From Drudge, a snapshot of a minor brain in action.

Ms German said she did not expect any trouble on the marches organised by her group.

"They are not the war mongers. If there is any violence the cause will be the visit of President Bush, because it is very provocative," she added.

Ohhhhh, I see. They are little lambs of peace, wouldn't hurt a fly. But the presence of Bush so drives them into a frenzy that they'll wack cops with their signs,.................Bush MADE them do it. Christ, can I use that excuse when she's in town? I'm normally very peaceable, but that idiot bitch so enraged me I had to stuff 10 or 12 of her supporters in a dumpster, it was all her fault.

Can I huh, huh.........please can I?

I take it there is no kind of intelligence qualification to lead one of those protests?

Cowboy is often used as an insult by Europeans, they seem to think we would take it that way, they might as well say something like stop acting like a man of character. It makes as much sense to American ears. When we hear the words cowboy or sheriff, this is what we think about, most of us over 30 anyway.

So this is how the lunatic fringe left expresses it's displeasure at our president, and by extension to us as well. They can say that "no, really, we like America, we just want your leader to die" as often as they like and it still comes across exactly as it sounds. It's an insult and beneath the dignity of a world power, You can imagine the reaction of the British left if their man of choice was burned in effigy on the Washington Plaza. They would be offended, insulted and wouldn't really care if every other speaker said we really "love" the UK, but you idiots elected a monster. A backhanded disclaimer is worse than a direct slur.

From even before our founding as a nation, the Brits never understood who we were, or what they were dealing with. With events like this I doubt they ever will.

There were and are exceptions certainly, Churchill understood, and Blair seems too. Various writers at various times have been very perceptive about us, strangely though those resources never seem to be accepted by the British left.

Our symbols tell our story.

Merely symbols yes, but they are uniquely our own. There is no Cockney counterpart to the Duke, no British version of The Shootist. There can't be, because we aren't the same, and they should stop thinking we wish to be just like them, because we don't. We chose a different path over two centuries ago, and haven't looked back.

We fought the greatest army in Europe to a bloody stalemate, then to victory, defeated their best generals. We did this when we were tiny and weak, barely a nation at all. That experience colored much of our history. We have refused limits, denied constraints from outside, and had the stones to make it stick. In all our history the only limit to our power and reach has been the restraints that we have placed on ourselves. When we stepped out from Europe's shadow, they spent a century pretending it was all just a big mistake, a hoax. They expected us to fail, to come crawling back, that we succeeded beyond all expectations was a rather rude shock to them. We are a mongrel race to them, they've said as much. Talented tinkerers and businessmen, but not serious players. We had no nobles, no ruling class, no cultural bias against change. We just didn't conform to their rules of class and culture.

The 20th century saw that dynamic change. The first global war, where we broke a stalemate that had ravaged Europe, a generation later when we emerged from the carnage of another European disaster the most powerfull nation on earth forever switched roles between the US and Europe. They can't seem to forgive us for that. As much as it pains them, the fact is we don't really want the job. We have inherited the position of hyperpower from the failures of the Europeans to succeed and to cope with the new world. The price is too high, and the Honors lacking, we would rather see another benevolent power assume the burden........

Just somebody point one out that could do it.

It becomes a simpler matter in that we just have no one we trust enough, or is strong enough to assume the mantle. There is nobody else.

9/11 came and the dynamic changed again. We were just beginning to lull ourselves into thinking that the big fights were all over, that we could coast for awhile. The smoking craters of New York, Washington and Pennsylvania showed us different. As bad as Pearl Harbour was, it was a military defeat. 9/11 was different, very different. They didn't attack our military, they murdered our citizens, .......men, women, children..........All sacrificed to the delusions of a dead culture based on past glories and blood fueds. A culture of spite and resentment. A culture that very often, finds common ground with the faded Empires of a selfneutered Europe, talking tough, but ashamed at it's lack of global power. The fall of the Soviets added to the mix. Western leftists found themselves cut adrift, cast off as the freed people of the Warsaw Pact soundly rejected their beloved path and came to embrace America as the only real opponent to what had enslaved them for so long. They haven't forgiven us for that either.

In esscense we are facing the bitter remnants of failed regimes, failed cultures. The more astute in Europe percieve that hating America for everything is irrational and short sighted. That success can only come from their own doing, not from our failure, .......and they're being drowned out by clowns with buckets of red paint.

So be it, their blindness to reality just ensures that they will continue to fail. That's their choice.

If they really want to ask a relevant question, it isn't why is America hated? It's why are they so bitter and angry? Why do they insist on trying to succeed by tripping us when they should be trying to run faster instead?

I see it this way, in the end we will succeed because we have no choice. Failure to win the War on Terror, the War in Iraq will put our children at risk, it will damn our people to being targets of oppurtunity by a bastard death cult patted on the head by halwitted losers from the west. We will win because we can't fail and still live our lives. We will win because we don't know how to crawl, won't learn and refuse to be taught. Understand that about us if nothing else.

I'm truely sorry so many in Britain have learned to crawl on their bellies. Have learned to deflect their own prejudices on us. Have learned to turn a blind eye to horror because they won't let go of a failed idea. They were stronger than that once, ...........in the past.........Blair knows what we can accomplish, what we wish too. Is he the only Brit to remember what it is to be proud,.......to do the right thing?

I hope not.

Whatever the outcome we fight on. Our critics will just have to get over it. As to the War on Terror? .......".You called down the thunder".

Be careful what you ask for.

This is pretty illegal

Funny how the left screams about the US acting unilaterally to depose a vicious regime, but says nary a word about France acting unilaterally to keep him in power. Oh, that's right, it wasn't unilateral on France's part. They had a little help from Russia and Germany as well.

Update:

Even though there are not many things more entertaining than bashing Chirac, it appears that this story is in error. Or, more correctly, that the Poles were in error when the story was written.

Hehe. Who knew that Ba'ath is just arabic for Nazi?

Ba'ath party (b��th) , Arab political party, in Syria and in Iraq. Its main ideological objectives are secularism, socialism, and pan-Arab unionism. Founded in Damascus in 1941 and reformed, with the name Ba'ath, in the early 1950s, it rapidly achieved political power in Syria.

Don't let the door his you in the ass on the way out.

However you feel about abstinence, the tone and cant of this opinion piece tells us alot. You see, the problem is that us hick, backwards Americans care what kind of morals we instill in our young,.........I shit you not.

There are, needless to say, a lot of things wrong with this. First, many of the campaigns are absurdly scaremongering, which puts the wind up teens who inevitably do have sex and makes them less likely to seek medical help for treatable conditions. Second, most of the dumb slogans (like "If you don't aim to please, don't aim to tease") put the onus on girls to act as gatekeepers to sexual experience, which is misogynistic. Third, the overwhelming emphasis on teenage pregnancy expressly excludes homosexuals from the debate (at a conference organised by the rightwing Medical Institute of Sexual Health, in 2000, a young female doctor was asked how she would apply the abstinence message to a young homosexual coming into her clinic. She said: "I would tell him that he was sinning against my Lord!").

Well excluding homosexuals from abstinence programs might be bigoted, except that senior citizens are excluded for the same reason. They can't get pregnant and be forced into early poverty you bimbo! Well she doesn't like all this moral stuff, how nice. So how exactly do you instill in your kids that carjacking and sleeping around like an English Ferret are bad, if you preclude such judgemental things like morality?

So she's an alley cat, fine, I can accept that. But she's old enough to face the consequences of what she does, old enough to pay for a child, or an abortion. How poopooing the effort to teach children that some choices aren't in their best interests helps is beyond me. This paragraph shows where she's coming from clearly.

As Alastair Campbell memorably remarked: over here we don't do God. We don't do God at all. This must be the most valuable distinction still extant between us and America, that we have yet to fall back on bogus concepts of morality to explain why some teens sleep around and shoplift, and some don't. Sorry if that sounds like triumphalism, but, God knows, we don't have much.

"Bogus concepts of morality" this from a woman living in a city that makes New York seem like Disneyland. Where carjacking and muggings are not only rampant, but growing. Where self defense is a crime, where criminals get lighter sentences than the citizens who do fight back. Maybe your attitude explains why you "don't have much" compared to us,......Thinking seems a lost art at the Guardian.

Even though the UN turned down coalition recommendations on security, it's still our fault they got attacked:

Annan said he was surprised to hear reports that the United Nations turned down an offer of security from U.S.-led coalition forces. He stressed that security was the responsibility of the United States as the occupying power and if it was needed, the United Nations shouldn�t even have been asked.
�I don�t know if the U.N. did turn down offer for protection, but if it did, it was not correct, and they should not have been allowed to turn it down,� Annan said in Stockholm, en route to New York. �That kind of decision should not be left to the protected. It is those with responsibility for security and law and order, who have intelligence, which determines what action is taken.�

Hey, Kofi, just once I'd like to hear you admit that the UN screwed up. About anything. Ever.

Norman Mailer, the beloved giant of the literary world has once again proven that having a gift for words does not mean you have anything intelligent to say. When you read this steaming pile of dog excrement you find that it's not about any of the things you believed the war to be about. No, it's about poor dumb ignorant white man America! Once again proving it's manhood to itself by conquering brown people! Jesus Christ, even the hippies give us credit for being smart enough to pursue self interest, but not Normie.....nooooooo.

Of course, there were sports fans who loved the stars on their favorite teams without regard to race. Sometimes, they even liked black athletes the most. Such white men tended to be liberals. They were no use to Bush. He needed to take care of his more immediate constituency. If he had a covert strength, it was his knowledge of the unspoken things that bothered American white men the most�just those matters they were not always ready to admit to themselves. The first was that people hipped on sports can get overaddicted to victory. Sports, the corporate ethic (advertising), and the American flag had become a go-for-the-win triumvirate that had developed many psychic connections with the military.

See it's racism, you can't be white and not a liberal and be anything but a bigot, Normie says so. Normie also needs to have his head extracted from that overused highway of an ass of his. See how easy it is to explain away how a majority of people disagree with you when you just tag them as knuckle dragging boobs. Only really smart people like Normie can see the truth, everybody else is just stupid.

I can't let this go either,

The carrier was easily within helicopter range of San Diego but G.W. would not have been able to show himself in flight regalia, and so would not have been able to demonstrate how well he wore the uniform he had not honored. Jack Kennedy, a war hero, was always in civvies while he was commander in chief.

Is Normie on crack? Bush never "honored" the uniform he wore? He flew F-106's in the Air National Guard, I'm sure that all the ANG units who flew in our last two wars consider their service dishonorable. Compared to what, Bill (pussyboy) Clinton ducking the draft? Al (mr. internet) Gore securing a decidedly non dangerous media position thanks to daddy? He mentions Ike and JFK as if he didn't know they would probably spit on almost all his stated positions. It's not required that everybody like Bush, what pisses me off totally is the thought that hating him isn't enough for him. Nope he has to imply and insinuate shit that is a damned lie. Vote for Dean if you like Normie, but save your personality projections for the assholes you know. I doubt he even knows a republican, I also doubt he knows anyone not wealthy, think he debates politics with his household staff? I'm also sure the only nonwhites he sees everyday are the people who cut his grass, and do his laundry.

Rich white liberals are as predictable as death, and half as pleasant.

I found this comment piece while doing my daily rounds at the Globe and Mail in Canada. It primarily discusses the Supreme Court decision to strike down laws making homosexuality illegal. That isn't my complaint with him. Read the piece and see if you don't agree that we may as well be talking about soft wood sales, cause it's another let's bash America fest.

Note the court was not asserting that the Constitution protects the rights of gay people to equal treatment before the law, only that laws actively prohibiting homosexual behaviour were unconstitutional, in that society had evolved toward a greater acceptance of homosexual conduct, which would make laws specifically targeting homosexuals invalid under the due-process provisions of the Constitution.

Some would argue that the courts here have perverted the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to extend benefits to gays not sanctioned by Parliament. But it was the federal government that revoked the sodomy laws in the 1960s, and provincial governments that led the way in the 1970s and 1980s in prohibiting discrimination based on sexuality.

First, I think almost nothing about homosexuals, it's as much a non-issue to me as to wether someone is from Idaho,....... "you are! That's nice, so what do you think about the war?" I don't judge peoples relationships unless they hurt other people. So I guess I think the court probably got it right. nuff on that.

No my problem is it's plain this fuckstick clearly believes he comes from a more highly evolved, more enlightened race of human. Oh yes sweet Canada, where bad people who vote republican will never be, where everyone is in total lockstep with the latest socialist approved societal trends. No, no backslidders here.................

Does this retard even read his own paper? There's enough miscreant behavior to go around thank you very much. You are not so fucking special. Get over yourself. Does he really think homophobia is not in Canada, or racism, or nazi's, anti-semites? He needs to get out of the newsroom and go to a neighborhood bar and ask them if they think gay marriage is OK, bet he gets more than he cares to hear about how enlightened his fellow citizens are.

He can sew on the Asshole First Class stripe now, the paperworks in the mail.

If you're in Michigan you've probably already heard about this. But here we go anyway. You may remember the name "Thayrone" (aka Terry Hughes). He hosted a show on a NPR station in Ypsilanti, Michigan until he repeatedly expressed his pro-Iraq war/pro-Bush views on the air. On April 2nd he was fired for those offenses and then refusing to run NPR news , stating "we know if you want a current assesment of what is going on, you're sure not listening to us".

He has been picked up by an Ann Arbor, Michigan station and given his own show starting this Sunday night from 7-11pm. He has been given complete creative control over his new program, won't be forced to run news, and even *gasp* has the freedom to speak in favor of GWB.

For all the bitching from the left about having their view points being shut down, quieted, censored, etc. which we have had to listen to for months now, none of them can point to an experience such as this being done to anyone on their side. NPR being a psuedo-government entity, I would be tempted to go legal on their ass if it had been me. I don't retain a lawyer for giggles you know.

But Mr. Hughes is much more "mellow" about this than I. "But don't look for any paybacks this Sunday. 'It's going to be a real strong energy show,' Hughes says, 'not a get-even show ever. I'm not looking back, this is the next evolutionary step.'

Expect the tin-foil hat crowd to go ballistic over this since the station that he know works for is a Clear Channel station.