...and if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

To readers of my little corner of the web, it obviously comes as no surprise that I have a deep dislike for Al Gore and John Kerry. I truly, TRULY try to avoid thinking about either of them but, invariably, one of these idiots opens their mouth and, in the spirit of Ron White (“I had the right to remain silent…but not the ability.”), I am duty-bound to address it.

“U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D- Mass., who was in town Sunday to help Gov. Jennifer Granholm campaign for her re-election bid, took time to take a jab at the Bush administration for its lack of leadership in the Israeli-Lebanon conflict.

"If I was president, this wouldn't have happened," said Kerry during a noon stop at Honest John's bar and grill in Detroit's Cass Corridor.

Bush has been so concentrated on the war in Iraq that other Middle East tension arose as a result, he said.

"The president has been so absent on diplomacy when it comes to issues affecting the Middle East," Kerry said. "We're going to have a lot of ground to make up (in 2008) because of it."”

(Skip some hirstorical BS)

“Hezbollah guerillas should have been targeted with other terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaida and the Taliban, which operate in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Kerry said. However, Bush, has focused military strength on Iraq.

"This is about American security and Bush has failed. He has made it so much worse because of his lack of reality in going into Iraq.…We have to destroy Hezbollah," he said.”

Let that sink in for a minute: “If I was president, this wouldn’t have happened.”

Really, John?

Let’s skip past the fact that a pretty significant majority of the country (i.e., everyone who voted against you as well as many of those who voted for you not because you are John Kerry, but because you AREN’T George W. Bush) really doesn’t care what you THINK you may have been able to accomplish had you become President.

Let’s also skip past my question about why someone who has actually won an election for Executive Office (Gov. Granholm) would want YOU campaigning on her behalf. No offense, but I’m just not seeing you having any political clout.

Let’s focus, however, on your words:

"The president has been so absent on diplomacy when it comes to issues affecting the Middle East," Kerry said. "We're going to have a lot of ground to make up (in 2008) because of it."”

Diplomacy worked extremely well for Clinton, didn’t it? Granted, it looked like he may have pulled a rabbit out of his hat in 1993, but, beyond a lot of placation (and a Nobel Peace Prize for Yasser Arafat), what truly came out of it?

However, this comment is truly misleading in that it chalks up the conflict to a lack of diplomacy and “diplomacy” just doesn’t enter into the equation. This isn’t a case where two diametrically opposed nations are getting into a pissing contest and the US could’ve mediated a settlement. This is a terrorist organization who has declared war against an established nation. Further, the term “Israeli-Lebanon Conflict” is intellectually dishonest in that Israel is not fighting Lebanon…it’s fighting Hezbollah. Unfortunately, Lebanon is in the crosshairs because the Lebanese majority is being, essentially, held captive by a terrorist minority.

I’ve seen some reports from people on the ground in Lebanon who say that many Lebanese HOPE Israel succeeds in eradicating Hezbollah. Sounds plausible to me.

Finally, on the diplomacy subject, much to the disappointment of many, diplomacy isn’t going to end this conflict. Hezbollah needs to be taken out entirely. Besides Israel, Lebanon would be the greatest beneficiary.


“Hezbollah guerillas should have been targeted with other terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaida and the Taliban, which operate in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Kerry said.”

However, Bush, has focused military strength on Iraq.”

Ahem:

“If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community's already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement, even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act." – John Kerry – September 6, 2002

Sorry…just had to get that out of the way. And, I’m not just throwing that out there as a dig. I use that specific quote to bolster a position I have regarding a President Kerry.

Ick…I feel dirty just for saying that.

Regarding Hezbollah, what justification might you have used to start bombing the hell out of Lebanon? That they were harboring a terrorist organization? Would you have used non-compliance with a UN Security Council Resolution (1559) as justification to start invade a sovereign, Middle Eastern nation who was “no threat to the US”?? Hmmm…curious….

So, President Kerry (ick again), in order to get us out of an ill-advised war, redeploys all of those troops in Iraq who are fighting “the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time”. Some get to go home, but many are sent due west into Lebanon to take care of this little problem that Israel has. Because we’re working to eradicate this relatively small group of terrorists, we’ve essentially started a war with not one but TWO other counties; Iran and Syria.

Rather than declaring a formal war with the US over this issue, however, they handle it by proxy…they’ll fund some other organizations to do the fighting for them. Since we’ve left Iraq, there are plenty of folks from al-Queda and other insurgents who are looking for something to do. No, they’ll save their militaries for other endeavors.

You see, Iran has been eyeing that piece of land to their west for quite a while. Since the US obliterated the Iraqi army and left them a chaotic mess (thanks to the Kerry policy of "retreat and surrender"), Iran will just move in and set up shop. There probably won’t be THAT much resistance.

So, while the US and Israel are fighting an insurgency which makes the current Iraq situation look like a simple case of teenaged rebellion, an unholy alliance…uh…coalition, is being formed between Palestine, Syria, Iran, and the country formerly known as Iraq, During this little “coalition-building” period, Iran realizes some success in their nuclear program. Congratulations, John! You’ve COMPLETELY lost the Middle East AND they’ve got the bomb.

Good strategy, John. SO sorry I didn’t vote for you in 2004.

"This is about American security and Bush has failed. He has made it so much worse because of his lack of reality in going into Iraq.…We have to destroy Hezbollah," he said.”

Uhh….that’s pretty much what Israel is doing right now.

Why, just this afternoon, Hezbollah gave an interview and, in so many words, they said, “Well, HORSESHIT! This wasn’t what we were expecting!”

OK. They didn’t really say “horseshit”. They actually said:

"The truth is — let me say this clearly — we didn't even expect (this) response ... that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us," said Komati.

He said Hezbollah had expected "the usual, limited response" from Israel after the two soldiers were seized by guerrillas on Israel's side of the border on July 12.

In the past, he said, Israeli responses to Hezbollah actions included sending commandos into Lebanon, seizing Hezbollah officials and briefly targeting specific strongholds in southern Lebanon.

Komati said his group had anticipated negotiations to swap the Israeli soldiers for three Lebanese held in Israeli jails, with Germany acting as a mediator as it has in past prisoner exchanges.


Go, Israel! Take them out. God bless.

Go SCREW, John. You’re NOT president….and I thank God for that.

Much To The Chagrin of Some, I Side With Newt...

Saw a little article this afternoon that I though was worthy of my commentary. My thoughts in red:

Gingrich says it's World War III

Posted by David Postman at 12:54 PM

Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich says America is in World War III and President Bush should say so. In an interview in Bellevue this morning Gingrich said Bush should call a joint session of Congress the first week of September and talk about global military conflicts in much starker terms than have been heard from the president.

"We need to have the militancy that says 'We're not going to lose a city,' " Gingrich said. He talks about the need to recognize World War III as important for military strategy and political strategy.

ME: The only real place that I disagree with Gingrich on this is that we can afford to wait for the first week of September. I’m sure that Newt’s thoughts are from a political standpoint…wait until we’re closer to elections to take a hard-line on this issue, but an awful lot can happen over 6-8 weeks. Personally, I think a special session should be called immediately…the week of 7/24 would be groovy. As one who has yet to take a vacation in the past 5 years without being tied to a cell phone or laptop, I don’t have a great deal of sympathy for our Congress and an interruption in their vacations. I’m a friggin’ Profits Analyst and I can’t catch a break. If you’re one of the elite who is responsible for the state of the free world, sorry about your Martha’s Vineyard trip being cut short.

Gingrich said he is "very worried" about Republican's facing fall elections and says the party must have the "nerve" to nationalize the elections and make the 2006 campaigns about a liberal Democratic agenda rather than about President Bush's record.

ME: Amen. This election should NOT be a referendum on George’s performance as President which, on many issues, is disappointing at best. Do we REALLY want to elect a bunch of Feingolds, Boxers and Pelosis into Congress when we are perilously close to a MAJOR world conflict???

Gingrich says that as of now Republicans "are sailing into the wind" in congressional campaigns. He said that's in part because of the Iraq war, adding, "Iraq is hard and painful and we do not explain it very well."

ME: AMEN. Conventional wisdom has made this war strictly about WMDs (it wasn’t) and for every woeful editorial about the quagmire we’re in, there is a TERRIBLY insufficient reponse from the White House, the RNC, etc.

But some of it is due to Republicans' congressional agenda. He said House and Senate Republicans "forgot the core principle" of the party and embraced Congressional pork. "Some of the guys," he said, have come down with a case of "incumbentitis."

ME: If you want to know my true feeling on this, go through the entire blog. Fiscal Conservitism is lost. We should be paying INFINITELY more attention to this than to who broadcast the word “fuck” by a disgruntled fan at a live sporting event or who showed their aged titty on TV.

Gingrich said in the coming days he plans to speak out publicly, and to the Administration, about the need to recognize that America is in World War III.

He lists wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, this week's bomb attacks in India, North Korean nuclear threats, terrorist arrests and investigations in Florida, Canada and Britain, and violence in Israel and Lebanon as evidence of World War III. He said Bush needs to deliver a speech to Congress and "connect all the dots" for Americans.

ME: Start now and keep hammering at it.

He said the reluctance to put those pieces together and see one global conflict is hurting America's interests. He said people, including some in the Bush Administration, who urge a restrained response from Israel are wrong "because they haven't crossed the bridge of realizing this is a war."

ME: I just said that a lot can happen over 6-8 weeks. As proof of this, about 24 hours ago, I was guilty of calling the Israeli response “disproportionate”. Whether that was the case or not, based on articles I’ve read today, it is escalating at a RAPID pace. The initial response may have been disproportionate, but the current actions of the Israelis isn’t…as evidenced by the fact that 8 folks in Haifa were just dispatched by Hezbollah rockets. I’m fully aware that many Lebanese have suffered similar fates…probably more than those in Haifa. Bottom line, the attempt to force the return of 2 Israeli soldiers has resulted in the death of quite a few Lebanese and Israeli citizens.

"This is World War III," Gingrich said. And once that's accepted, he said calls for restraint would fall away:

"Israel wouldn't leave southern Lebanon as long as there was a single missile there. I would go in and clean them all out and I would announce that any Iranian airplane trying to bring missiles to re-supply them would be shot down. This idea that we have this one-sided war where the other team gets to plan how to kill us and we get to talk, is nuts."

ME: His declaration may be a tad premature, but we are certainly on the brink and it should be acknowledged as such.

As far as the comment about us talking it out while the others figure out how best to eliminate as many as possible is spot-on. Going back to the “liberal agenda” Newt spoke about earlier, he’s absolutely right. It seems that many of our Congressional Liberals have yet to figure out that talking just isn’t always good enough. ESPECIALLY when you’re dealing with an enemy who is incapable of being reasoned with.

(In the interest of political correctness, I am NOT saying that you can’t reason with all Muslims. There’s over a billion of them…some of them have to be reasonable. I AM saying that you can’t reason with Muslim extremists. Despite the fact that the extremists are the minority, I have yet to see an adequate response from the majority. Accordingly, I don’t have any real regrets about blanket comments.)

( In the interest of brevity, I’m leaving out the less relevant portions of the article. Wanna read it? Here it is.)

"The line I think every Republican should use is, 'X knows their record, they just hope you don't,' which is actually the line I used in my winning race in '78. I'm a historian. I don't do anything new. I just imitate. I guarantee you there are 60 or 70 Democrats, if their districts thoroughly understood their record, they'd lose this year even though people aren't happy with Bush. Because people aren't suicidal. ..."

"While people understand that while they may be irritated with Republicans, we at least broadly share their values and visions and the left is just out of touch with reality. I think then you have a totally different debate by October, if we have the nerve to do it. ... There's going to be a national conversation in October. The only question is whether it's the Republicans defining it or whether we have some nutty idea that we can run local races, and so the entire definition is on the left."

ME: Most appropriate quotes of the article.

UPDATE: I tried to get a comment today from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee but no one ever got back to me. This evening, Kelly Steele, spokesman for the state party, did respond and sent this e-mail:

This is classic - that Gingrich's solution to Bush's failed leadership is a different "marketing strategy" shows the true extent to which Republicans cannot be trusted to win the war on terror. Democrats believe we need a "tough and smart" strategy that makes 2006 a year of transition in Iraq and aggressively takes the fight to the terrorists, while Gingrich and Bush seek to elect a new crop of loyal rubberstamps - McGavick, Reichert, and Roulstone included - to blindly support and extend their monopoly on their "tough and dumb" conduct of the war in Iraq and the larger battle against global terrorism.

ME: A little campaign advice for the Democrats: If you truly believe that you have a “tough and smart” strategy to succeed in Iraq AND to deal with the issues we, as a GLOBAL COMMUNITY, face, you can show that you place a higher priority on the future of the world than on your election chances by actually telling us what it is. So far, the only two strategies I’ve heard from the Democrats is “Stay the course” (and we know how well that’s working for Lieberman right now) or “Cut and run”.

This harkens back to John Kerry in 2004:

Kerry: “I have a wonderful strategy to make the world an altogether better place.”

Moderator: “Well, tell us about your ideas.”

Kerry: “Oh no, no, no. I can’t let you know that until I’m elected President”.

…to which 63,264,221 voters sighed a “screw you” and RE-ELECTED one of the most polarizing Presidents we’ve ever had.

Seriously…if a Democrat ever hopes to get a vote from me (and the other 60+ million voters out there who tend to vote Republican), PLEASE give me a reason that you deserve my vote other than “George Bush blows donkeys, nobody likes him, everybody hates him, he should eat worms and I’m not George Bush.”

Saving the World One (GREAT BIG) Problem at a Time...

Everybody hates the Jews.

Understand, I am not making a statement based on my personal preferences or prejudices. I’ve got no problem with the Jews. Hell, I'm related to one by marriage and, if you look at some of MY family members, you've got to question to what degree THEY may be Jewish. I’m simply stating a well-known fact.

From the time the Jews were enslaved in Egypt up until this very second, the vast majority of the world has hated them. This hatred seems to be reaching a boiling point, what with the Israeli-Lebanese(and everybody else) pissing contest taking place as I type. Accordingly, I've given it a lot of thought and have come up with an idea that would help me to go down as one of the greatest visionaries the world has ever known.

Let’s review a few key points of history over the past 2000 years. I’m not going all the way back to Abraham because, frankly, it’s too cumbersome. We’ll just leave it that the Romans were NOT the first enemy that Israel had to deal with:

The Roman Empire takes over well before the Common Era (read: “After Christ”). Granted, anti-Semitism was not the original motivation for the Romans…they were just looking for a little world domination and additional tax revenue. Unfortunately, however, by constantly holding themselves up as “God’s Chosen People” and, with the subtlety of a sledgehammer, reminding the Romans that their Gods were false didn’t necessarily endear the Romans to the Jews. Accordingly, the Romans felt a little come-uppance was in order and Jews were not treated all that well.

The Tribe decides to revolt against Rome…twice…neither of which worked out quite like the Jews might’ve hoped. Jerusalem (and the Temple) are destroyed and those Jews who didn’t find themselves as slaves or little grease spots in the desert were unceremoniously thrown out on their asses. As a nice little “screw you”, Rome renames Israel (and the surrounding area) “Palestine” after Israel’s longtime enemies, the Philistines. This would be much like my entire neighborhood being taken over by Democrats and renamed “AlGoreadephia” or “Kerrywood” or “Kennedyland” or some such.

Eventually, the Romans lose the land to the Muslims and the Muslims call it “home”. Granted, it wasn’t necessarily a peaceful existence and the Palestinians had their fair share of troubles over the next 1200 years, but it was their backyard. Meanwhile, the Jews are spending the next two millennia dealing with constant massacre, expulsion, inquisitions, etc.

Along comes Hitler and his Final Solution in which he managed to take out a significant portion of the world’s Jewish population. Now, lest anyone thinks that it was only those Jews who lived in Germany who found themselves on the wrong end of a rifle or gas nozzle, I would remind you that Hitler got a lot of help from much of the rest of Europe, whether or not they were occupied by Germany. He also got an assist by other complacent parties…complacent parties including the US. One of those underreported, shameful missteps by the US during the 1930s was that, when a bunch of Jews showed up here asking for a place to crash for awhile, we told them to pound salt. Guess where they ended up?

World War II ends and, while trying to figure out how everything is going to work out, the League of Nations is approached by the Jews:

“Hey, guys. Since we don’t have a homeland to go back to anymore, why don’t you help a brother out and give us back Israel. After all, it was rightfully ours 1,900 years ago.”

Whether the League of Nations’ intentions were altruistic and they sincerely hoped that this would serve as adequate recompense for all that the Jews had been through, or if they just hoped that the Arabs would finish what Hitler started, is really irrelevant. The bottom line is that they booted a whole bunch of Arabs off the land they’d occupied for a couple thousand years and moved the Jews on in. Needless to say, the Welcome Wagon didn’t show up to say “Howdy” to the new neighbors.

Fast-forward almost 60 years: Israel is currently bombing the hell out of Lebanon and is issuing ultimatums to Syria and Iran. At the same time, they are inadvertently building the largest coalition of countries in the history of the world. Unfortunately, the coalition is against them…which means one thing: Eventually, we (the US) are going to be called in to pull Israel’s ass out of the fire.

We already have our hands pretty full, guys and, frankly, don’t really have the diplomatic capital right now to build a team to help you out. Your bombing of an entire country and threatening two others for the benefit of two soldiers kidnapped by a terrorist organization seems a little, I don’t know…disproportionate? We appreciate that you’re attempting to curtail terrorism and, in fact, have absolutely NO love for Hezbollah, but we’ve got other fish to fry right now. And considering much of our diplomatic capital was lost as the result of our relationship with you, you’re really not helping either of us out.

Now that I’ve finished my history lesson and my political rant, I can reveal the idea I promised at the beginning of this article; the idea which will bring peace (at least for the short term) to much of the world and will make ALMOST everyone happy. This entire idea can be summed up in one word.

Utah.

We, the fine people of the US, will give you a quarter of the state of Utah in exchange for a commitment by you to leave the Middle East and relocate to the “New Israel” immediately.

Think about it. One quarter of Utah is two and a half times the size of Israel and the climate and geography are much the same: desert. And, let’s face it, one million white Mormons who don’t even drink coffee are far less scary and threatening than a couple hundred million Arab Muslims who own AK-47s and grenade launchers AND have a grudge.

Considering natural resources have little to do with your overall economy, you can essentially set up shop and run your own economy anywhere. Why not “Utahhhhh!”

Because the “New Israel” is situated cozily in between Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and what remains of the state of Utah, you wouldn’t need your own military. The US would handle your national defense for you. We wouldn’t even charge you anything…we’d just quit sending you billions of dollars a year in foreign aid.

Granted, you’d no longer have a seaport, but who needs seaports when you have a great Interstate System, railroads and airports?

I know you have your arguments, so let’s just address those now:

“But, that land was promised to us! All of our history is there. We’re supposed to rebuild the TEMPLE, for God’s sake!”

The land was promised to Abraham about four thousand years ago and, frankly, I think you’re excluding a pretty important aspect of that land grant: the land was promised to Abraham and his descendants, one of whom was Ishmael (the ELDEST, in fact). Isaac was the father of the Jews and, according to the Muslims, Muhammad is a direct descendant of Ishmael. I’m not arguing who is right on this issue, but considering that God’s messages tend to be fairly cryptic, I think there’s a reasonable question as to who is the rightful heir to the land. Personally, I’d love to see you all share it, in perfect harmony, but it’s already been proven that THAT won’t happen.

I’m assuming by “history” that you are NOT talking about your personal history as Israel, as a state, is a whopping ONE YEAR OLDER than my dear old Dad. The city of Miami is twice the age as the State of Israel.

If you’re talking about “spiritual history”, you’re not alone. As a Christian, I reckon that my spiritual history is there too. Do I want to live there? No. Do I even have a desire to go there? No. Making a pilgrimage to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at the risk of catching shrapnel is just not worth it to me. Maybe God will consider this to be a deficiency in me, but I doubt it.

Regarding the Temple, there are 7 million Jews in the Middle East who want to rebuild the Temple and about 400 million (give or take) Muslims who won’t let that happen. They think pretty highly of that mosque that was built there about 1400 years ago. I know that it's a prophesy which is supposed to be fulfilled, but it isn't happening in your lifetime. Or mine. Or in my great-great-great-great-great grandkids either.

“But we thought you wanted us there as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East.”

Frankly, I’m a little torn on that whole “Democracy in the Middle East” thing. Yes, I am a firm believer that democracy is the greatest chance that people have for freedom, justice and the pursuit of happiness. Unfortunately, though, it doesn’t always work out like we’d hoped. You should be especially aware of that as a terrorist organization, Hamas, became the controlling authority in Palestine. The fact that Hezbollah has quite a few seats in Lebanon is equally troubling.

Either way, many of those whom we would like to see pick up democracy hate you, so I’m not sure that you’re the perfect beacon of democracy.

As I said earlier, everybody wins:

The Jews win because they can live in a place in which they are not target practice. They don’t have to have their own military and can sleep soundly at night.

The Muslims win because they get Palestine back. Granted, they’re still going to hate the Jews, but are not going to waste the time, effort and resources to invade what is presently Utah.

The People of the Great State of Utah (some of them, anyway) win because we wouldn’t just run them off their land…they would get paid HANDSOMELY for their land.

The Mormons would be happy because much of that cash paid for “New Israel” would end up in their coffers (assuming, of course, that the Mormons tithe better than we Presbyterians)

The US wins for a TON of reasons:

Billions a year in Foreign Aid Savings;

We’re no longer pissing off 400 million (give-or-take) Middle Eastern Muslims by making them play nice with 7 million Jews.

By removing their (at this moment) greatest enemy from sight, we are in a much better bargaining position for bulk petroleum purchases and may actually get ahold of a barrel of oil at a discount.

With the exception of oil, we’d have no other real reason to show up in the Middle East, thereby sparing most of those fools over there the disgrace of having to deal with too many of our infidel asses.

Finally, Dubya wins because, if he could pull it off, George Bush will go down as the greatest leader in the history of the planet.

If anyone can see where my idea fails the smell test, feel free to let me know. In the meantime, I think I’m forwarding this e-mail on to Georgie boy now.

There’s nobody else in the world in more dire need of legacy building right now.

Isn't She Lovely, Isn't She Wonderful???

As the extremely proud father of the coolest 2 year-old who ever lived (“Three in August, Daddy-O” – KT), it is my duty to document those “cute-sy” moments we experience from the little monkey on a day-to-day basis.

Accordingly, I submit a small handful of KT’s most recent amusing quotations:

Response to seeing her new big-girl bed:

KT: “How cool is THAT?”

Initial response to seeing her newly re-arranged bedroom:

KT: “I can not-a BELIEVE it!”

After rushing her grandmother out the door to work one morning:

Grammie: "You girls have a good day."

KT: "Busy, Busy, Busy!" (Grammie walks out the door, KT shuts it)

KT: “Mommy, Grammie wears me out!”

While pretending to cut Daddy’s hair while playing “Barbershop:”

KT: “Daddy, say “ouch””,

Daddy: “OUCH!”

KT: “THAT DIDN’T HURT!”

After 10 minutes of constant blabbering:

Daddy: “HEY! Daddy’s ears need a BREAK!”

KT: (in a tone reminiscent of "HEY, your problem, not mine!) “Uh…mine don’t.”

While reading a bedtime story about opposites:

Mommy: “This is how Mommy mows the yard:CROOKED. This is how Daddy mows the yard: STRAIGHT”

Daddy: “And Daddy doesn’t break his foot while mowing the yard”

KT (to Mommy): “YOU did!”

While talking to a buddy of ours:

Mommy: “So, Matt, what’s the woman situation. You got a girl?”

KT: “I’M YOUR GIRL!!!!!”

Anytime the word “Shut-up” is uttered in her presence:

KT: “SHUTUPISBADMANNERS!!!!”


That’s all for now. I’ll add more as they occur.

Although Some Stupid Questions Don't Warrant Answers, I Take the Bait...

Every day, I take a quick peek at the Huffington Post just to delve into the minds of the perpetually retarded lefties who post there. I’ve not commented on any lately (in fact I haven’t commented on ANYTHING lately), but this was too good to pass up. Besides, I owed it to my public. I’ve had two separate people remind me over the past week that I’ve neglected my duties to this little corner of the web.

Beware…this is a very long post. So long, in fact, that I’ve been working on it on-and-off for the past 24 hours. It was fun though.

Without further ado, I give you the answers to “50 Easy (yet poorly reasoned, poorly worded or simply dumb) Questions to Ask Any Republican (or, in my case, Right-Leaning Federalist)”


1. What are the Top Seven best things that the Bush Administration has done?

Prevented further large-scale terrorist attacks on US soil, democracy in Afghanastan, democracy in Iraq, SIGNIFICANTLY reduced the power that Al-Queda was able to gain during the Clinton Administration, lowered taxes (thereby revitalizing a depressed economy, increasing homeownership, reducing unemployment, etc.), Number 8 would be returning Al Gore to his rightful position as a private citizen.

2. Is the Iraq War is going well?

As well as can be expected. Hate to bring up the “Liberal Media meme”, but if the news outlets spent a fraction of the time reporting on our successes rather than focusing on setbacks, public perception wouldn’t be so bleak.

3. After three years thus far, when do you think Iraq might be able to "stand up" so that America can "stand down"?

Not sure. How long did it take for Germany, Japan, etc. to “stand up” so we can “stand down”?

4. For his part in the event, how would you rate the job the President did protecting New Orleans from devastation?

Because I don’t believe that it was his responsibility to personally fly to N'awlins to stick his finger in the dike, I think he did just fine. How would you rate Nagin and Landreau’s jobs?

5. How do you think the rebuilding of New Orleans is going?

Haven’t paid much attention but probably about as well as (if not better) than the rebuilding of Homestead went after Hurricane Andrew. WAY better than the rebuilding of the World Trade Center.

6. When Dick Cheney and the oil company and energy executives met in private to plan America's energy policy, how much of their goal was to benefit consumers?

The purpose of the energy policy was to address potential shortages in energy and figure out how to mitigate that risk. In the long-term, it was completely for the consumer's benefit. At no point, however, were they charged with figuring out how to reduce the price of a cost of a gallon of gas or nationalize the oil industry.

7. Do you believe in the President's call for an Era of Personal Responsibility?

As opposed to an “Era of I Feel Your Pain, We’re Here To Take Care Of You, It’s All The Corporations' Fault, The Man Is Holding You Down Nanny Statism?” Absolutely

8. Since Republicans control the White House, Senate and House of Representatives, how personally responsible are they for conditions in America today?

Sadly, very reponsible. Despite the fact that Republicans “own” all three houses, many of them have zero backbone and are apt to cave to Democrats and fringe groups. “Speak softly and carry a big stick” is lost on the pantywaste Republicans we’ve elected and I, for one, am deeply disappointed by this.

9. Why do you think they haven't been able to find anyone who can verify that George Bush ever showed up for National Guard duty in Alabama?

Who cares? I care no more or less about that than why Kerry hasn’t fulfilled his promise to release his entire military file.

10. Would you want Donald Rumsfeld to plan your daughter's wedding?

No. I would never wish wedding planning on any man (other than the groom).

11. Are you aware that no government in the history of civilization, other than the Bush Administration, has lowered taxes during a war?

Are you aware that no government in the history of civilization, other than the Bush Administration, has not only lowered taxes during a war but also increased tax revenues at the same time?

12. Are you married?

Yes

13. Do you personally feel threatened by gay marriage?

Why does opposition to homosexuality always have to be likened to a fear or threat? In my life, I’ve known many homosexuals and the only time I felt threatened by one was when a really large lesbian took humbrage with the fact that I was hitting on her bi-curious girlfriend.

No, I’m not threatened by gay marriage. I do, however, oppose it.

14. Since getting elected, do you think the President has been more a uniter or a divider?

Since getting elected to which office? As Governor of Texas, he was unparalleled in his ability to unite both sides of the aisle. I don’t fault W. for dividing the country. I fault him for being so naïve as to think that he could actually pull off in Washington what he did in Texas.

15. How do you explain the President's approval rating going from a high of 90% to the current mid-30%?

Easy. Democrats have always hated him and Conservatives (such as myself) have fallen out of love with him because he has compromised many of those things that we put him in office to do.

16. Do you like the government collecting personal data on you without a warrant?

Because I don’t fit the criteria of a potential terrorist or terrorist sympathizer (thereby meaning that I’ve likely not had any of my personal data collected beyond what the IRS has been doing my entire adult life) , I’ve not lost any sleep over it.

17. How much money do you have in your bank account, stocks and investments?

Bank account: less than I would like, but enough to get by. Stocks: a little. Investments: six figures.

All is well

18. What's your partner's favorite sex position?

The only thing my wife has made clear to me on her preferences are those that she doesn’t like.

19. If you have nothing to hide, why aren't you answering?

I did.

20. Should we build a wall along the Mexican border?

Probably not, but we should do a better job of patrolling our border.

I'd be more inclined to dredge out the Rio Grande to make it too deep to cross on foot. Releasing a few surplus gators (not to injure anyone but to make the potential crosser re-think his position) wouldn't be bad either. Florida's got plenty of them to spare.

21. Why isn't anyone building a wall along the Canadian border?

Probably has something to do with Canadians being generally satisfied with their station in life and not fleeing in droves.

22. Does that terrorist gang arrested in Canada count as a threat?

POTENTIAL threat. Or, at least, used to be.

23. If you shot someone in the face while drinking, how fast would the police show up to arrest you?

It would probably depend on the circumstances. If I were to have a beer with lunch prior to an afternoon hunt in Texas and were to accidentally discharge my weapon, causing non life-threatening injury to another person in my hunting party, the likelihood of my arrest would be pretty slim.

My father-in-law used to hunt with a gentleman who, on average, shot one person every season and there was likely alcohol involved. No arrests.

24. If Donald Rumsfeld had planned your daughter's wedding three years ago, would the guests still be there?

Was it an open bar?

The premise of the question is stupid. Weddings, including receptions, generally last anywhere from 3 to 6 hours (mine was 5.5). Major wars, on the other hand, generally last anywhere from 2 years (WW1) to 14 (Vietnam). If you compare Iraq to Vietnam (as liberals are so inclined to do), after 3 years, we haven’t even gotten to “You may kiss the Bride” yet.

25. Even if no laws are broken, do you think it's okay to reveal the name of a covert agent?

Probably not, but you answered the key to the question within the first 6 words…”no laws are broken.”

Rather than arguing the premise of the question (and there are arguments to be made), I’ll drop it.

Hoping that an investigation would bring down the “Bush Family Evil Empire” and only being handed a dude named Scooter on a perjury charge must be heartbreaking. Being the compassionate feller I am, I’ll leave it alone so liberals may continue to lick their wounds and scream to the skies.

26. During your lifetime, approximately how often have you changed your mind?

I’m not even sure how many times I’ve changed my mind this week.

As far as changing my mind on values-based decisions I’ve made, I believe it was only once. Back when I was a young and stupid college student, I had a handful of liberal ideas on certain subjects. Then I thought the better of it.

27. Why shouldn't people dismiss you as a flip-flopper?

Stupid teenaged decisions made while drunk and thinking with my lower torso should not be held against me in my 30s.

28. Where do you think the Weapons of Mass Destruction might be?

In a deep dark hole in close proximity to John Kerry’s integrity.

(By putting "John Kerry" and "integrity" into the same sentence, I'm hoping to land near the top of Google in the event anyone is silly enough to do a search with those three words in it.)

29. Where do you think Osama bin Laden might be?

Strapped to a dialysis machine and mourning the fact that his legacy is being stomped out, one terrorist at time.

30. Is it fiscally responsible to cut taxes, increase spending and create a $9 trillion federal debt?

No. But name one other time in the history of the US when one could rightly accuse the Federal Government of being fiscally responsible.

I will agree, however, that Bush has blown this one. Cutting taxes was great but I’m chagrined over the fact that he has yet to veto a single spending bill.

31. Are you glad liberals passed such programs as Social Security, Medicare, the Civil Rights Act, women's suffrage, federal deposit insurance, unemployment compensation, rural electrification, child labor laws, minimum wages and the 40-hour work week?

Considering it’s all I’ve ever known, sure.

Can you, however, point out a great liberal accomplishment enacted in MY lifetime (34 years)?

32. What are the Top Ten best things that conservatives have given to America?

Methinks the author lacks an understanding of what a “Conservative” is, despite the fact that the definition of a Conservative is contained in the root of the word. We leave the ideas up to the liberals and, I’ll grant, some of the ideas have been good ones (Civil Rights, Women’s Sufferage, etc.). The Conservative’s job is to make sure that the liberals don’t go off half-cocked and pass something stupid like Universal Health Care, or some such.

33. If you were on life support, would you want a doctor you'd never met making a diagnosis about you via remote television?

Better than making a diagnosis via cell phone or walkie-talkie.

No, I probably would not, but what does this question have to do with anything?

34. Do you think man-made greenhouse gases have anything at all to do with depleting the ozone layer?

I have no idea and, even if I did, how am I, as a financial analyst, qualified to make that determination? Seems to me that the scientists who are experts in the field can’t even get on the same page.

35. If Donald Rumsfeld had planned your daughter's wedding three years ago, and guests were still there, how many factions would they now be split into?

See question 24. Because we haven’t even gotten to the smooching yet, they would be divided into exactly 2. Bride’s side and Groom’s side.

36. How good is it that the terrorist Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was killed?

In the words of one of my great-uncles, “Pooder than gussy.”

37. Are you aware that in 2002 the Pentagon knew where al-Zarqawi was and presented three separate plans to kill him, but the Administration refused to act each time?

Not to downplay al-Zarqawi’s bad guy credentials, but are YOU aware that in 2002, he was a much lesser bad guy, not a member of al-Queda and, therefore, not really a top focus?

Personally, I'd have probably liked to have seen him taken out (along with many others), but government-sanctioned assasination of an unaffiliated bad guy just would not have worked to our advantage (from a diplomatic standpoint).

Were I to find out that we had opportunity to take him out in 2004 or 2005 and neglected to do so, THEN I’d be pissed.

38. Is George W. Bush the kind of guy you'd want to sit down and have a beer with?

Absolutely.

39. When he started talking about being a Born Again Christian, would you want to stay or leave?

I’d stay. As a Christian, I don’t generally take offense to talk of God, Christ and all that goes along with it.

If the conversation went all zealot and stuff, I’d be more inclined to walk away, but doubt that would happen. Contrary to liberal belief, W. isn’t really a zealot…CERTAINLY not by Southern standards.

40. Is Ray Romano the kind of guy you'd want to sit down and have a beer with?

Sure, but as I don’t know anything about him and probably have little in common with him, I’m not sure how much fun it would be.

41. Would you want him to be President?

What, pray, does that have to do with anything?

As soon as Ray starts to explore a run for the Presidency, I’ll start to do my research on his qualifications and whether or not I’d support him.

42. Does the Administration have an environmental policy that benefits the environment?

The Administration has identified certain aspects of a beneficial environmental policy but it seems the left keep pissing all over them (i.e., expansion of nuclear energy capabilities, putting a gag on Al Gore and all of the hot air he ventilates, etc.).

43. Since George Bush campaigned for President strongly against nation building, in what ways are our actions in Iraq not nation building?

When George Bush campaigned for President strongly against nation building, there were two WTC towers standing in NYC and a Pentagon that contained 5 complete sides. His administration was dealt a crappy hand and he had to work with it accordingly.

Besides, if we reduce a country to rubble, we'll kick in to rebuild it. We're pretty cool like that.

And before any liberal starts to argue that Bush planned the Iraq invasion prior to his presidency or, worse, that he knew it was going to happen since 9-11 was an inside job, stop. No point in making yourself look stupid with asinine conspiracy theories.

44. What's the maximum amount of time you'd want to spend alone with Dick Cheney?

Much of it would depend on the locale. If my first meeting with him took place on a golf course or at a party over a nice bottle of 15 year old bourbon, I might make a friend for life. If I first met him on a quail plantation, I’d still probably like him…I’d just give him a wide berth.

In fact, of everyone in the Bush Administration, Cheney is the one that I’d probably like the most. The fact that he’s speaks bluntly, thinks sharply and appears to have no need for chatty small talk would mix well with my personality.

45. After dismissing Saddam Hussein's old Iraqi army, was it a good idea to let them keep their rifles?

Dismiss??? Are you f*$#ing stupid?

We did not dismiss Hussein’s army as there was no army left to dismiss. Those Iraqi soldiers who had not been turned into swiss cheese or crispy critters simply went home. No surrender, no dismissal…just obliteration.

Letting those former soldiers keep their guns was probably not the best thing to do, but raiding the house of every former soldier (putting our own soldiers at great risk) in order to snag the rifle wouldn’t have been any smarter.

46. Would a policy that allows torture be something that makes you proud as an American?

How is this relevent? Didn’t the Bush Administration already denounce and ban (at least, publically) torture?

Personally, I think we've gone above-and-beyond on the torture thing because we've defined torture as, essentially, anything which is uncomfortable to the prisoner. Ripping out fingernails in torture. Constant beating is torture. Force-feeding an inmate who is trying to starve himself to death or building a pyramid out of sweaty, naked Arab guys is not. Certainly not PLEASANT, but not torture.

47. Has the Mission been Accomplished?

If you define the mission as “Major Combat Operations”, yes.

People (read: "liberals") make it out that "Mission Accomplished" meant that Bush had already asked Colin Powell to start planning a Middle Eastern kegger. He was abundantly clear that the work there wasn't done by a far sight.

I agree, however, that "Mission Accomplished" wasn't the wisest photo-op ever conceived.

48. Do you feel comforted that Dick Cheney is a heartbeat away from being President?

For those reasons referenced in question 44, yes. Very.

49. If Donald Rumsfeld had planned your daughter's wedding, and guests started fighting and were killed, would you expect to be allowed to view the caskets when they were returned home?

This question is too stupid for me to even give a smartassed answer.

50. How glad do you think George Bush is that he's no longer active in the National Guard?

Probably as glad as I am that, after 15 years, I’m not in the same position I was in when I first became a grown-up and entered the workforce.