Archive for May, 2007

We are at war…torture early, often and repeatedly

Thursday, May 3rd, 2007

Many people claim to be against torture. When pressing many of these people on specifics, they respond with the nonsensical notion that torture is torture, period, and that it is always wrong. While liberals get indignant as being portrayed as kumbaya loving hand holding jellyfish who wish to take Al Queda operatives and send them to bed without supper (no dessert anyway), their stubborn refusal to consider torture methods allows them to be defined as weak. So rather than lump all torture together, looking at various methods provides for a more complex issue than meets the eye.

There are people that believe in beheading, thumbscrews, ratchet sets across the testicles, burning people with cigarettes, or throwing acid on their faces. These people are Al Queda. They do this. We do not, and I have yet to meet an American that advocates it. Having said that, not every form of torture, aka coerced interrogation methods, should be out of bounds. Even beating somebody with a whip (ironically, dominatrixes make a good living…how can something be too tough on terrorists when business executives pay to receive such treatment?) is inappropriate.

Sleep deprivation–if this is illegal, than college campuses should be shut down. Any student trying to get through final exams has put through all nighters.  Manuel Noriega was brought down in Panama through blaring rock music such as Def Leppard (had it been Barbra Streisand I would have cracked in 5 minutes).  While children have been torturing their parents by listening to everything from gangsta rap to hard rock, at no point has  loud music been considered too cruel to deal with Al Queda.

Altering the room temperature–Whether making it ice cold or uncomfortably warm, terrorists are not entitled to a room temperature room with a fridge stocked with miniatures. They are supposed to be uncomfortable. If this is out of bounds, than Vince Lombardi should have been thrown in jail for coaching in the Ice Bowl in 1967. The Green Bay Packers did not like the cold, but if they and the Dallas Cowboys can survive it, than battle tested warriors like Osama can cope.

Forcing terrorists to stand up in uncomfortable positions–Has anyone ever worked as a Bank Teller? Wells Fargo does not give their bank tellers chairs. They stand for hours on end. Where does it say that Al Zawahiri Or Zarquai or Saddam Hussein must have a Sharper Image massage chair? Maybe we should fluff their pillows as well.

Waterboarding–This is not to be confused with motorboarding, which is one of the world’s great pleasures (when a guy places his face in a woman’s chest). Waterboarding is when the terrorist is made to feel as if they are drowning. They do not actually drown. They merely gasp for air when submerged. It scares them. That is the point. They are supposed to be scared.

Deporting them to less “civilized” nations–This option is fabulous. Liberals are constantly carping (again, redundant) that America tries to impose its will on other nations. We should back off, and let other nations govern as they see fit. Therefore, if we capture an Al Queda leader in Pakistan, we should turn him over to the Pakistani authorities (although we should stay outside the prison door as observers). Yet what if they plan to use severe interrogation techniques such as shooting them in the leg and arm? Oh well. It is not our place to tell them how to run their judicial system. If liberals would feel better with us offering statements of horror at how barbaric this other nation is behaving, we can wave our finger at them and yell “shame, shame,” before taking their leaders out for steaks and drinks.

Some would argue that we cannot sink to the level of the terrorists. Not only can we…we must. Being noble and murdered is a less desirable outcome than getting our hands dirty but being alive.

When I was 14, I thought my dad was torturing me when he grounded me no tv for a week. Being forced to get up at 5 am can be torture for some. If our enemies were 14 year old stockbrokers in Los Angeles, both of these techniques would win the war on terror. If Osama was 8 years old, we could run our nails on a chalkboard and then send him to the principal’s office.

The bottom line is that adult issues require adult methods of communication. Those who oppose torture see torture as the methods that Al Queda uses. In the same way people against gay marriage opponents support civil unions, which is basically saying “I will give you everything you want provided you call it a different word,” there are people who simply are tortured by the word torture. Fine, we will engage in coerced interrogation, but we will not call it torture. Then the only thing that we will be torturing is the English language.

So for people who are more concerned with winning the struggle of civilization versus barbarism over the war of linguistics and semantics, the answer is pure, unadulterated torture. Terrorists should be tortured early, often and repeatedly. If they don’t like it, then they can simply stop being terrorists. Asking them to stop nicely is not working.

Abu Gharaib was behavior found at college fraternities. It is called “Rush Week,” also known as “Pledge Week.” Guantanamo Bay is Summer Camp. Haditha is hijinks. Al Queda beheads people. We should not lose an ounce of sleep by denying them a peaceful night’s sleep. The war ends when we crack the torture whip, and they just crack. We should do this now, before their is no one left on our side to stop them.

eric

In support of USA unilateralism

Thursday, May 3rd, 2007

One of the biggest criticisms of George W. Bush is that he is accused by his enemies (it is no longer necessary to be polite and call his democratic critics his opponents…they hate his guts) of fighting an illegal war based on a lie, and we did so unilaterally. At this point liberals need to quit the drugs that were popular in the 1960s, as well as the hatred (ironically enough the drugs were supposed to make them mellow and peaceful and loving), and become hooked on phonics instead.

That’s right, hooked on phonics. Those who criticize the president and his father for, horror, of horrors, fracturing their syntax, need to work on their own vocabulary. Time does not permit trying to explain to these linguistically challenged liberal primates what the word “lie,” means, or they would know that President Bush told the complete truth about the war, including WMD. Those who supported President Clinton, rendering them unable to distinguish truth from lies, also do not know the meaning of the word “illegal.” Lying under oath is illegal, even if lying about sex. Going to war after getting permission from the United “group of corrupt” Nations is legal.

Explaining lies and illegalities to liberals is like explaining why murder is wrong to Al Capone. Ted Kennedy is a senator, rendering hopeless the notion that democrats will grasp certain concepts.

However, the word “unilateral” is a simple concept. The word “uni,” means “one.” Singer Al B. Sure had a “unibrow,” as opposed to the two eyebrows most people have. Some people ride “unicycles.” If the United States was the only country that attacked Iraq, the attack would have been unilateral. The attack was multilateral, if one assumes that England, Spain, South Korea, Italy, Australia, and a host of other countries are considered actual nations. Despite some liberals describing them as “window dressing,” apparently these are actual nations consisting of human beings, similar to red state Americans that are often overlooked when elitists are discussing who actually counts.

So we did not go to war unilaterally. We went out of our way to be multilateral. This argument should be rendered next time, and there will be a next time (Are you listening Syrian and Iran?). Next time we should not be so defensive about being unilateral. We should just announce that we are embracing unilateralism unless others choose to help.

That’s right. We will do whatever we want, because we can. If other nations have a problem with that, Dick Cheney’s approach to Harry Reid works for me. A few strategically placed F-bombs would be appropriate.

Unilateralism to most liberals means “every nation except France and Germany.” Yes, the Axis of Weasel apparently should have a veto of US foreign policy. One year ago, my response would be to dismiss Germany as the nation that killed my family for being Jewish, and France for collaborating with them, in addition to simply being and acting like France.

However, to the chagrin of blue state surrender mavens, Germany and France are changing, and for the better. Germany has a Prime Minister in Angela Merkel that wants better relations with America. France is on the verge of electing Nicholas Sarkozy, who is rabidly and appropriately Pro-American (If Segolene Royal wins, they will simply remain France, in all its glorious irrelevance).

Therefore, without those two obstacles, what is left? Shall America refuse to defend itself without permission from Zambia? How about Madagascar? Greenland? Maybe Monaco can object. Better yet, perhaps we need permission from Syria and Iran to eliminate them. Funny, Al Queda never sought my permission before murdering my fellow New Yorkers.

If John Kerry wants to take a global test, he can repeat 7th grade Social Studies. The adult world of foreign policy understands that each nation has an obligation to defend themselves. If America is about to be attacked, America and America alone gets to decide what to do about it. If other nations do not want to be obliterated, stop trying to kill us.

The next president should continue the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive war. Then he (Yes, it will be a he since the US Constitution prohibits Lady Thatcher from running) should announce to the world that America will unilaterally defend itself against any and all enemies. The nations of Old Europe exist because we saved their bacon in World War II. 

Some will debate for ages whether or not the war was unilateral, while supposed linguists like Noam Chomsky (yes, apparently he did at one point have a skill and a job) will decipher what the word actually means and when it means it depending on which party is in control. The real issue is that this debate should never have to take place, because defending America is nothing to apologize for. The war was multilateral, and if it was unilateral, I would have been fine with it.

The war in Iraq was, is, and will be right for eternity. The fact that other nations chose to help us is heartwarming, but without their help, the war was equally right.

American Unilateralism is legally, morally and strategically an honorable course of action. No amount of liberal linguigymnastics can change this. Despite liberals, America will continue to behave unilaterally, because our responsibility is to our nation. This responsibility will be moral, decent and right.

Iran and Syria…the clock is ticking. Our friends might want to help us…but we will not be under any obligation to ask them. So I will say to Assad and Armageddonijad what I say to liberals in general…Knock it Off! Then go (insert f-bomb here) yourself, before we enthusiastically do it to you.

eric    

Jane Fleming, P.T. Barnum, Madonna and Don King–Because Marketing Matters

Thursday, May 3rd, 2007

Somewhere out there, a 14 year old boy is about to make a tragic mistake that is going to detract from society. He is going to become an activist.

He is going to start spouting nonsensical gibberish about things that most people could…and more importantly should…care less about.  He will worry about Darfur, even though he goes to public school, and therefore does not know the Sudan from South Dakota. He will worry about the ozone layer and chloroflorocarbons, even though he cannot spell the word environmentalist in the school spelling bee. He will start breaking into clothing stores and spraying fur coats because he is convinced that bunny rabbits are an endangered species.

It is not that he is passionate. It is that he will be passionate and uninformed. So what will cause this 14 year old boy to abandon normal obsessions such as video games, sports and learning about cars? Well, the last acceptable form of idiocy left on the planet…junior high school girls.

Now before some flaming feminist (redundant, I know) blathers on about why it is wrong to objectify women, a little honesty goes a long way. Women have used sexual power to reduce men to imbecilic automatons since Eve brought down Adam. It works. Physical beauty is a narcotic. If a boy thinks he will get between a girl’s legs, he will put up with anything. This means nodding one’s head up and down in the affirmative and pretending to care about things just because the girl does. Yes, girls do pretend to know and like sports at that age, but the difference is that sports is about activity, not activism. Quoting sports statistics does not put companies out of business or lead to protest marches about things that even the marchers do not understand.

Marketing matters, and sex is the most powerful form of marketing. So who cares if 14 year old boys become googly eyed idiots? I do. These boys will become young adults, and worse…they will become liberals. At this point it will be too late.

I am a conservative republican. I believe in the message of the conservative movement, and I believe the republican party is the best way to spread that message. Yet more young people today want to be democrats, and liberal ones at that. This is easy to understand. No matter how positive and right a message is, if it is not marketed well, no one hears it. On the flip side, society is littered with people who may not contribute much in terms of value, but market themselves brilliantly. Dennis Rodman, Anna Nicole Smith, and Jerry Springer are examples of this.

The bottom line is that conservatism is seen as stuffy and stodgy, and liberalism is seen as hip and cool. The reason this is the case is because liberals are not bound by any constraints. Laws and rules do not apply. So they do what any successful marketing organization does…they sell sex, and very effectively. Anyone who does not see this should turn on the tv and watch Jane Fleming.

Jane Fleming is the leader of a cult known as Young democrats for America, or something like that. She is also a physically gorgeous woman. True power in the form of beauty can be hypnotic. I disagree with almost everything she has to say, and yet I would consider it a privilege to take her on top of a pooltable until we are both scuffed. At this point the feminists need to sit down and shut up if they voted for Bill “Astroturf in the pickup truck” Clinton.

Women can look at men that mentally disgust them and walk away. We can’t. When I see Jane Fleming get indignant on television, with her eyes bulging out in rage, reading democratic party talking points, I get sucked in. Intellectually, I know that if I were to abandon my principles and vote democrat, it would not get her to let me bite off the zipper on her blue jeans. Physically, I would consider voting for Satan (or worse, Hillary) if I could gnaw at her underclothing.

Now if as an adult I could be reduced to such senselessness (Monica Lewinsky anyone? It was not her brains, which she may have, but no one cared), what chance does a 14 year old boy have? It is not a fair fight. The cheerleading team may be uncool in two decades, but by then the boy has already formed his opinions.

The republican party needs to start getting some erotica on television…and fast. Michelle Malkin is stunning, but she is married. Ann Coulter is physically alluring, but she can be intimidating, and boys do not listen to girls they are afraid of. Ann Coulter makes Lorena Bobbitt come across like Mother Teresa.

The democrats get it. Jane Fleming has the pouty lips routine down to perfection. Sure, boys are sitting in front of the tv wishing they were under her desk, but unless the mute button is on, they are going to hear her message. It seeps through. One minute they are wondering if she is doing the show “commando (sans underclothing),” and the next minute they are volunteering to protect wildlife in Alaska from oil drillers. The fact that there is no wildlife to protect in the area to be drilled is irrelevant. The fact that the people of Alaska support drilling means nothing. The Pied Piper of eroticism speaks, and the lemmings jump over the cliff.

This is not to say she is unintelligent. It is just to say that whatever intellect she possesses is peripheral to her being on television. College republicans simply do not have anyone at this time that can compete. Ten years ago I would have said Shannon Doherty, but she has for some bizarre reason not used her playboy spread to catapult her into the political arena. Angie Harmon is stunning, but she is married. That turns guys off, especially ones with no sense of reality, which is almost all 14 year old boys.

So the young boys are hot for these liberal activists, and the girls want to be like them because they know how it effects the boys. Sure, every once in awhile there is someone who actually understands the cause they are supporting, but most of them just want to be cool. If smoking is cool, they light up. If it is uncool, they rail on and on about second hand smoke. If red meat is cool, they eat burgers. If uncool, they cry about poor baby calves. They should cry about sheep, because that is basically what young people can become. Or better yet, lambs led to the slaughterhouse, where their brain cells are killed in an indoctrination ritual.

The next 50 years will determine if America survives. Republicans talk about Islamofacism. It is not sexy, but it is of vital importance. Democrats, especially liberals, worry about singing kumbaya with trees and mosquitoes. It may be intellectually useless, but so many young kids care about it. Could it be that kids are intelligent? Well their parents are not like this in equal numbers, so unless kids truly are smarter than their parents (no), it is just that they are more easily seduced. The republican party will not win over kids with facts, logical reasoning or flow charts.  They need spokespeople who put underwear models to shame in terms of looks.

I was lucky. My obsessions with football and the local video arcade were strong enough to help me resist the Cleopatras of the democratic persuasion. Plus, I was funny looking in junior high, so I was blessed enough to realize I was cursed enough to believe I had no shot at sleeping with anyone, much less a cheerleader with airheaded ideas about life.

Most boys are not that far down. They have hope. They do not know what C-Span is, but they would watch it for hours on end provided that they thought it would get them closer  to making a good enough impression to end up romping in a jacuzzi filled with lemon lime jello with someone like Jane Fleming.

Good ideas are worthless without effective marketing. Young people are the most easily manipulated creatures of marketing. They then become young adults with entrenched opinions. Either the republican party starts finding ways to appeal to young people now, or we will lose elections for a generation. Anyone who thinks being right and having good ideas alone is enough is in a fantasy land (and not the hot steamy kind). Republicans tried the “actually standing for something” approach in 2006. It did not work. Democrats in congress still have no beliefs, and yet more young people identify with them.

So either the young republicans find Shannon Doherty or some other hot vixen and have her tour college campuses in an almost see through push up bra, or the 50-50 nation will tip 51-49 and beyond for the democrats.

Anyone who thinks I am wrong…turn on the tv…put on Jane Fleming…and see registration among 18 year old boys spike up faster than they spike up themselves. They will not know what she is talking about, but they will not care. Even when she gets as incomprehensible as boxing promoter Don King (the 3rd greatest marketer behind P.T. Barnum and Madonna), young boys will act like they totally understand and relate to her, in the hope that she relates to them.

I have an advanced degree and a successful career, and if I can throw reason out the window, then don’t tell me that 14 year old boys would not form their political beliefs on the basis that they want to sink their teeth into the backside of Jane Fleming’s jeans. This type of language may ruin my political career, but Bill Clinton almost got fired over Monica. She had marketing, and as even the dumbest young junior high school girl knows, marketing is power.

Republicans must match fire with fire, or be prepared to end up out in the cold.

eric

The world is officially upside down

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

The world is officially upside down.

The French are on the verge of being more Pro-American than Americans. A majority of French people support Nicholas Sarkozy, whose critics claim he is too close to George W. Bush in terms of vision. A majority of Americans are against George W. Bush at this moment in history. I pains me deeply to admit the French are right and my fellow Americans are wrong.

Germany has a Prime Minister in Angela Merkel that is Pro-Israel, where it is illegal to engage in antisemitic demonstrations. In Israel, Ehud Olmert has policies that a majority of Israelis feel are crippling Israel. It has a 20% Arab population that is mostly Anti-Israel from within. So Germany is now more Pro-Israel than Israel.

What’s next? Turkey having an Armenian President? The President of India vacationing in Pakistan? 

Having other people like us is fine. What is not fine is being self-loathing. It is ironic that two decent nations such as the USA and Israel consist of a large plurality of individuals that hate the USA and Israel.

When France and Germany care more about the USA and Israel than they do themselves…when France and Germany represent the voices of reason in this world…then intellectual armageddon is officially upon us.

I am off to watch Jeff Foxworthy and Larry the Cable guy talk about rednecks. At least rednecks are red staters that like being American. They like their cars fast, drinks cold, and world right side up.

I used to wish Blue Staters would disappear and take their smugness with them to France. Now I do not know where I wish to send them. Some would say Australia, but even the upside down nation is totally right side up under the leadership of John Howard.

Perhaps we can stuff them all in San Francisco, and hope that the next Earthquake sends them to Russia. Then again, the Russians have not done anything to deserve such a punishment. On the other hand, a few months living under Putin may make even the Pelosiest liberal appreciate George W. Bush.

Until then, leftists should replace their symbol of the donkey with that of the bat, given that they spend most of their lives living @ss backwards and upside down.

eric

Bill Murray, Bill Clinton, Bill Belichick, Will Ferrell and Natalie Holloway

Tuesday, May 1st, 2007

For a brief fortnight, America became serious. The Virginia Tech massacre forced us to ask tough questions about controversial issues. While we as Americans disagreed about solutions on matters ranging from gun control to immigration, at least the discussions were intelligent and meaningful. Even Greta Van Susteren and Geraldo Rivera were watchable.

Then it happened…a break in the Natalie Holloway case.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.

I am sorry, but she is deceased somewhere far away, and that is where this story needs to be. I will spare the politically correct pablum about how much pain I feel for the Holloway family. Of course I feel it. People I care about have died. I do not get interviewed about it. People die every day. It is not news.

There is a real world out there involving Islamofacists. We also have homegrown terrorists, including the Virginia Tech killer. Yes, he was a terrorist. It is vital that hard news be on our television, much as it can trouble us. Perhaps somewhere out there is an Afghani or Pakistani citizen watching television. They recognize the picture of an Al Queda henchman because they are watching Fox News, CNN or some other news program where actual news such as Al Queda is being discussed. This henchman lives in the same village. The citizen reports the henchman, who is apprehended. The henchman rolls over and gives up Bin Laden.

The above scenario cannot happen if the news consists of nonsense. Natalie Holloway is the Bill Clinton of the current news cycle. She sucks up the Oxygen that belongs to the War on Terror. She is the Bill Murray character in “What About Bob.” That is the movie where the Richard Dreyfuss character snaps at his family when describing Bill Murray’s character “Gone! He’s Never Gone!”

This is amusing when it is a comedy movie. It is not amusing in real life. Even those who say there is enough room for Natalie Holloway, the problem became that when the Natalie Holloway story broke, there was no room for Al Queda or the War on Terror. Natalie Holloway was the news. Even Anna Nicole Smith had less staying power.

There is a place in life for nonsense, powderpuff human interest stories. Hard Copy (ironically named), 20/20 (Barbara Walters used to discuss actual news), Inside Edition, Access Hollywood, and Dateline can discuss nonsense. Katie Couric can discuss Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell in Anchorman) and pandas giving birth. She should not do it on the CBS Evening News.

When Bill Clinton was president, like him or not, he was occasionally relevant (not due to anything he actually did, but his title). He is now a private citizen. If he had expertise in a particular area, such as Richard Nixon dealing with China or Ronald Reagan dealing with the USSR, he could discuss that. However, given his need to publicly express his opinion on everything, he becomes relevant about nothing. The argument that he becomes relevant if Hillary Clinton gets closer to the White House is credible if one accepts that Laura Bush makes nightly news when she speaks. She does not, nor does she claim to do so. Bill Clinton was a master political strategist, but that is tactics. That is not policy. Bill Belichick is the head coach and master strategist of the New England Patriots, but he is relevant during the sports section of the news, not the entire broadcast.

This horse needs to be flogged repeatedly. We are at War. The fate of the free world is at stake. There is no room for nonsense, especially not during the news.

Ron Burgundy is fictional. Bill Clinton is a former world leader who needs to build houses somewhere…quietly. Natalie Holloway needs to rest in peace.

Otherwise, we will dumb down the news to where it is too stupid for even the lowest common denominator to tolerate (“The View” interviewing Alec Baldwin, anyone?). We will be even less informed than we are now.

On May 6th, the French elect their new leader. I never thought I would live to see the day when anything happening in France is more relevant than what is happening in the USA.

We need an Al Queda capture now. Putting their faces on screen again would be a good start. That is what news broadcasts are supposed to do.

eric