"Where are your ca-hoonies?"

It's Crazy Pammy, the awful harridan of the Atlas Shrugs blog, doing her very first video blog!

It's ungentlemanly to attack one's political foes for their appearance, so let's instead focus on:

* her horrid Lun-Guylind accent
* her inability to complete a sentence
* her attacks on George Clooney for not talking about "jee-had"
* the way her mind seems unable to focus on anything she is actually saying
* the way she has pressed her hapless children into parroting her deranged political views by ceaseless nagging

Oh, it's a real treat. And when you're done with that, why not prep yourself for the release of the Strangers With Candy movie by digging video excerpts of Florrie Fisher, another mentally unbalanced woman with a fierce Noo Yawk accent and the original model for Jerri Blank? The first excerpt, where she discusses how "I was thrown from a horse and I had to have a laminectomy, and I ended up in the San Francisco General Hospital, where I was operated on by the same doctor who operated on the late Jayne Mansfield's son Zoltan when he was mauled by the lion", is one of the most batshit things you'll ever see until Pam's next v-log.


Politics in action

1. War in Iraq is going poorly; goals ill-defined, bodies piling up, political system a mess, no clear exit strategy, recruiting down and corruption up.

2. Distraction of possible war in Iran fails to capture the imagination of public at large despite hard upselling by pundit class.

3. Marine Corps accused in massacre of unarmed civilians, including women, children, and the elderly, in Haditha; 'support the troops no matter what' mentality takes a hit.

4. Poll numbers for President Bush continue at record low.

5. But wait! Hey, remember Zarqawi? No? Well, he's Oddjob to bin-Laden's Goldfinger, or something like that! And guess what? We killed him! The war is almost won!

6. Plus, look! The president 'secretly' visited Iraq to boost everyone's confidence, and say "al-Brauni, you're doing a heck of a job" to the dipshits we picked to run the country! He didn't even wear body armor for the helicopter flight, because he is a grandstanding asshole manly tough guy!

7. And by a crazy coincidence, just one day after meeting with our manly tough guy president, Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki launched a violent government crackdown (called 'Operation Forward Together' HA HA HA) in Baghdad! A violent government crackdown which is sure to lead to peace, freedom, and progress, just like violent government crackdowns always do everywhere!

8. So what happened? I'll tell you what happened: President Manley T. Guy's poll numbers are up, up, up! Now, almost half of America thinks that the war in Iraq isn't completely unwinnable!

Oh, it's all too depressing. Here, watch this video of David Horowitz making a David Horowitz out of himself instead.


More Annti-Christ

I know that responding to her is pretty much identical to letting a three-year-old drive a car so he doesn't throw a tantrum, but she has reached some kind of a deranged apogee that makes William Jennings Bryan's the-sun-revolves-around-the-earth meltdown of 1925 look sane by comparison. Within the last 24 hours, she wrote this deranged column that goes off the charts of Nazi comparisons (it is liberals, of course, who are like Nazis), culminating with the claim that liberals would love Hitler if he hadn't turned against their beloved Stalin* AND gone on TV to claim that 9/11 widows are opportunistic gold-diggers who are happy their husbands died so they can ram their agenda down our throats**.

Oh, Ann, you're the worst American demagogue since the heyday of Father Coughlin you silly billy!

*: No resemblence between this claim and actual history, in which liberals opposed Hitler while conservatives were still desperately trying to keep us out of the war, should be implied or inferred.

**: Yes, Ann Coulter, who has spearheaded the right-wing offensive to use 9/11 as the final and untouchable justification for every item on the neo-conservative agenda, is accusing the widows of dead men of being opportunistic. THE END! OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION!


If we keep using this analogy, the terrorists win

Mona Charen:

No one yet knows what happened in Haditha, Iraq, last November.

Actually, a lot of people know. Most especially the soldiers involved.

There are accounts -- unconfirmed -- of a massacre perpetrated by a unit of enraged Marines against unarmed civilians.

Dig them qualifiers! The Marine Corps itself seems pretty convinced that something happened.

Consider that Abu Ghraib, which did not involve killing or torture

Actually, it included both torture and killing.

became the American and world press's favorite topic for weeks on end, though far more grotesque acts were being perpetrated daily by the jihadists in Iraq and elsewhere.


For the bajillionth time, IT IS INHERENTLY MORE NEWSWORTHY WHEN "GOOD GUYS" COMMIT QUESTIONABLE ACTS THAN WHEN "BAD GUYS" DO IT. We trust that Americans, as the self-declared 'good guys', will not perpetrate acts that we normally associate with Islamist terrorists; that's why it's more newsworthy when they do, just as it's more newsworthy when a policeman is caught dealing drugs or robbing banks than it is when a drug dealer or bank robber is caught doing same. A fucking ten-year-old could figure out why it's idiotic to bring up how bad terrorists are when non-terrorists commit acts of terrorism, but the right just keeps dragging it out as if it means something. LEAVE IT.

In the period since then, the American press has focused almost exclusively on stories from Iraq that depict the situation as hopeless and the role of Americans as counterproductive.

Which has nothing to do with the situation being hopeless or American actions being counterproductive. The job of the press is to deliver GOOD news! Look, purple fingers! They're painting a school, and it's only costing eight million dollars!

My Lai was not evidence of the moral bankruptcy of the Vietnam War. It was exactly what America-haters here and abroad claimed it was not -- an aberration.


They always flee, teaches Osama bin Laden.

If we criticize American troops for murdering innocents, the terrorists ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz.

The lessons our liberal professors and editorialists learned was that the war was immoral. And no amount of experience -- a million boat people, genocide in neighboring Cambodia, the collapse of communism nearly everywhere -- has been sufficient to alter their view.

Um...the genocide in Cambodia almost certainly wouldn't have happened without the American installation of hugely unpopular local leaders and the massive socioeconomic disruption that resulted from our illegal bombing of the country.

In fact, the defeatism preceded the Iraq War and was evident in the early days of the Afghanistan campaign as well when The New York Times famously declared the conflict a "quagmire" after only a few days of fighting.

Whereas now, everything is great in Afghanistan!

Amir Taheri, writing in the June issue of Commentary magazine, offers a catalogue of progress in Iraq that is almost impossible to find in our principal news outlets...there have been no queues of refugees streaming out of Iraq. To the contrary, 1.2 million have returned home since Saddam's ouster.

By a crazy coincidence, many of the people 'returning' to Iraq (often from Pakistan, Syria and Iran) are doing so with the express purpose of fighting American soldiers.

The Iraqi dinar, which had been in free fall during the final period of Saddam's misrule, has risen by 17 percent against the Kuwaiti dinar and 23 percent against the Iranian rial.

This is not only a colossal misstatement, but it ignores the fact that the low worth of the dinar during the last days of Saddam was due not to his mismanagement, but military sanctions against the country imposed from without.

Yes, violence is extreme, particularly in certain areas of the country. But this does not mean that democracy is failing to take root. Seventy percent of eligible Iraqis voted in the past three years.

And still no government! Throw another whoopsie-doodle on the fire, Fred.

Radio stations, newspapers and Internet blogs have proliferated.

The blogs, of course, being overwhelmingly critical of the American occupation, something not found in the newspapers which are largely fed their articles by the US State Department.

The first free trade unions in the Arab world have begun in Iraq.

1. Nonsese; the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions has existed for fifty years, and includes free unions in Egypt, Syria, Morocco, and Algeria. There are also independent unions in Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mauritania, and Yemen, as anyone who cared to check a less biased source than Town Hall could easily discover.

2. The 'free trade unions' in Iraq are toothless and have no collective bargaining power, thanks to clauses in the US-written constitution.

But don't expect to hear about those things. Our press will doubtless be too busy luxuriating in Haditha.

Yes, that's why we're so HAPPY about the massacre of innocent children, because we just LOVE TO BE PROVEN RIGHT! Yay, dead kids, thanks for your help!


But he knew Bruce Lee, so it's okay

Hey, remember a while back when the National Review's resident pederast, John Derbyshire, wrote a column where he talked about how gross Jennifer Aniston's saggy ole titties were, and explained how only he is brave enough to tell the truth about how the only women with tits worth looking at are those of teenage girls?

Well, he's launched a defense of that column that's, uh, interesting, to say the least. Highlights are mine:

Some of the most vituperative emails I have ever got came in after I made an offhand remark, in one of my monthly NRO diaries, to the effect that very few of us are physically appealing after our salad days, which in the case of women I pegged at ages 15-20. While the storm was raging, biologist Razib Khan over at Gene Expression (forget philosophers, theologians, and even novelists: the only people with interesting things to say about human nature nowadays are the scientists) decided to look up some actual numbers. Reasoning that a rapist is inspired to his passion mainly by the physical attractiveness of his victim, Razib went for rape statistics.

He found a 1992 report (Rape in America: A Report to the Nation) from the National Victim Center showing the age distribution of female rape victims. Sixty percent of the women who reported having been raped were aged 17 or less, divided about equally between women aged 11 to 17 (32 percent) and those under eleven (29 percent). Only six percent were older than 29. When a woman gets past her mid twenties, in fact, her probability of being raped drops off like a continental shelf. If you histogram the figures, you get a peak around ages 12-14.

What's the creepiest thing about this?

-the fact that Derbyshire quotes a biologist to shore up a bizarro sociological/criminological theory

- the fact that this biologist seems to think that rape is motivated by the physical attractiveness of the victim

- the fact that Derbyshire is defending his own sexual tastes by noting that they coincide with those of rapists and pederasts

- the fact that these statistics could just as easily be used to defend the viewpoint that the most attractive females of all are those under the age of 12

- some other completely fucking creepy thing