he was holding me, with my head against his chest, it felt like he was trying to protect me," Ashley said. "I thought, 'Here is the most powerful guy in the world, and he wants to make sure I'm safe.' I definitely had a couple of tears in my eyes, which is pretty unusual for me."

President Bush spoke to Lindsey Yeskoo, the wife of a U.S. Foreign Service officer, after delivering a speech in Shanghai
http://www.snopes.com/glurge/yeskoo.htm

...(Bush) gave a tremendous, candid yet heartening speech, and then was escorted down to the floor to meet the crowds. Everyone was of course behind a tight rope, and there were Secret Service men and security everywhere. There was no way he could meet all, but he sure did a great job of shaking hands with as many as possible.

...Needless to say, the whole experience was unforgettable. I cannot begin to tell you how deeply it has affected me. Certainly, I do not think I have ever prayed for a leader or government or nation (or world!) so extensively has I have done since then. It was really quite an unusual and unexpected and powerful encounter."

President Bush jogs with a serviceman who lost a leg in Afghanistan
http://snopes.com/politics/bush/jogging.asp

"On 9 January 2003, 31-year-old Staff Sergeant Mike McNaughton of Denham Springs, Louisiana, a member of the Louisiana Army National Guard, was serving with the 769th Engineer Battalion in Afghanistan, scouting for land mines. Suddenly, according to Sgt. McNaughton, "I closed my eyes for a second going up in the air and then landing on the ground, and that's when I just — I knew exactly what happened." Sgt. McNaughton had stepped on an anti-personnel mine, and in the resulting blast he lost his right leg, as well as the middle and ring fingers of his right hand and a chunk of his left leg.

Sergeant McNaughton says the president was more interested with his new leg than even his own children. McNaughton says the president couldn't stop looking at it or asking questions about it."

George W. Bush saluted an Army officer who had been badly injured during the September 11 terrorist attack on the Pentagon
http://www.snopes.com/glurge/birdwell.htm

"As you may know, the President and Mrs. Bush visited the Washington Burn Center on Friday 14 September. Among those they visited was LTC Brian Birdwell, who was badly burned in the Pentagon attack. Mrs. Bush went into Brian's room, spoke to him for about a minute, all the time as if they had been long acquaintances. She then turned to Brian's wife Mel, who at this time had been at the hospital for probably 2 1/2 days, and apparently, according to Mel herself, was dirty, grimy and had blood on her shirt.

"I cannot tell you how grateful and truly proud I am that when Brian started to return that salute, despite his wounds, the president held his salute firmly and thereby permitted my brother the honor of demonstrating his and the true character of so very many others of our fighting men and women. Indeed, you should know that it was this very character that likely saved Brian's life in the first place. As Brian crawled through the fire, certain brave men and women pulled him from the carnage, carried him out to the parking lot, then into the adjoining street."

These are just a few little stories, but I think they tell you a lot about the man.....

August 1st, 1944

After one of the bloodiest months of fighting in Europe, House Republican leaders called for all United States forces to be withdrawn from Europe. "This is a quagmire," said one house member. "There is no evidence whatsoever that Nazi Germany had any connection to the attacks of 12/07 and fighting with Germany is a distraction from our war on Japan. We need to finish the job in the Pacific before getting involved in Europe’s problem and besides, it’s not as if Nazi Germany is an imminent threat to America. They haven’t even been able to conquer Britain. Besides, isn’t this a matter for the League of Nations?"

Asked about reports that there were some concentration camps in Europe, another House member replied, "He [FDR] has never said that this was about liberating the concentration camps in his 12/08 speech. In fact, how could he [FDR] say a word about this when we ally ourselves with dictators such as Josef Stalin and Chang-Kai-Shek?" (Cont)

Ya know, like most people, I've think the torture of prisoners in Iraq was nothing less than despicable. As a matter of fact, last week I called for court martials & prison sentences for the people responsible.

That being said, the media's general reaction to this situation has been staggeringly overwrought & monstrously overblown. This week, because of what went on at Abu Ghraib prison, I've heard us compared to Hitler & Saddam, calls for Rumsfeld to resign, heard that our reputations will never recover, comparisons to concentration camps & Mai Lai...

Please, what a load of sanctimonious hyperbole that is.

Sorry, a few poorly supervised soldiers got out of a hand and tortured people. And who knows? Maybe this is more widespread than we thought. Maybe there are a few contractors or CIA guys involved.

So what are we doing about it? Well, we cleaned house at Abu Ghraib, changed our procedures, and everyone from Donald Rumsfeld, to Condi Rice, to Colin Powell, to Bush himself has very publicly come out and either apologized or said this is wrong.

Yet and still, we're getting all this hand-wringing, mainly because we're afraid the Arab World is going to flip out over this.

First off, somewhere around 10%-15% of the Middle-East already thinks we're the "Great Satan Zionist Sons Of Pigs And Monkeys" so it's not as if we have to worry about dropping any lower in their eyes.

As for the rest of the region, let's put this in perspective. Are we really worrying that people from Egypt, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, etc, are too ill informed and ignorant to tell the difference between the US and their own rulers? These people live in countries where torture 5 times worse than what we saw at Abu Ghraib is the rule, not the exception -- is rewarded, not punished -- and you'll die of old age before you ever hear anyone apologize for it. When are the Mad Mullahs Of Iran or the Saudi Princes going to apologize for torturing their people? Better question, when are they going to stop torturing their people?

The reason what happened at Abu Ghraib has been such a big sensation is because it is such an aberration and so out of line with American values. So the apologies and changes we've made were appropriate, but so is a little perspective...

Every day, every day of the week, John Kerry should get on his knees and thank the Lord that the press so liberal. Here's a guy whose campaign theme is basically "Vote for me because I won medals in Vietnam" and yet, when Kerry's takes MONSTER broadsides on the whole Vietnam front, the press is barely covering it. Here's some of the quotes that have been breaking from some of Kerry's fellow soldiers in Vietnam in the last couple of days...

Kerry's First Purple Heart

After first pointing out that Kerry claimed that he was hit by enemy fire, but actually appeared to have accidentally wounded himself by firing a mortar round at some nearby rocks...

"What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry's arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle.

The wound was covered with a bandaid." -- Louis Letson, the doctor who treated the wound Kerry got his first Purple Heart for

John Kerry, Tearing Apart The Families Of Veterans

From an article on the anti-Kerry group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth...

"One veteran, noting the allegations were again made in a book on Kerry's war experiences, choked back tears as he related how his wife and daughter had read about the alleged war crimes Kerry spoke about in Douglas Brinkley's "Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War" and asked him if he had committed them."

John Kerry, Viet Cong, & POWs

"John Kerry's recent admissions caused me to realize that I was most likely in Vietnam dodging enemy rockets on the very day he met in Paris with Madame Binh, the representative of the Viet Cong to the Paris Peace Conference. John Kerry returned to the U.S. to become a national spokesperson for the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, a radical fringe of the antiwar movement, an organization set upon propagating the myth of war crimes through demonstrably false assertions. Who was the last American POW to die languishing in a North Vietnamese prison forced to listen to the recorded voice of John Kerry disgracing their service by his dishonest testimony before the Senate?" -- John O'Neil

Even though Bush isn't running on his Vietnam record, the press spent WEEKS pouring over every minute detail of his National Guard days. Yet, Kerry, whose whole campaign is centered around Vietnam, isn't getting 1/10th the scrutiny that Bush got from the press on the same issues. Like I said, Kerry should hit his knees and give thanks every day that the press is protecting him like this...

Most often people will disagree on issues of the day, but just because someone doesn't think like you doesn't mean you should call him evil and kill him. That's what Islamic extremists and the majority of posters at Democratic Underground would do. Instead, following these steps you can have a nice discussion with someone with different viewpoints and both come out of it smarter.

DO consider the merits of viewpoints different to your own.
DON'T throw out your own principles just to be agreeable. No one gains from that.

DO listen carefully to what the other person is saying. Try to understand their different viewpoint.
DON'T use the time while the other person is speaking as just an opportunity to formulate your own rebuttal.

DO try to find areas of agreement no matter how much you differ on an issue.
DON'T compare the other person's views to Hitler. Hitler was a bad man, and no one likes being compared to him.

DO keep on topic. You're more likely to learn from each other if you keep the talk focused.
DON'T kick the other person in the groin when he strays. He might forget what you were talking about in the first place.

DO make all disagreements in a friendly tone.
DON'T follow all disagreements with putting the other person's head through drywall. That gives who you're talking to no time to consider what you said. Also, it's hard to repair the drywall and paint over it perfectly to cover up the hole.

DO agree to disagree when reaching a stopping point.
DON'T declare an intifada and blow yourself and the other person up so you can get 72 virgins. You both lose if you do that, and you should focus on finding one nice girl (or guy) in this world.

DO stick to your principles while still considering what the other person says.
DON'T pile drive the other person into a folding table when you find a topic you vehemently disagree on. Though it would be cool, it's just not civil.

DO back up your statement with facts when necessary.
DON'T punch the other person through the chest, pull out his heart, and show it to him before he dies when you feel run into a corner. That's usually a non-sequitur to the debate... unless the debate is whether you can actually pull someone's heart out and show it to him before he dies.

DO make sure not to get caught up arguing minutia.
DON'T burn the other person's house down over a small disagreement on a fact. Yes, insurance will probably cover it, but he'll be less likely to listen to what else you say.

DO make sure to not raise your tone of voice no matter how heated things get.
DON'T silently lower the other person in a slow dipping device into a pit full of ravenous monkeys until he admits you're right. Getting the other person to agree with you through other means that intelligent discussion gains nothing for either party.

DO be willing to admit you’re wrong if the other person is convincing. Admitting you're wrong can seem painful, but, when you do it, you suddenly become right.
DON'T commit seppuku if you discover you’re wrong on an issue. There are other ways to bring honor to your family.

Follow these rules and you should have some nice, friendly, intelligent discussions. Hooray!

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

It has been 6 long months since the last time I used Alexa to rank the top 125 political websites on the net and I thought it was about time to do it again. So, if you're looking for the most popular political websites on the internet, then today is your lucky day....(Cont)

By no stretch of the imagination can things be said to have gone swimmingly in Iraq of late. To the contrary, it has been one thing after another. The murders and mutilations of American contractors in Fallujah, the Al-Sadr uprising, half of the Iraqi forces chickening out or changing sides, bad poll numbers from the Iraq people, the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, the heaviest American causalities of the war for April -- the bad news has come in spades.

Yet and still, we're slowly but surely winning despite it all.

I know the anti-war left doesn't buy that for a second because every war from start to finish -- well at least any war waged by a Republican President -- is another Vietnam to them. But, I'm sure there are even some conservatives out there who're thinking "Piffle and poppycock Hawkins! Winning? Bah! Call me when Fallujah is a hole in the ground, then I'll believe we're winning!"

Hey, I'll be the first to tell you that I've had my doubts about whether we've used enough force in Fallujah and/or Najaf during this uprising, but I have a lot of confidence in our men on the ground. If the marines surrounding Fallujah wanted to blast the city until there was nothing left but bouncing rubble, they've been capable of doing it all along. Same goes for Najaf. Who knows? Maybe they'll still have to go in firing before it's over. But, that isn't the path they've chosen and who's to say they're not right?

Isn't our goal to help the Iraqis handle their own security? Well, that's exactly what we're trying to do -- for the most part -- in Fallujah and Najaf -- we're trying to let the Iraqis handle it. If the Iraqis can police their own country -- and I mean really police it, not just **wink, wink** nothing to worry here about Great Satans -- then isn't that a better outcome than tearing up whole cities, losing hundreds of troops and losing hundreds, perhaps thousands of Iraqi civilians who'll get caught up in the crossfire?

On top of that, we've got to keep our eyes on the ball here. If we want an Iraqi Democracy to succeed, we've got to help the Iraqis take responsibility for their own country. What's going on in Fallujah and Najaf right now, whether the Iraqis trying to deal with the situation succeed or fail, is part of the process and it'll help prepare them to run their own country.

And isn't that why we're there right now? To help the Iraqis towards Democracy? Isn't that by heritage and choice, what Americans believe is the right thing to do, in our best interests, an important part of the war on terrorism, and the primary factor in how history will judge what we did in Iraq?

Take heart, there have been lots of local elections in Iraq, we're turning over partial sovereignty to them on June 30th, and there are going to be nationwide elections in January of 2005. Moreover, while 50% of the Iraqi military and police crapped on us when things got tough, 50% hung in there and proved their mettle. Now we have a core to build around and if we add a few of the less tarnished Baathists to the roster and fighters from some of the soon to be disbanded militias, six months to a year from now Iraqis may be able to handle the overwhelming majority of their own security problems.

And their own problems may not be as bad as people fear. The insurgency has made little headway with the Iraqi population and there's currently no evidence that Iraq is moving towards civil war. Has it been bloody? Yes. But compared to other major wars like WW1, WW2, Korea, & Vietnam, casualties have been light. I'm sure that's no consolation to anyone who has lost a loved one fighting in Iraq, but what we're doing there is helping to stop future 9/11s or worse yet, terrorists with WMD who could kill as many as 80,000 Americans in a single attack. Going back to sticking our heads in the sand like we did before 9/11 just isn't an option anymore.

Nor is dishonoring the sacrifice of the Americans who gave their lives in Iraq. A lot of American blood has been spilt in Iraq and lives will be lost before it's over. But that butcher's bill will only be paid in vain if we don't have the will to follow-through and help the Iraqis towards Democracy. In the end, the Iraqis themselves will be responsible for their own freedom, but by God, we should do everything humanly possible to help them. It has not been, nor will it be, easy -- but it's right and it's in our interests and we must stay the course...

Concerned that Americans do not yet know Sen. John Forbes Kerry, his presidential campaign has launched a $25 million TV advertising burst which reveals that the candidate served in the Navy during the Vietnam war.

The ad campaign, called A Lifetime of Talking About a Few Months in the Service, focuses on a little-known chapter in Mr. Kerry's life, his four months as a swift boat commander in Vietnam.

"While most voters are familiar with Kerry's sterling record of legislative achievement as a leader in the Senate," said an unnamed spokesman, "they're surprised to discover that he actually served during wartime."

The source said that the story of Mr. Kerry's Vietnam service has been "suppressed by the right-wing attack machine."

"The $25 million ad buy is just another example of Sen. Kerry's commitment to service," said the unnamed source. "No anti-war candidate has ever spent so much of his fellow Americans' money to convince them that he was a war hero. That's how much service means to John Kerry."

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

The U.S. military command in Iraq has ordered former Iraqi Maj. Gen. Jasim Mohammed Saleh to undergo what it called a “Queer Eye” makeover to make the former Saddam Hussein loyalist look less like Saddam Hussein, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff confirmed today.

In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, General Richard Myers said that the U.S. had been ready to transfer authority over the city of Fallujah to General Saleh “until someone at headquarters pointed out that he looked creepily like Saddam.”

In explaining the Joint Chiefs’ misgivings about General Saleh, General Myers said, “We felt that giving military authority to a gentleman who could basically take Saddam’s date to the prom without her suspecting anything was, under the circumstances, ill advised.”

After an intense round of discussions at the Pentagon, the U.S. decided to order a so-called “Queer Eye” makeover for the former evildoer, dropping style guru Carson Kressley into Fallujah by parachute.

In a conversation with reporters today, Mr. Kressley said he had urged General Saleh to shave his Hussein-like moustache and ditch his Republican Guard uniform in favor of a tailored suit by the German designer Jill Sander.

“I took one look at that Republican Guard uniform, and said, ‘WMD – Wrong Men’s Designer,’” Mr. Kressley quipped.

Mr. Kressley said that although General Saleh was resistant at first to his “Queer Eye” makeover, by the end of the process the fascist and the fashionista had “totally bonded.”

“I have no idea what a Baath Party is, but I like the sound of it,” Mr. Kressley said.

If you enjoyed this satire by Andy Borowitz, you can read more of his work at The Borowitz Report.

At long last, I've gotten around to reading Mark Steyn's superb book, "The Face of the Tiger" and as you'd expect, it was typical Steyn -- i.e. a fantastic read. I'd certainly recommend the book to anyone and just to whet your appetite, here are my favorite quotations from Steyn's tome... (Cont)

If we had a Democratic incumbent in the White House and there was a Republican running almost entirely on his military record, this news would be on the front page of every paper in America in screaming 3 inch high type...

"Hundreds of former commanders and military colleagues of presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry are set to declare in a signed letter that he is "unfit to be commander-in-chief." They will do so at a press conference in Washington on Tuesday.

"The ranks of the people signing [the letter] range from admiral down to seaman, and they run across the entire spectrum of politics, specialties, and political feelings about the Vietnam War," he added."

"Hundreds of former commanders and military colleagues"? "19 of 23 officers who served with [Kerry]. We have every commanding officer he ever had in Vietnam"? So it isn't any "Republican attack machine" challenging Kerry's records, it's his fellow service men and commanders. This is as damning as it gets. It's like Ken Lay running for President based on his business experience while the Enron scandal was breaking.

If you ask me, this cuts to the heart of what's wrong with the Kerry campaign. Winning medals in Vietnam is a great accomplishment, something to be proud of, and it speaks well for your character. However, it isn't enough to prove you're tough enough on defense or a fantastic human being. Most importantly, I don't care what you did 36 years ago in Vietnam, in and of itself, it doesn't qualify you to be President of the United States.

Unfortunately for Kerry, his record in the Senate, particularly on defense issues, has been so poor that he has to treat make his experience in Vietnam the focal point of campaign. But medals in Vietnam are like ketchup that goes with your fries for a politician. It certainly adds something to the meal, but without the fries (the record), dinner isn't served and the election isn't going to be won...

Last week, I gave everyone an opportunity to guess my selections in the "IMAO T-Shirt Babe Contest" (pics here) and.....

Nobody got 'em.

Here are the winners...

5) Carissa
4) Reva
3) Serenity
2) Willow
1) Sarahk

And here were my selections...

5) Miranda Marmorstein
4) Carissa
3) Willow
2) Elise Cordell
1) Reva

I could have easily gone 10 deep, but Frank only let the judges make 5 selections...

Has moonbat courtin' potential veep Wesley Clark been advising John Kerry on how to fire up an audience full of Democrats? If so, it would explain this...

"Speaking on a live local broadcast at a campaign stop in Toledo, Ohio in front of 300 people, Kerry blasted Bush for being an illegitimately elected president in 2000 when he was "selected" by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Kerry added, "I know where that anger comes from, I know where the frustration comes from."

Do you know what would have been just tooooo sweeeeeeet? If someone from the audience could have followed up Kerry's response to the "oil profits guy" with...

"If you think we're murdering women and children in Iraq for oil profits, why did you vote for it?"

Then of course we'd get the whole "Well....not my vote, it was the families vote...uh, did you know I fought in Vietnam....I voted for the funds in Iraq before I voted against them...are you part of the Republican attack machine?"

Ah, smell the NUANCE!

And the "selected not elected" thing has always killed me. Bush wins two machine votes, wins an unconstitutional recount ordered by a runaway state court that was rewriting the rules of the election after it happened, and even wins the media recounts after the fact, but four years there are still Democrats running around whining that he was "selected not elected". Come on, the guy playing the world's tiniest violin for you is getting tired, his fingers are bleeding, he wants to go home to his wife, so give it a rest already.

This sort of unpresidential tripe is part of the reason why so many voters don't like Kerry...

ABC-TV journalist Ted Koppel, who caused a firestorm of controversy with his plan to read the names of U.S. troops killed in Iraq, today announced that in the interest of balance and fairness, next week he will read another list on his show, Nightline.

"I would never want anyone to accuse me of bias. After all, I'm a journalist, devoted to accurately portraying world events," said Mr. Koppel. "So, next week I will read the list of Iraqis who were raped, tortured and killed by Saddam Hussein's regime after President George H.W. Bush declared victory in the Gulf War on February 28, 1991."

Mr. Koppel said next week's Nightline will be a "special extended episode starting Friday and running non-stop until the day I retire from ABC."

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

I was very pleased to get an opportunity to do a phone interview with immigration expert, Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. Mark is as well informed on immigration issues as anyone you're ever going to hear from and I think you'll find his comments of legal and illegal immigration to be quite interesting. (Cont)