"DESTROY ANOTHER FETUS NOW, WE DON'T LIKE CHILDREN ANYHOW"
I'd like to describe myself as "pro-choice when it comes to abortion, but I'm not a coward. I'm not afraid to say what I'm for, and that happens to be abortion.
No one would describe themselves as being "pro-choice" on, say, civil rights. When was the last time you heard someone say "You know, it would be really nice if black people could vote without being lynched. Y'know, unless white people don't want that?"
No one is "pro-choice" on guns. You either have that right or you don't. Period. The same is true of abortion. If you believe in it, you're not "pro-choice," you're pro-abortion. And if liberals weren't such snivelling little assholes, they'd be proud to say so. When it comes to the rights of the people, there really is no "choice" involved. You either have a right, or you don't.
It might not seem like it, but I actually do respect "pro-life" voices. The problem is that most of them are the same kind of cowards that the "pro-choice" idiots are. If you believe that abortion is the murder of another human being, you do not make exceptions for "rape, murder or the life of the mother." If you believe that there are certain classes of expendable human life, then you're no better than a fucking Nazi.
Abortion is not a morally incrementalist argument. It's either murder or it isn't. A fetus is either human life, or it isn't. The only truly immoral voices in the debate are those of the vast middle, the "choice" believers on the left and the "exceptionalists" on the right. What they seek to do is, pardon the pun, split the baby.
I disagree with pro-life absolutists with every fibre of my being, but I can at least respect them for being honest. I can't say that for everyone else who isn't me. If you argue that "rape, incest and the life of the mother" are incremental steps in banning abortion outright, you might be the most immoral people of all. You are, by your own definition, willing to sacrifice innocent life for decades until you achieve some far away goal. Those terrorist assholes who bomb abortion clinics are more morally honest than you are, and you should be ashamed of yourselves for even suggesting that in public.
I happen to believe that if you can't prove that a fetus is human life beyond any legally definable doubt, then you should cede the choice of what to do with that mass of cells that will someday drop out of college to the person carrying them in their bloated bellies. That's just how I roll.
I have a very difficult time reconciling the belief that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects ... shall not be violated, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation" has any exceptions. If anything, the freedom of a woman's uterus from government interference is much more important than, say, your collection of sawed-off shotguns and Internet porn. My position on abortion rests on the foundation of security of the person, particularly the one that everyone can actually agree is a person. Without the security of the person, all other rights are essentially meaningless.
If I have a problem with Roe v. Wade, it is that Justice Blackmun's reasoning is almost incomprehensible. If I were to write that decision, it would be all of two sentences long. It would read "The Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Ninth Amendments to the Constitution, taken as a whole, clearly establish a right to personal privacy. Fucking deal with it."
Even as strident a pro-life voice as Justice Antonin Scalia has said that there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits abortion. Whenever I see a doubt as to what the Constitution says, I feel compelled to side with the individual over the state, which the Ninth Amendment does, too.
Instead, Blackmun wrote an incredibly muddled opinion that has only served to make the United States the political laughingstock of the world. Even the people of a backward country like Ireland, that bans abortion totally, laugh their asses off watching American politicians obsess over an issue than effects a grand total of one (depending on your definition of "life") person.
Widely ignored is the fact that Roe was the least important of two abortion decisions from the 1973 term. The real ground breaker was Doe v. Bolton.Even if Roe was overturned, it wouldn't affect Doe, which established access to abortion.
After Morgentaler, there was almost no constitutional foundation upon which to write a new, restrictive law. Also, the politics were horrible. Just mentioning abortion in the context of an election campaign is a good way for a political party to get dead fast.
It should be noted that unlike the United States, all criminal law is by definition, the jurisdiction of the federal government under the Criminal Code of Canada. One of the most important parts of Morgentaler v. Her Majesty, the Queen was the finding the provinces cannot pass abortion laws on their own.
Amazingly, Canada has been an abortion law-free kingdom of tranquility and happiness ever since.
Of course, that doesn't stop the jackals in the goddamn liberal media from polling us on abortion.
The poll by Angus-Reid - a firm that I have found to be traditionally unreliable - finds that 91% of Canadian support abortion rights to one degree or another. That isn't hugely surprising. What does shock me is what happens to the numbers when you add public funding to the equation.
When it comes to funding abortions, though, there is not the same level of support.
The same poll found 44% of respondents thought the public purse should only pay for abortions that were medical emergencies.
Four percent think the health-care system should never fund abortions. Egan said the numbers surprised her, but that they may not truly reflect people's thoughts on the issue.
She said many younger women, low-income women and women from rural areas could not afford abortions if they had to pay for them themselves, and so if the public system didn't pay for their procedures, it would amount to discrimination.
Firstly, the Canada Heath Act (socialized medicine to my American readers) doesn't, despite the best efforts of a bunch of liberal cocksuckers, doesn't deny treatment for maladies incurred by bad behaviour. Those leftist assholes would love to deny me coverage for my eventual cancer and heart disease because I love smoking more than anything in the world.
Furthermore, the taxes I pay on my cigarettes are, according to my government, supporting the fucking system in the first place. As I remember it, that's the justification for tobacco taxes in the first place. Should I demand that those taxes only pay the costs of smoking-related illness? How would all of Canada's remaining stupid motherfuckers react to that?
And what about all of those fatasses out there. McDonald's kills almost as many people as Imperial Tobacco does! Why are those sloppy, sweaty fuckers getting off so easily?
What said leftist assholes overlook is that most health maladies are the result of bad behaviour. When I first had this argument with a professor in college, I used the example of HIV/AIDS, perhaps the most preventable disease in North America after 1984. That didn't go over very well because liberals don't want to say that anything bad that happens to homosexuals might be a result of behaviour.
Making moral distinctions regarding care under a universal health care system would indeed be discriminatory. If you won't pay for a woman's abortion, why should I pay for her retard kid? Abortion is a one time payment of about three hundred bucks. Retards cost a fortune over their lifetime in health care benefits. That's to say nothing about the cost of their education. Them floppy-headed fuckers are expensive, and as a fiscal conservative, I object to footing the bill when an alternative exists.
Like it or not, Canadians have decided that health care is a right. Through our courts, we have also decided that abortion is a right. Furthermore, anything that involves sticking things into a woman's uterus that isn't me is by definition a health-related matter.
If nothing else, abortion and emphysema are at least fun-related conditions. Someone had a good time getting that way. But the 50% of you assholes who are body-surfing your way to Type 2 diabetes on a wave of fucking cheeseburgers and pancakes stuffed with chocolate and peanut butter are the last people who should bitch about funding abortions with your precious health care dollars.
Yet you fat, moralistic motherfuckers are going to be the first ones in my wallet when you have your fucking feet cut off, aren't you?
Let me get this straight, my tax dollars are only supposed to encourage certain kinds of behaviour and not others? Encouraging a girl to be a filthy little whore who needs it bareback is wrong because it costs a few hundred bucks, but holding a parade for you assholes who eat an entire pig for dessert because the fucking cow wasn't filling enough is right because you have a glandular problem is compassionate?
If that's true, fuck you and fuck Canada. I hope the goddamn terrorists win. At least they'll be more honest than you are.
Everybody in this fucking country is an asshole but me.
Thank you for your attention.
Easy Listening Recommendation of the Day:The FutureBy: Leonard Cohen From:The Future
HEY LOOK, TITS!: COUILLARD CONTINUES TO CAPTIVATE CANADA
Everybody loves a great set of knockers and the Parliament of Canada is no different. Fine tits have a way of speaking to a man in a secret language that you need a penis to understand. And like the rest of us, The Liberals, New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois want Julie Couillard's tits to talk to them.
It's been a big week for MademoiselleCouillard'sformidablefunbags. First, they brought down yet another senior Conservative that it turned was close to them. Then, the inept leader of the Official Opposition publicly mused that they might be the perfectly shaped instruments by which organized crime could infiltrate the Canadian government. Those are pretty powerful mammeries.
Canadian women from sea to shining sea are of course outraged. After all, none of their boobies get the kind of attention that Julie's are getting, and there aren't very many broads out there who captures the attention of a sexy guy like Stephane Dion, Gilles Duceppe or Jack Layton.
The week started out with a busty bang as the Minister of Public Works, Senator Michael Fortiershitcanned his senior Quebec advisor for bumping uglies with Julie just before MaximeBernier hopped on.
"Mr. Bernard Côté failed to inform me that while he was in a personal relationship with Julie Couillard, at the same time she was also vying for government business for Kevlar and raised it with Mr. Côté," he said. "Mr. Côté should have recused himself of having any dealings with the matter at hand, which he unfortunately didn't."
Fortier said Côté offered his resignation "and I accepted it."
First Bernier, now Cote. You know that when you see a piece of ass that ruins two careers in a month, that it's probably worth it.
But those magnificent mammaries might also be instruments of evil, the Liberal Party of Canada warns us.
- There are compelling security reasons to investigate whether the federal government is being targeted by organized crime, Liberals said yesterday amid news the Julie Couillard affair has claimed another senior Conservative casualty.
"There is the possibility that organized crime is trying to infiltrate the government," Liberal Leader Stephane Dion told reporters. "I'm not saying it's what happened. But certainly all the experts of security who have spoken (say) ... this is the pattern that you need to check."
Now any of you who know about biker gangs know that they're so ... subtle. Everyone who's seen The Wild One knows that. If you know a Hells Angel, you'll know that he excells at three things; anarchy, getting his red wings, and stealthily infiltrating the governments of G8 nations.
There's something you need to know about politicians. Sometimes it seems like they're actually speaking English. In fact, it is a stealthy facsimile of the Queen's tongue.
Indeed, the meaning, of what they say is often the opposite of what you would usually associate those words with. When President Bush said "I haven't made any decision about going to war with Iraq," he actually means "I'm going to war with Iraq on Tuesday night." When Stephane Dion says "I'm not saying it's what happened," he means "That's precisely what happened." And when Dion's deputy Michael Ignatieff says "I don’t care about her skirts, I don’t care about her cleavage," he actually means to say "I am a homosexual."
And now there are hearings regarding Madame Couillard and her beautiful breasts by the Commons Public Safety Committee. Our girl Julie is expected to appear this week. If my American readers remember how much fun the Clarence Thomas / Anita Hill hearings were in 1990, imagine how much more fun they would've been if Anita Hill was smoking fucking hot and pulled a train of bikers and senior Republican figures.
There are serious questions to be asked of Julie and the committee expects answers. For example, is she completely shaved like all women should be? Does she like anal sex or does she love it? Is she dating now?
The hearings will continue endlessly and eventually Julie's nipples will get hard and Canadian society will rapidly disintegrate. And if UjjalDosanjh can keep his hands out of his lap during M. Couillard's testimony, he's a better man than I am. If it's wrong to question a witness before a parliamentary committee whilst masturbating furiously is wrong, then I just don't want to be right.
However, if we've learned one thing froml'affaireBernier, it would be that journalists love writing about tits. They can't get enough of it, and the Canadian people can't stop reading about it. Last week it was the turn of the National Post to make breasts no fun at all.
Easy Listening Recommendation of the Day: The Bad Touch By: The Bloodhound Gang From: Hooray for Boobies
CALIFORNIA TAKES THE PLUNGE, BIBLE BEATERS BREATHLESS
With a divorce rate that has been over 50% for over thirty years, I have a very difficult time seeing what the imperative to "protect marriage" is. If marriage needs to be "defended" from anybody, people like Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani - who are each on their third one - seem like the people it needs defending from.
Truth be told, I don't think that married people should have any inherent rights or benefits granted by the goddamned government. Anyone who thinks that marriage and the family need to be encouraged is a fucking idiot. I would argue that anyone who gets married and starts shitting out kids because of a tax break is the last person who should do either.
Get married or don't. I don't give a shit, and I can't think of a reason why anyone else, particularly the huge bureaucratic machine of government, would either. People are way too involved with other people's families. Worse still, is this conservative penchant for being busybodies in the name of small government. Jesus, how can any rational adult advocate the government defining the family when that same government was not long ago headed by a guy who couldn't define what the meaning of the word "is" is.
There's only one reason that I'm for gay marriage: I can't think of a reason to be against it without feeling like an idiot. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be against it. The anti-gay marriage jokes practically write themselves and it's very difficult to be funny supporting it. Unfortunately, I'm allergic to stupidity.
In a perfect world, the government wouldn't have a goddamned thing to do with marriage and people would mind their own business. In that world, conservatives would understand that arguing that the government can't deliver the mail, yet has a duty to sanctify and protect the family unit only serves to make them look foolish.
Conservatives, especially those of the silly social variety, base their opposition to homosexuality on biblical principles. Jesus, they tell us, wouldn't like all of this faggotry bounding about. Why, if Jesus saw, say, David Guest, He'd kick him square in the nuts. As we all know, He ain't down with that.
There's a small problem with that reasoning. The New Testament doesn't actually address homosexery. It does advocate the subjugation of women and the submission of slaves though.
Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. 19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them. 20 Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. 21 Fathers, do not embitter your children, or they will become discouraged. 22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, 24 since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. 25 Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism. (4.1)Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven.
- Colossians 3
Wow, it turns out that modern society isn't based on biblical principles after all. Either that or Ike Turner is at God's right hand and Abraham Lincoln is burning in Hades as I write this. Amazingly, some folks are awfully selective about which biblical principles they advocate.
Having said that, same-sexery is mentioned quite a bit in the Old Testament, which is notable for its extremely pissy God. Not only is gay sex punishable by death, so is eating shell fish. Christ, the Book of Deuteronomy actually lays out the case for taking your wife to the gates of the city and stoning her to death should she backtalk you. Want to live by biblical principles? Let's start by banning Red Lobster and making spousal abuse fashionable again.
Furthermore, Christian conservatives believe that issues like gay marriage, or pretty much anything else should be decided by their elected representatives and not the courts. That ignores the fact that the concept of democracy is completely foreign to the Bible and the courts aren't. As I remember it, Jesus himself had an unfortunate encounter with the judiciary.
I find it incredibly odd that those most staunchly against same sex marriage are the same people who advocate monogamy the loudest. But the denial of marriage rights serves only to encourage homosexual promiscuity, which is the thing they seem to fear the most. As much as the Onward Christian Soldiers crowd wishes to the contrary, gay people aren't going anywhere. Wouldn't you prefer them behind a white picket fence as opposed to in a leather bar?
I've long maintained that adult life isn't all that different than its second grade counterpart in that we've never really grown out of pointing at one another and yelling "homo!" really loud. And nowhere is that more apparent than in American presidential politics.
I've had this argument before and I'm sure that I'll have it again. I'll always maintain that the 2004 election was won by the GOP on the backs of gay people. 11 states had gay marriage initiatives on their ballots that year and all of them carried.
The only state that passed a gay marriage amendment that went for John Kerry was Michigan, and that was much closer than it otherwise would have been. President Bush carried Ohio, which also had a ballot initiative, by about 100,000 votes. People vote against their economic interests all the time, but they rarely vote against their silly cultural interests. Does anyone really believe that 100,000 people voted to ban gay marriage and to elect Kerry at the same time?
Even though the president has absolutely nothing to do with marriage or constitutional amendments, Bush called for one banning gay marriage at about the time that Kerry became the Democratic nominee. This is what political professionals call "framing the issue." By making Kerry oppose the amendment, the GOP made him the candidate of homo nuptials. That Kerry's position on gay marriage was even more patently fucking ridiculous than Bush's was left unsaid.
And wouldn't you know it, just as another election is coming up, gay marriage becomes an issue again, this time in California. On Thursday the California Supreme Court ruled that the same-sex marriage ban, Proposition 22, violated the state's constitution.
With California, where 1 in 10 Americans live, recognizing gay marriage, the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act - which was always unconstitutional - is essentially useless. Furthermore, just as the California ban violated the equal protection clause of the state constitution, it won't be long before the remaining state laws violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
If you look at marriage as a civil service provided by the government, the argument becomes clearer. If you see a civil marriage as being no different than education, you can't escape the conclusion that outright bans or "civil unions" are in violation of constitutional guarantees.
In 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that "separate yet equal" schools for African American children were in breach of the equal protection clause. How then can the states plausibly maintain a separate yet equal civil union regime for homosexuals. That was struck down on a racial basis in the 1967 Loving v. Virgina decision.
While it is true that the word "marriage" is not to be found in the Constitution, neither is "education." What Brown corrected was the application of a government service to a specific minority. And very few people would today assert that Brown was wrongly decided. Not even a strict constructionist would argue that because education is not a specifically designated right, Brown is an example of an activist judiciary.
Conservative commentators and bloggers have charged that this is another example of the judiciary "creating law." It is not. The Fourteenth Amendment never refers to race, gender or sexual orientation, merely "the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." This is not the creation of new law at all.
Furthermore, the California ruling, like the one before it in Massachusetts, does not compel religious institutions to perform marriage ceremonies for homosexuals, as that would violate their free exercise rights under the First Amendment. The rulings are exclusive to government recognition of civil marriages. The Catholic Church, for example, refuses to recognize divorce and no one suggests that that is unconstitutional. This is not an example of the courts controlling religion. It is the courts forcing the state government to comply with its own constitution.
Of course, California is a peculiar place in that they allow for the incredibly dumb and counter-productive practice of direct democracy. Proposition 22, we will be reminded, was passed with 61.4% of the vote less than eight years ago. That means less than nothing in so far as if the will of the majority were paramount, there would be no need for constitutional protects at all. Those individual protections are a specific check on the power of the majority. If, for example, the people of California voted for the internment of Muslims after 9/11, it would still be unconstitutional even if 100% of the voters approved it.
But this will be a major factor in this year's elections, just as the Massachusetts decision was in 2004. Republicans, losing as they are seats in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi, will argue that this is another case of an activist judiciary, despite the fact that the case was decided solely on the merits of California constitution, not the federal one.
It also puts John McCain in a peculiar position. In 2006, he opposed the incredibly wrongheaded Federal Marriage Amendment, but supported and campaigned for a similiar measure in Arizona. McCain rightly believed that marriage is an issue for the individual states to decide.
The problem for McCain is that the state of California has decided and Governor Schwarzenegger has declared that he will not support a constitutional amendment to moot In re Marriage Cases. McCain cannot very well be supportive of the decision lest he antagonize the retarded right wing of his party, but he can't condemn it without undermining his support for state's rights.
Of course, the GOP will return to it's cudgel of "activist judges." It's worked for them before and it is one of the very few selling points it has left. That that argument undermines the third branch of government and the rule of law itself doesn't matter, nor does the fact that the current child president of the United States arguably owes his tenures of office to an "activist judiciary."
Not that any of that matters. Gay marriage is too far along to realistically stop now. Between California, Massachusetts, the "full faith and credit clause," and a distinct lack of support for a marriage amendment in the country and the states, the cause of same-sex marriage is unstoppable.
Gay marriage is now legal in California, Massachusetts, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, South Africa and Spain. Foreign marriages are legally recognized in Aruba, Israel, New Mexico, New York and Rhode Island.
And you know what? Life hasn't ended in any of those places. It won't end anywhere else either.
Easy Listening Recommendation of the Day: Honeymoon Blues By: Robert Johnson From: The Complete Recordings
NOTES ON TRUE LOVE LOST & WHY EVERYBODY IN CANADA IS AN ASSHOLE BUT ME
Most Canadians are pretty fucking stupid, so their dreams are limited to playing professional hockey, being a shithead like Don Cherry, or owning a Tim Hortons franchise. Canadians are a simple people with simple dreams, and I'm frankly shocked that we're a G8 country. If we didn't corner the export market in space arms, oil and comic actors, we'd be worse off than Uganda. We worship Wayne Gretzky as a god and engaged in five months of nationwide cannibalism when "The Beachcombers" was cancelled.
Canada is the kind of country where the strong are eaten and only the weak survive. Were it not for the intrinsic beauty of our reproductive organs, we would have died off as a nation long ago.
If there's anything worse than Canada, it's Quebec. Besides being "the French fact in North America", it is also a cauldron of corruption. La Belle Province is seemingly controlled by biker gangs who have childish names like "Rock Machine" and no motorcycles. This is preferable to popular democracy, which has only been able to produce life-long losers like Jean Charest. If Canadians were truly serious about making the world a better place, we'd wall off Quebec, plow their fields with salt, and drown the fuckers with their beloved Pepsi cola.
The only worthwhile things to emerge from Quebec is Leonard Cohen and Mitsou. But MaximeBernier wants to join that esteemed company and make it a holy trinity.
Bernier is Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs, and a notably ineffective one. This is particularly shocking in so far as Canada hasn't had a foreign policy that inspires anything other than laughter for 70 years and pretty much everything the Canadian government does springs exclusively from the fevered dreams of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
You would think that such a job would be difficult to fuck up, but Monsieur Bernier is doing yeoman's work of it. In his short time in office, he has publicly called for the president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai to fire the governor of Kandahar province, Asadullah Khalid, for the type of corruption that makes him suitable only for the Liberal Party of Canada.
Since I'm not foolish enough to believe that Afghan democracy is going to accomplish anything but sadness, I'm not necessarily against calling for the removal of a corrupt bureaucrat who cannot effectively govern a place where Canadian soldiers have a nasty habit of getting dead in large numbers. What I don't support is making that demand in public because doing so never accomplishes anything productive and only serves to make us look like arrogant occupiers.
Having established that MaximeBernier might be retarded, it would be unseemly not to point out my admiration for his skill with the ladies.
For his swearing in by my super-hot governor general as minister of foreign affairs, Bernier was accompanied by a comely fuckslut who had her beautiful jugs hanging out in a way that still makes my balls boil whenever I think about it. It was an impressive display of tits and ass and one that has earned the minister my undying respect.
As it happens, the fuckslut in question, Julie Couillard, has quite the history to accessorize her formidable ta-tas.
Tongues first wagged over Foreign Affairs Minister MaximeBernier's striking companion at last summer's cabinet swearing-in, and Parliament Hill is buzzing anew with revelations she was once married to an outlaw biker and lived with another gangster murdered during a bloody turf war in the 1990s.
The divorced Bernier, 45, first began dating former model and aspiring actress Julie Couillard, 38, during the summer of 2007, and the pair caused a minor furor with her revealing attire at last August's cabinet ceremony. According to newspaper reports, officials in the Prime Minister's Office admonished Bernier over her choice of outfit.
I can only assume that Harper's discomfort with MademoiselleCouillard's sexy, sexy outfit is an outgrowth of his inbred priggishness and inability to truly satisfy a woman. But pretty much everybody in Canada knows that about the prime minister. But the part about her biker history has certainly raised some eyebrows.
According to documents, trial transcripts and newspaper archives, Couillard was romantically involved with two men with strong ties to the Hells Angels biker gang, La Presse reports.
In 1995, Quebec's elite anti-biker squad stormed the house Couillard shared with her then-boyfriend Gilles Giguère, a well-known underworld figure, in a pre-dawn raid.
Couillard was questioned in connection with a murder and extortion plot allegedly involving Giguère, a Hells Angels lawyer, and a Montreal loan shark named Robert "Bob" Savard, key lieutenant to jailed Hells Angels kingpin Maurice "Mom" Boucher.
After a long interrogation, she was released, later filing a complaint to the provincial police commission. She talked of her ordeal in a 1996 interview with Allô Police, a now-defunct Montreal crime tabloid.
Couillard lived with Giguère for three years beginning in 1993, until he decided to become a police informer after being arrested with a cache of machine guns and 20 kilograms of marijuana.
But Giguère was gunned down in April of 1996, before his trial could begin. Police discovered his body in a ditch east of Montreal.
The next year, Couillard began dating StéphaneSirois, another gangland figure who would later become her husband.
Sirois was a member of the Rockers, a Hells Angels puppet club that biker experts say was responsible for taking over drug territories in and around Montreal and eliminating the Hells Angels' competitors.
Sirois later admitted to being a member of a Rockers "baseball team" – who intimidated rivals with baseball bats and smashed up bars that refused to allow the gang to deal drugs – and testified against more than a dozen of his former associates in a 2002 mega-trial.
During that testimony, Sirois contended Boucher had presented an ultimatum: he had to choose Couillard or his gang. He chose the former, but after their 1999 divorce, Sirois became a police informant, and returned to the gang as a mole.
To my knowledge, a biker slut has never gotten into the pants of a federal cabinet minister before, and this frankly speaks well of Quebec. It's nice to see that they still have a criminal element that isn't involved in the Liberal Party's endless kickback schemes.
I'll admit that I have no small reservoir of affection for whores from Quebec. Before the fall of the Berlin Wall, Toronto's strippers were almost all French Canadian and were only put out of work because their Eastern European sisters are infinitely filthier.
I also spent a weekend with a girl from Montreal several years ago and learned that if you have a finger or two in their asses while you eat them out, they tend to be screamers when they come. And they do tend to come a lot. Not having had a screamer before or since, I cherish the memory. As swinish as Quebec's general population is, their women are a precious resource and should be exploited without mercy once the Great Day of Reckoning comes.
While I applaud Bernier's romantic choices without hesitation, Ottawa's churlish political and journalistic establishments are displaying what they are best known for, jealousy and stupidity.
In Ottawa, Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said he had no independent confirmation of the allegations, but what he had heard caused him concern. "Certainly, Mr. Bernier needs to explain because we want to know if there were any matter of national security involved," he told reporters.
This is further evidence that Stephane Dion should shut the fuck up. Bernier is minister of foreign affairs, he's not justice minister or running the Treasury Board. What's the worst thing he can do, give Saskatchewan to the Arizona chapter of the Bandidos? And would that really be so terrible?
Christ, does Dion even like girls? It sure doesn't look like it. And that goes double for Gilles Duceppe. Unless and until either one of those sexless dwarves can demonstrate that they can handle the slutty sphincter of a trained biker whore, they should put their fucking kid gloves back on and leave the important stuff to MaximeBernier and me. It's easy to think that you can handle a woman experienced in pulling a train of hardened, hairy criminals, but the reality is very different. Don't ask how I know that, just know that I do.
We're also learning that, besides being the greatest fuck in the world who isn't my bride-to-be, Julie seems like the kind of girl who can get a self-important cesspool like Ottawa to lighten the fuck up, if only a little.
The cabinet minister’s girlfriend always stood out in the genteel diplomatic crowd that inhabits the foreign affairs building.
Whether smoking cigarettes in an ambassador’s limousine or striding into meetings snapping bubble gum and clad in leather boots and tight jeans, Julie Couillard raised eyebrows.
The prime minister is being surprisingly cool about the whole spectacle. I always figured that if Harper were ever presented with a perfectly shaved pussy, he'd physically recoil and immediately declare martial law.
"I hear that one of my cabinet ministers has an ex-girlfriend," Mr. Harper told reporters at a hastily called scrum Thursday.
"It's none of my business, none of Mr. Duceppe's business, none of Mr. Dion's business," he said, referring to the leaders of the Liberal and Bloc Quebecois parties.
"Mr. Dion and Mr. Duceppe are quite a group of gossipy old busy-bodies," the Prime Minister added.
Harper should have concluded his remarks on the matter by asking if Dion and Duceppe are also "worthless cocksuckers", but the man is the prime minister of Canada, and apparently some things actually are beneath him. Who knew?
Of course, none of this is stopping the Liberals and the Bloc from looking extraordinarily silly and sad.
At one point, Tory MPs booed so loudly during a question by Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale that the Speaker had to intervene. Peter Milliken ruled such queries were in order.
"This is not about Madame Couillard. This is about national security," said Mr. Goodale.
"This is a fundamental issue of democracy and if the government is not prepared to let the people of Canada have their say and ask decent legitimate questions, then this government stands exposed as government that is denying fundamental democracy."
Fucking a girl who fucked a bunch of bikers is a "fundamental issue of democracy?" Really? Jesus Christ, it's getting to the point that Canadian democracy is so fragile that a gang bang might just plunge us all into the darkness of fascism.
Furthermore, Goodale is the wrong person to lead this charge. The Liberals need a recognized expert on sluttishness. By the way, where isBelinda Stronach, anyway? She'd be good at this as she could ask questions like "Mr. Speaker, did the minister ejaculate in Madame Couillard's ass? Because a man will do anything, including jeopardize the national security, for a woman who lets him do that."
Only a true dumper daredevil like Belinda knows what the stakes really are in a situation like this. Belinda knows it, Peter MacKay knows it, I know it, and now you know it, too.
Of course, the jackals in the Fourth Estate are giddy over the prospect of talking about tits and ass while pretending that it's really about something other than tits and ass. The sexual frustration of the Toronto Star's James Travers in particular is almost palpable.
It's as easy to make too much of MaximeBernier's latest twirl in the spotlight as it is to miss the point. Who he dates is mostly important because it muddies the message he was trusted to deliver.
What "message" is Bernier's cock supposed to be delivering, Jim? "I Break for Nuns?"
Bernier's success in annoying separatists is measured by reports that Bloc mischief-making was central to the resurrection of the Julie Couillard story reporters previously explored and found wanting. While ticking off the Bloc delights patriots as well as Conservatives hoping Quebec will help push the party from minority to majority, it's slim compensation for the wreckage trailing the minister mandarins half-jokingly call "Mad Max."
High in the damage report is the Conservative law-and-order image. As unfair as it is to a woman with no criminal record, politicians in particular are judged by the company they keep and it's hard to find worse company than bikers.
I disagree. Politicians are seen in the company of journalists all the time. Most surveys show that reporters rank somewhere around the level of child molesters in the public's esteem and well below blogger scumbags like me. Something tells me that I've had filthy, nasty sex with more of my readers than James Travers has with his. Accordingly, I'm much more important than he is. Giving up the nappy dugout is much more of a personal commitment to a writer than, say, paying seventy five cents on the way to work. Just sayin'.
Worse still, the Star's own chronically wrong editorial page forcefully disagrees with its star pundit.
All of the above goes double for Stephen Maher of the Nova Scotia Chronicle Herald. Maher is seemingly incapable of making a point and writes for a newspaper that probably has fewer readers than I have, which is fucking pathetic. Almost nobody is reading me at this point.
There are a few points here to remember when considering the importance of Monsieur Bernier's past-tense bumping of uglies with Madam Couillard
MaximeBernier doesn't take a dump without a note from Stephen Harper explicitly allowing it and dictating the size and girth of the turd.
No one has managed to explain how a former fucktoy of the Quebec Hells Angels constitutes a national security threat. Has Sonny Barger allied himself with al-Qaeda without telling anyone?
Bernier is sadly no longer fucking Julie, therefore any "threat" has receded.
Stephane Dion, Gilles Duceppe, James Travers and Stephen Maher are all singularly incapable of satisfying a woman and probably aren't interested in learning. You could send all four of them to the fucking Learning Annex and none of them would be able to find the clitoris with a flashlight afterward.
This is the best scandal that can be dug up on the Tories? Really?
Have you seen her tits? Canada has no real national security policy to speak of and Mme. Couillard has fantabulousfunbags. If I absolutely have to worry about something, I'd prefer to worry about something that I know for a fact exists.
I've said a lot of incredibly sexist things in this little essay and all of them happen to be true. But I'm also telling you something that the Liberals, Bloc Quebecois and the goddamned liberal media isn't - that this story isn't about national security and never was. It's a story about slutty pussy written under the pretext of national security.
If this was a serious story, the media would have been on top of it (so to be speak) when the Bloc started pimping it out months ago. And they did check it out, but decided that it just wasn't as important as the fact that Dion was going to be a coward about forcing an election for the sixth month in a row.
But Parliament is about to go out of session for the summer and, since neither Harper or Dion is going to do anything remotely interesting, pussy is as good a topic for the press gallery to write about as any.
I can't prove this, but I have a sneaking suspicion that I'm being read by a few Canadian journalists. If that's true, I'd like to take this opportunity to tell them that they're fundamentally dishonest. When I write a story a story about cunt, at least I tell my readers (and usually in the headline) "Hey, look at this story about cunt!"
However, if you don't know the difference between biker cunt and national security and can't explain how one impacts the other, chances are you don't understand either. Julie Couillard isn't Ellen Rometsch, you dumb bastards. At best, she's a girl who spent a decade being passed around at keggers and traded for particularly good crystal meth.
It's adorable that assholes like Ralph Goodale and James Travers think that a former Hell's Angels cum dumpster is a threat to "fundamental democracy" when the all of the available evidence indicates that they themselves - and the proud and profoundly ignorant voters and readers who support them - are a much more serious threat.
The public likes being stupid and the political and journalistic classes of North American society are more than happy to keep them that way. If they can do that while writing about a girl with big tits and a well-worn cooter, all the better.
JESUS MAKES YOU DUMB: JEREMIAH WRIGHT, JOHN HAGEE & PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS
For the last forty years presidential campaigns have essentially been little more than an episode of Seinfeld, fundamentally about nothing. The last campaign where serious issues were discussed in something approaching a seious manner was in 1964. Say what you will about the candidates, but the election itself was about the permanence of social security, the role of the federal government in guaranteeing the civil rights of the citizenry and the wisdom of sending an ICBM into the Kremlin men's room.
Since then, campaigns have been about generic "crime," the death penalty, the pledge of alliegence, gay marriage, and fucking flag pins. The one thing that all of these things have in common is that they have nothing at all to do with the executive office of the president. As a matter of fact, the pledge and flag pins have nothing to do with anything.
Voters - American ones in particular - don't like issues because they make your head hurt. It's much easier and much more fun to get angry about bullshit. It doesn't matter that the United States is $9 trillion dollars in debt and that its military and foreign policies are effectively crippled and everybody's losing their fucking houses, at least it doesn't matter as much as what Barack Obama's goddamned minister said.
We're now well into the sixth consecutive week of the most important debate in America: whether or not Jeremiah Wright is a nut. Judging by column inches in the newspapers of record, television time and space devoted by the biggest of the big dog blogs, you cannot come to any conclusion other than Wright is the most important man in the country. Thankfully, the United States isn't at war or anything.
To be fair, the preoccupation with goofy religious nonsense in this campaign didn't begin with Wright. Much was made about Mitt Romney's magic underpants during the Republican primaries. The fact that Romney is a Mormon seemingly mattered far more than did the fact that Romney is an asshole and a borderline idiot.
I'll admit a bias here. I think that Jeremiah Wright is endlessly entertaining. Do I think that he's a lunatic? Sure I do. But insane people are often fun to watch and I need something to occupy my time with between Charles Manson's parole hearings. I have discussed this with my future bride, and when the day comes that we get married, we want Reverend Wright to conduct the ceremony. This is because I'm the most romantic man ever.
Am I shocked that Wright believes that the US government created the HIV virus and is ultimately responsible for 9/11? Not really. Wright also believes that Jesus is, as Sarah Silverman put it, magic. Faith is predicated on believing implausible things with no logical foundation whatsoever.
I don't make any distinction between worshipping the Zombie Christ and thinking that Louis Farrakahn is a swell guy. Both are incredibly silly assertions. On the other hand, Farrakhan made a pretty cool calypso record and Jesus didn't, so Farrakhan wins! I know for a fact that calypso exists, which I can't say about ressurection.
You know why Jeremiah Wright has been on television so much? Because Jeremiah Wright is entertaining as hell. He yells. He dances. He imitates marching bands from Florida and Michigan. He says shit that convinces you that he's completely lost his mind. And of the four, George W. Bush has only been really good at the fourth.
Even though Obama is still the presumptive Democratic nominee, Wright has essentially destroyed his chances of winning a general election. Unless the senator actually shoots his former pastor in the kneecaps, his name will forever be tied to America's chickens coming home to roost.
And I think that's unfortunate for two reasons. First, there are several perfectly logical reasons to vote against Barack Obama if people would only take the time to pay attention. Second, what happens to America's chickens if they don't come home to roost? Will they roost in Scandanavia? Or will they roost with the terrorists? If the chickens roost with the terrorists, don't the terrorists win? I think about these things so you don't have to.
I know that there are any number of asshole Republicans who are exhibiting no small measure of glee over the media obsession with the Wright story. This is because Republicans can be stupidly short-sighted when they smell blood in the water.
Like most of you, I remember Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson getting together on September 13, 2001 - three days after the attacks of 9/11 and three days before Wright made his comments - and said the following;
''What we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be minuscule if, in fact, God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.''
Mr. Robertson responded, ''Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven't even begun to see what they can do to the major population.''
A few moments later Mr. Falwell said, ''The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the A.C.L.U., People for the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.' ''
To which Mr. Robertson said, ''Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government.''
God allowed America's enemies to give them what the country probably deserved. Not radically different than what Wright said, is it? But everybody focused on the part about "the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the A.C.L.U., People for the American Way," as if Norman fucking Lear was the 20th highjacker, and they overlooked the first part. Liberals took Robertson and Falwell's comments as an attack on themselves because liberals are narcissitic shitheads. But they were an attack on America.
But President Bush never cut off either one of those ghouls and John McCain gave the commencement at Falwell's clown college just before Falwell had the good grace to finally fucking die. The GOP kept going to their poisoned wells long after they proved themselves to be every inch as treasonous as Jeremiah Wright. They campaigned on their dopey shows, received their emissaries at the White House and spoke at their hamburger universities.
If I know journalists as well as I think I do, they're using the Wright story to tee up a full-bore assault on evangelical retards in the name of being "fair and balanced." Journalists are godless heathens to be sure, but they happen to be particularly antagonistic toward conservative fairy tales.
All the way back in 1993, Bush remarked that "heaven is open only to those who accept Jesus Christ," which leaves Muslims and Jews in a rather precarious position. Fortunately for Bush, he was only running for governor then and the approximately 12 Jews and Muslims in the Lone Star State weren't going to vote Republican anyway. It was only in 1999, when he was preparing to run for president, that he sought absolution from Abe Foxman and the Anti-Defamation League.
Then there's John McCain's relationship with John Hagee. Reverend Hagee runs one of those Wall-Mart churches in Texas and believes some incomprehensibly dumb things.
And he's even got a minature whore for his "Whore Church" pointer. Awwww. John Hagee is fucking adorable!
Don't get me wrong, he's right about the "Whore Church" and Catholic anti-Semitism, but that's beside the point. There are 40 million Catholics in the United States and they constitute the single largest voting bloc there. Republicans would very much like to continue their recent trend of narrowly winning the Catholic vote. But the immigration debacle is going to crucify them with Hispanics and seeing John McCain holding hands with the likes of Hagee certainly isn't going to help with the rest of them.
Hagee also called Hurricane Katrina "the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans." because the city was planning a gay pride parade. Do serious people actually believe shit like that? I thought saying things like that got you in a straightjacket and not presidential politics.
When presented with Hagee's quotes, McCain distanced himself from them. However, just two weeks ago, McCain said to George Stephanopolous that he was "glad to have his endorsement." After the Obama / Wright conflageration, that isn't going to fly for very long. The press knows that and I think McCain does, too.
Look, I think John McCain is the first decent human being to run for president since Bob Dole 12 years ago and he doesn't want to attack Barack Obama's faith, particularly when the media and Hillary Clinton are doing it for him. I think, like the first President Bush, that he would like to avoid a presidential election becoming a stupid debate about an invisible man who lives in the sky.
Idiot bloggers are screaming for McCain's head because he won't jump on the Jeremiah Wright gravy train of glory. That's why I call them idiot bloggers. John McCain has been in politics for a very long time and is savvy enough to know that the second he attacks Wright, he opens himself up to questions about his relationship with Hagee and the ghost of Jerry Falwell returns to haunt him.
The stupid pricks in the GOP's evangelical base hate McCain and he isn't real fond of them either. But, while I disagree with his assessment, he feels he needs those jackals and doesn't need the hassle of throwing an evil crank like Hagee under the bus.
I'm not sure that's true. If any Republican can win without evangelicals, it's John McCain. Furthermore, it isn't like those assholes are going to vote for Obama. The worst thing that can happen is that they stay home. McCain is already on the record calling Falwell and Robertson "agents of intolerance" and Obama wrote a book about how wonderful Wright is. If it the argument stays at that level, McCain wins.
But McCain was almost killed by his little pantomine of kissing Falwell's ring at Liberty University last year and I'm not sure that the Lazarus act works twice. If Hagee becomes an issue - and the New York Timesstarted the ball rolling this morning - he can't do any less than Obama did in denouncing him personally without getting killed.
Let's quit pretending that Obama isn't already the nominee. At this point, Hillary Clinton is little more than a highly effective McCain surrogate. As time goes by, it is increasingly clear that McCain can beat Obama with independents and what I like to call "Ed Rendell Democrats" who cower in fear at the prospect of voting for a brown person.
But if this campaign becomes an inspid Ecclesiastical debate, all bets are off and you're likely looking at a President Obama. After all, religious psychopaths who publicly indentify with the Republicans outnumber those who identify with Democrats by about a hundred to one. The only thing saving McCain from answering questions about his strange relationships with lunatics is Howard Dean's insane "50 state strategy" that adorably assumes that the Democrats have a shot in the South. When the eventual nominee takes over the DNC, I assure you that this will change.
I know that this little missive is going to piss off any number of my readers, including several of my friends. But faith is a private thing and is best left that way. If you insist on making that faith a spectacle in your elections, I reserve the right to mock both it and you mercilessly.
I'm also not dumb enough to say in public that Jeremiah Wright is any better or any worse than John Hagee. Does anybody seriously believe that if Barack Obama becomes president that he'll establish a black republic, go on television and say that the United States deserved 9/11, or establish a federal Department of Chicken Roosting? Really? I certainly don't think that John McCain is going to go on a whore church tirade although it would be awfully funny if he did.
I love the United States and its people with all of my heart. I've spent the better part of my life studying the country and its politics. But Americans have this highly distrubing quirk that makes their elections about God even more than the fucking Iranians do. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad didn't get elected president because he was closer to Allah. He got elected because he promised to kill more Jews.
Maybe Obama's pastor hates America. His plumber might, too. So the fuck what? In the end, making your elections about your religion is like my making my blog about my cock. And I'd never do that. I'm far too classy.
Easy Listening Recommendation of the Day:GodBy: John Lennon From:Plastic Ono Band
You will get different estimates about precisely how close he is. We do know that he is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. We do know that there have been shipments going into Iran, for instance -- into Iraq, for instance, of aluminum tubes that really are only suited to -- high-quality aluminum tools that are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs. We know that he has the infrastructure, nuclear scientists to make a nuclear weapon. And we know that when the inspectors assessed this after the Gulf War, he was far, far closer to a crude nuclear device than anybody thought, maybe six months from a crude nuclear device.
The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.
-Condolezza Rice, September 8, 2002
My last post seems have really stirred the shit in the comments. I like it when that happens and I'd particularly like to thank Mook for being a psychopath. It keeps things interesting around here, particularly when my writing sucks, which seems to happen a lot.
In the comments, Mook makes a couple of interesting assertions that underscore both how batshit fucking crazy he is and how goddamned dumb the Bush administration is. You have to work awfully hard to be that uninformed and I don't want him thinking that I don't appreciate his effort. When Bill O'Reilly finally has the good sense to commit suicide, Mook is more than capable of taking over that chair.
First, he states "Vietnam is a fair parallel to Iraq in that it was a large scale war in which we were not seeking to conquer and rule the country," which is true for what it's worth. It just doesn't happen to be worth much.
You see, Americans live with this adorable notion that people care what American motives are when the United States bombs or invades their country. I can assure you that they don't. Americans can get away with this because they consume half of the world's illegal drugs and possess half of its nuclear weapons. I learned a long time ago not to argue with heavily armed, stoned people and hopefully you did, too.
South Vietnamese villagers didn't like having their huts burned down and accordingly worked with the Viet Cong more than they otherwise would have. The Filipinos didn't enjoy being waterboarded and their liberation from Spain did little to alieviate that dislike. And I'm pretty sure that your average Iraqi doesn't feel especially "free" when he can't go to mosque without getting blown up. Also, replacing Abu Ghraib with, well, Abu Ghraib was probably less than wise. Just sayin'.
Americans like to point to the post-war occupations of Germany and Japan, yet neglect to mention that anyone capable of forming an insurgency in either country was fucking dead. Oh, and the allies had something approaching a proper force to population ratio in Germany and Japan, which they don't in Iraq. As you may have noticed by now, airplanes and smart bombs aren't particularly effective in civil pacification operations.
Mook continues; "Saddam was a nutjob threat to the region with a history of producing and using chem(ical) weapons. That threat was successfully removed."
Actually, that was true in 1998, as we later learned. As one can read about in Deception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons by Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark, the Clinton "blowjob bombings" of December '98 were devastatingly effective in wiping out what remained of Iraq's WMD capacity while Republicans questioned the need for those bombings at all.
Mook suggests that Saddam "had expelled weapons inspectors back in 1998", which isn't the case. The inspectors left because he stopped giving them access to suspect sites. After they left, Saddam refused to readmit them.
Furthermore, the United States is the last country on earth that should bitch about the production and use of weapons of mass destruction. First, America actually invented most of those weapons and is the only country to have used a nuclear weapon. Second, the US government has excelled at (often accidental) proliferation and looking the other way when really scary countries like Pakistan get the bomb.
You know who else has WMD and a history of using them, Mook? The United States, the United Kingdom and France. You might know them as a majority of the permanent members of the Security Council.
Second, the US had a complicated history with Iraq's WMD program. Specifically, they provided the original funding for it during the war with Iran with agricultural credits and dual use technology transfers from the Reagan administration. This is something that Donald Rumsfeld doesn't like to talk about much, but knows quite a bit about.
Third, the idea invading a country that you presume has WMD and will use it on you or give it to terrorists is the single craziest fucking thing I've ever head. If Saddam did have them, the invasion would make it a self-fulfilling doom prophecy.
Here's how it works. No national leader would pass along a weapon like that and expect to long survive. Someone would only do something like that if the destruction of his regime was a certainty. It seems to me that if you're announcing that you're going to take a guy out, you're assuring that he'll either use those weapons on your troops or pass them along to terrorists so that he can exact his revenge from beyond the grave. The Bush administration is goddamned lucky that Saddam didn't have WMD. If he did, Pittsburg might no longer exist today.
That's not to say that Iraq shouldn't have been invaded, just that WMD was a laughably silly reason for doing it.
Saddam seemingly couldn't get out of bed in the morning without making a monsterously dumb strategic miscalculation. "I'll invade Iran. What could happen?" "I'll invade Kuwait. What could happen?" With the cocksucker French and Russians determined to lift the UN sanctions, it was only a matter of time before Iraq went on a shopping spree and Saddam did something dumb again and the United States would inevitably have to come to the rescue.
That being the case, better to take him down when he's weak than when he's strong. But that's a complicated argument to make to an uneducated public. It also lacks the peppiness of "mushroom clouds" and makes for a very busy bumper sticker.
Then there's the matter of unintended consequences, which President Bush seems to be the poster boy for.
In his 2002 State of the Union, the president and David Frum created an artificial "axis of evil" consisting of Iraq, Iran and North Korea, and specifically cited the dangers of their weapons programs. Then the US invaded Iraq. Predictably, Iran and North Korea accelerated those very programs to deter the United States. They might be evil, but Iran and North Korea aren't stupid. The best part? Deterrence seems to have worked. At least against the United States. Once the Commies and Persians figure out how containment works, Bush is fucked.
Mook took great exception to my contention that Operation Iraqi Freedom was "the most underplanned and undermanned military operation of its size in human history." Perhaps I could have stated that more clearly and I'll use this space to elaborate.
When one country decides to invade another, it usually knows two things before proceeding. First, they figure out what it will cost. Second, they decide what should happen when they win. The Bush administration was unique in resolving neither.
Paul Wolfowitz famously had the balls to go before Congress and say with a straight face that the war would cost no more than $50 billion and that would be financed through Iraqi oil revenues.
Both predictions turned out to be patent horseshit. Once you factor in the damage to the American economy and the continuing health care needs of the wounded veterans, this war is well on the way to eventually costing three trillion dollars. And that's three trillion in borrowed money, teenagers. For the first time in American history, a war is going to be paid for by the children and grandchildren of those who fought it. And to think that Larry Lindsey was dumped on his ass for suggesting that it was only going to cost $200 billion.
And you know what Iraq has been doing for the five years since "Mission Accomplished?" Importing gasoline. They sit on the second largest patch of it, but they're actually importing it. Turns out that three decades of war and sanctions rips the tits off of your production and refinery capacity. Who knew?
More importantly, the suggestion that the resources of a conqured nation could be exploited to pay for the conquest sort of undercuts the assertion that it was an operation where "invader does not seek to control the invaded country." The Wolfowitz plan would have been brilliantly original if the Germans hadn't thought of it first. But it does explain why the only arm of the fallen Iraqi government that was protected when the looting started was the Ministry of Oil.
As to the planning of what "victory" would look like, the history is there for anyone who wants to read it. The planning of the war took a year and a half. The planning for the aftermath only started about 3 months before the invasion. America's two proconsuls, Jay Garner and L. Paul Bremmer arrived in Iraq mere weeks after their appointments and had no documented directives on what precisely they were expected to accomplish. That, in a nutshell, is how Iraq ended up with a fucking flat tax before it had anything that even remotely resembled security. It's almost as if President Bush invaded a country to decide whether Steve Forbes was right all along.
Anyone who has read Rajiv Chandrasekaran's majestic Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone knows that the Coalition Provisional Authourity was little more than resume padding for budding young hacks from the Bush/Cheney 2000 campaign. If you once blew the guy who got coffee for the deputy director of lying in the Wyoming Republican Party, there was a better than even chance that you were going to rebuild Iraq's electrical infastructure. The results are obvious. Iraq still has no reliable electricity, but they do know all about the Bush vision of hack power. Of course, they already learned that from Saddam.
Worse still, the CPA went about attempting to sell off Iraqi state industries in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, which explicity prohibit that sort of thing. That only further undercut the Bush administration's already battered reputation for competence and respect for the rule of law.
Now, I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . .
Q: If your analysis is not correct, and we're not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?
Cheney: Well, I don't think it's likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. . . . The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but what they want to the get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that.
-Vice President Dick Cheney, "Meet the Press," March 16, 2003
The above quote by Vice President Hunty McShootaguy seems to be the total and full extent of postwar planning in Iraq. "They'll love us like the Japanese love Ratt," the thinking went. "We'll get the genetically criminal Ahmed Chalibi in there and everyone'll be happier than pigs in shit. Besides, who doesn't love a little sexual humiliation in jail?"
Anyone who knows anything about anything will tell you that you can't provide basic security with a ratio of occupiers to occupied that thin, let alone transform a society that is older than most, riven with historical sectarian divides, and is famously fucking cranky. The idea that you can take over a country as big and as crazy as Iraq with a force that thin and placate it with a guy who has actually convicted of a massive bank fraud right next door is worse than insane, it's criminal negiligence. Congress must have created a Department of Fairy Tales when I wasn't looking because I can't think of anywhere else that such "planning" could have taken place. On the other hand, it is perfectly representative of the entire Bush presidency.
If you were curious about what I meant by "the most underplanned and undermanned military operation of its size the human history", now you know. No intellectually honest person would say that the occupation of Iraq is a a testament to superior planning, manpower and execution.
Which leads me to the other points Mook has to make to make.
"Name another large scale war in history involving 150,000 invading troops where only 4,000 were lost over a 5 year period in in-country battle. Whether you all are honest enough to admit it, those relatively minimal losses, miniscule by historical standards, are a testament to superior planning, manpower and execution."
Oh.....
I can't think of another large scale war in history where over 90% of the casualties occured after the mission was described as accomplished and the major combat operations were deemed "over." You see, Mook suffers from a case of Bush Derangement Syndrome, too. He conveinently forgets major policy statements from his masturbatory Jesus when they conflict with his hallucinatory world view.
What Mook also doesn't work out in his retarded calculus is the number of Iraqis who have been killed in that 5 year period. Surely, you remember them, right? Those are the folks you liberated! Well, the insurgents have killed nearly a hundred of them for every American they've smoked. Of course, that number is just a guess since the Bush administration can't be bothered to acttually count how many of the people it liberated have been subsequently murdered. Also remember that the one of the only things an occupying power is legally obligated to provide the occupied is security.
If you agree with the position that the insurgent tactics are indeed those of terrorists, you have to recognize what the point of terrorism is. And that's not to achieve a stellar body count, it is to instill fear. That's where the "terror" part comes in, see? And it seems to me that your average Iraqi is plenty scared.
The Vietnam analogy is being bandied about quite a bit in the comments of my previous essay, and that's worth exploring.
Mook contends that "we didn't deliver any semblance of democracy in Vietnam or in the entire region, whereas Iraq has had democratic elections. Sure Iraq's political alliances are fragile, but they are undeniably steps toward democracy like nothing we were able to accomplish in Vietnam. And so on. That progress in Iraq costing 4,000American lives vs. 58,000 Americans killed in Vietnam."
Categorical nonsense. South Vietnam had plenty of elections. They just didn't mean a whole lot because those governments were incapable pf providing basic services, such as security, to their constituents. Sound familiar?
The Vietnam analogy also falls apart in the face of the "what if America wasn't there in the first place" test. If America wasn't in Vietnam, the north would have swallowed the south and bunch of people would have died. That's tragic, but ultimately what happened anyway.
If America never went to Iraq, Saddam would be running a criminal government that targeted political dissidents and ethnic rivals. But since America went into Iraq the way that it did, anarchy has broken out where the violence is completely random and no one of any faction is safe. Worse still, a Kurdish declaration of independence remains a distinct possibility, which would provoke a Turkish invasion with the United States in the middle.
That's your "superior planning, manpower and execution" at work.
But you're right and I'm wrong, Mook. Bush is Clauswitz in a fucking cowboy hat. You finally got me. I'm the deranged one. George W. Bush will remembered as the greatest military mind in recorded history!
I may be wrong and engaging in faddish "truth to power" rhetoric. But you're consciously and despite all of the available facts, speaking "truth" for power, which is usually infinately worse, son.
Easy Listening Recommendation of the Day:Gimmie ShelterBy: The Rolling Stones From:Let It Bleed
State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration by James Risen Finished, Thursday 19 January 2006
A Simple Twist of Fate: Bob Dylan and the Making of Blood on the Tracks by Andy Gill and Kevin Odegard Finished, 23 January 2006
Grits: An Intimate Portrait of the Liberal Party By Christina McCall-Newman Finished, 17 March 2006
Running the World: The Inside Story of the National Security Council and the Architechts of American Power by David Rothkopf Finished, 6 April 2006
Strategery: How George W. Bush is Defeating Terrorists, Outwitting Democrats and Confounding the Mainstream Media By Bill Sammon Finished, May 10, 2006
George Wallace: American Populist By Stephan Lesher Finished, June 15, 2006
Secrets of the Kingdom: The Inside Story of the Saudi - U.S Connection By Gerald Posner Finished, June 20, 2006
Soldiers of God: With Islamic Warriors in Afghanistan and Pakistan By Robert D. Kaplan Finished, June 27, 2006
Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus By Rick Perlstien Finished, July 4, 2006
Flawed Giant: Lyndon Johnson And His Times 1961-1973 By Robert Dallek Finished, August 10, 2006
Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential By James Moore and Wayne Slater Finished, October 7, 2006
The Fall Of Baghdad By Jon Lee Anderson Finished, October 31, 2006
The Way It Works: Inside Ottawa By Eddie Goldenberg Finished, November 12, 2006
Child Of God By Cormac McCarthy Finished, November 18, 2006
Right Side Up: The Fall Of Paul Martin And The Rise Of Stephen Harper's New Conservatism By Paul Wells Finished, December 8, 2006
The Private Life Of Chairman Mao By Dr. Li Zhisui, Translation By Tai Hung Chao Finished, December 14, 2006
Exile On Main Street: A Season In Hell With The Rolling Stones By: Robert Greenfeild Finished, February 21, 2007
"Work Hard, Study ... And Keep Out Of Politics!" Adventures And Lessons From An Unexpected Public Life By: James A. Baker, III with Steve Fiffer Finished, March 7, 2007
Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story Of The Struggle For Control Of The United States Supreme Court By Jan Crawford Greenburg Finished, March 14, 2007
Imperial Life In The Emerald City: Life Inside Iraq's Green Zone By: Rajiv Chandransekaran Finished March 18, 2007
Memories Of My Melancholy Whores By: Gabriel Garcia Marquez Finished, March 21, 2007
Guests Of The Ayatollah: The First Battle In America's War With Militant Islam By: Mark Bowden Finished, April 4, 2007
Screwjack By: Hunter S. Thompson Finished, April 19, 2007
State Of Denial: Bush At War, Part III By: Bob Woodward Finished, April 22, 2007
31 Days: Gerald Ford, The Nixon Pardon, And A Government In Crisis By: Barry Werth Finished, May 6, 2007
At The Center Of The Storm: My Years At The CIA By: George Tenent with Bill Harlow Finished, May 28, 2007
No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner By: Robert Shrum Finished: July 1, 2007
Chief of Staff: Lyndon Johnson and His Presidency By: W. Marvin Watson with Sherwin Markmarn Finished: July 12, 2007
Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power By: Robert Dalleck Finished: July 17, 2007
1912: Wilson, Roosevelt, Taft & Debs - The Election That Changed The Country By: James Chace Finished: August 5, 2007
Becoming Justice Blackmun: Harry Blackmun's Supreme Court Journey By: Linda Greenhouse Finished: August 20, 2007
President Reagan: The Triumph of Imagination By: Richard Reeves Finished: September 20, 2007
Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush By: Robert Draper Finished: October 1, 2007
Harper's Team: Behind the Scenes in the Conservative Rise to Power By: Tom Flanagan Finished: October 9, 2007
Full Circle: Death and Resurrection in Canadian Conservative Politics By: Bob Plamondon Finished: October 17, 2007
My Years As Prime Minister By: Jean Chretien Finished: October 23, 2007
The Thumpin': How Rahm Emanuel and the Democrats Learned to Be Ruthless and Ended the Republican Revolution By: Naftali Bendavid Finished: October 25, 2007
Not A Suicide Pact: The Constitution in a Time of National Emergency By: Richard A. Posner Finished, October 29, 2007
Slash By: Slash and Anthony Bozza Finished: November 1, 2007
The Heroin Diaries: A Year in the Life of a Shattered Rock Star By: Nikki Sixx and Ian Gittin Finished: November 2, 2007
Clapton: The Autobiography By: Eric Clapton Finished: November 5, 2007
Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet By: James Mann Finished: November 13, 2007
Miami and the Siege of Chicago: An Informal History of the American Political Conventions of 1968 By: Norman Mailer Finished: November 15, 2007
Memoirs: 1939-1993 By: Brian Mulroney Finished: December 3,2007
Peace Kills: America's Fun New Imperalism By: P.J O'Rourke Finished: December 4, 2007
The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 By: Lawrence Wright Finished: December 11, 2007
The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America's Pursuit of Its Enemies Since 9/11 By: Ron Suskind Finished: December 19, 2007
Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President By: Stephen F. Hayes Finished: December 25, 2007
When Trumpets Call: Theodore Roosevelt After the White House By: Patricia O'Toole Finished: January 1, 2008
America's First Dynasty: The Adamses, 1735-1918 By: Richard Brookhiser Finished:January 7, 2008
The Road By: Cormac McCarthy Finished: January 9, 2008
The Conviction of Richard Nixon: The Untold Story of the Frost/Nixon Interviews By: James Reston, Jr. Finished" January 11, 2008
Write It When I'm Gone: Remarkable Off-the-Record Conversations with Gerald R. Ford By: Thomas M. DeFrank Finished: January 15, 2008
The Bush Tragedy By: Jacob Weisberg Finished: January 18, 2008
When All You Have Is Hope By: Frank O'Dea with John Lawrence Reynolds Finished: January 21, 2008
Confessions of a Political Hitman: My Secret Life of Scandal, Corruption, Hypocrisy and Dirty Tricks That Decide Who Gets Elected (and Who Doesn't) By: Stephen Marks Finished: February 8, 2008
The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court By: Jeffery Toobin Finished, February 18, 2008
The Architect: Karl Rove and the Dream of Absolute Power By: James Moore and Wayne Slater Finished, February 21, 2008
Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln By: Doris Kerns Goodwin Finished, February 26, 2008
Post Office By: Charles Bukowski Finished: March 6, 2008
Factotum By: Charles Bukowski Finished: March 7, 2008
Women By: Charles Bukowski Finished: March 10, 2008
Queer By: William S. Burroughs Finished: March 12, 2008
To Live's To Fly: The Ballad of the Late, Great Townes Van Zant By: John Kruth Finished: March 17, 2008
Twenty Thousand Roads: The Ballad of Gram Parsons and His Cosmic American Music By: David N. Meyer Finished: March 24, 2008
W.A.R: The Unauthorized Biography of William Axl Rose By: Mick Wall Finished: April 4, 2008
Deception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons By: Adrian Levy & Catherine Scott-Clark Finished: April 21, 2008
The Assassins' Gate: America in Iraq By: George Packer Finished: May 5, 2008
Worse than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush By: John W. Dean Finished: May 7, 2008
Clinton in Exile: A President Out of the White House By: Carol Felenthal Finished: May 12, 2008
Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America By: Rick Perlstein Finished: June 2, 2008
Infidel By: Ayaan Hirsi Ali Finished: June 11, 2008
The People's Machine: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of Blockbuster Democracy By: Joe Mathews Finished: June 20, 2008
The Strong Man: John Mitchell and the Secrets of Watergate By: James Rosen Finished: June 30, 2008
American Spy: My Secret History in the CIA, Watergate & Beyond By: E. Howard Hunt w/ Greg Aunuapu Finished: July 4, 2008
Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA By: Tim Weiner Finished: July 16, 2008
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder By: Vincent Bugliosi Finished: July 21, 2008
War by Other Means: An Insider's Account of the War on Terror By: John Yoo Finished: July 25, 2008
Your Government Failed You: Breaking the Cycle of National Security Disasters By: Richard A. Clarke Finished: July 31, 2008
The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America By: Kenneth M. Pollack Finished: August 13, 2008
The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture By: Ishmael Jones Finished: August 19, 2008
Havana Nocturne: How the Mob Owned Cuba ... And Then Lost It to the Revolution By: T.J Enjlish Finished: August 25, 2008
Descent into Chaos: The United States and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia By: Ahmed Rashid Finished: Sepember 9, 2008
The Case Against the General: Manuel Noriega and the Politics of American Justice By: Steve Albert Finished: September 25, 2008
Condolezza Rice: An American Life By: Elisabeth Bumiller Finished: October 10, 2008
Presidential Courage: Brave Leaders and How They Changed America, 1789-1989 Michael Beschloss Finished: October 13, 2008
What People Are Saying About skippy
"hands down, Canada's most underrated blog" Damian Penny, The Undisputed Dean of Canadian Political Bloggers. Posted at Daimnation , Saturday October 21, 2006
"You can count on “Skippy” to make you think in different ways about familiar issues. You can also depend on him to be rude, offensive, and outrageous – if you're offended by completely uninhibited sexual imagery (and imagination!), don't read Skippy – but your prudery will keep you from an often interesting perspective." Posted On: Jamulblog, July 12, 2007
"Your Maximum Leader is beginning to think that the less he posts, the better Skippy’s political posts are. Indeed, your Maximum Leader even thought (just a few short moments ago) that if your Maximum Leader just stopped blogging all together would Skippy just keep on writing enough good material for two blogs? (Admittedly one of those blogs would be an X-rated social commentary/diary site and the second a remarkably well-informed and insightful political commentary site…)" Posted On: Naked Villainy, September 18, 2007
"I love your writing. few could pull off sarcastic humor and self-loathing like you do. You've turned self-disgust
into an art form." Posted By:Ophelia July 19, 2003
"hahaha um, not funny" Posted By: Ophelia July 17, 2003
"This is not fucking funny." Posted By: Bee August 21, 2003
"I join Bee in saying that this isn''t funny AT ALL. jesus christ, Skippy." Posted By: Ophelia August 23,
2003
"You are obiviously being kept down by the Mud People." Posted By: DrReverend August 21, 2003
"I''ll give you $50.00 if you kill yourself." Posted By: DrReverend August 19, 2003
"Last time I read this blog." Posted By: Dave, October 24, 2003
"I think you should stop talking about killing yourself and ACTUALLY kill yourself. For fuck's sake, everybody is
tired of hearing about how you might, just do it or face the fact that you are too pathetic to even kill yourself."
Posted By: A Caring Guy, October 25, 2003
"If Joey Ramone were alive today he'd probably shit in your mouth." Posted By: DrReverend November 11,
"When you're good, you're good. When you're bad, you're even better. See you in hell." Posted By: Anna
November 11, 2003
"Skippy, if you can prove to me that giving head and swallowing will without a doubt keep lung cancer and heart
disease at bay, you've earned yourself a BJ." Posted By: Mary Magdalicious, December 5, 2003
"Wow...you know nothing about politics." Posted Dr. Reverend, December 26, 2003
"You are a dick and should think seriously about killing your stupid blog - go get a job, you big fag"Posted
By: Princess Paragonian, December 29, 2003
"You have a, how shall i say.... appealing 'tough', yet gently gay look." (Univited PM) Posted
by:Jus20012002, January 2, 2004 .
"I hope jesus doesn't kick you in the nuts."Posted By: Mary Magdalicious February 2, 2004
"Stumbled on to your blog by accident and i must say alot of the stuff had me in stitches. Love it" Posted
By:Jeremy February 4, 2004
" .....sick."Posted By: Bee February 7, 2004
"Hey Skippy, you ever consider running for public office in the states? I know some people in the West Virginia state
government and our Senator can't live forever.Hell, even Strom, Thomas-Jefferson-Fan, Thurmond died
eventually.Posted By: Ford W. Mavrick, February 9, 2004
Wow, for someone who is so opinionated, you really don't know shit about American or Canadian culture. You appear to
know even less about history." Posted By: Dr. Reverend February 13, 2004
"Your blog's the best I have come across in a long time. I may not agree with all you say but the verve with which
you say it and the humour and irreverance is terrific. These days when the media just reproduces the handout from central
control, blogs like yours do a great deal to form informed opinion in a democratic society. Thanks. Keep it up."
Posted By:Anandan February 13, 2004
"SKIPPY pities ME? Where's my noose?" Posted By: Kilgore Trout March 22, 2004
"Jesus Skippy. Now Allah is going to kick you in the nuts" Posted By: Mary Magdalicious March 22, 2004
"I could make one that says "Skippy has a small penis" although his cock is superb. Posted By: Bestest Pussy March 23,2004
"Cunt sucking is for bitches.You're considered one of the girls because you dress like one. Posted By: Dr. Reverend March 24, 2004
"John Malkovich is one sexy bastard. I have such a thing for him. And I never realized til now, Skippy, how much you resemble John Malkovich...this, by default, makes you also one sexy bastard. See how that works?" Posted By: Zombie March, 26, 2004
"Too bad you live up north. It could have been beautiful.
Ever since I started coming here and saw your pic I wondered why you weren't getting more action. You are not a bad looking guy at all.
Maybe the girls are just...well, that's enough kindness for one day." Posted By: Serenity March 26, 2004
"Hell, if they make gay marriage legal, I'll marry you..." Posted By: Outpatient March 26, 2004
"You look creepier than the REM faggot. But he looks much more like a homersexual." Posted By: Dr. Reverend March 27, 2004
"Skippy, your hits will go up again if you post pictures of your man nipples. Lots of man nips." Posted By: Mary Magdalicious April 15, 2004
"What the fuck? You turning faggot? Posted By: Dr. Reverend April 16, 2004
"Sometimes it gets to be just a little too much. Sharing, that is." Posted By: Bee May 23, 2004
"I'll give you $5.00 if you make the fucking font you use on your blog bigger.
I'll give you $50.00 if you stop fucking writing about American politics.
I'll give you $500.00 if you fucking kill youself." Posted By: Dr. Reverend May 26, 2004
"Of course women like jerks.
Why the fuck do you think they like me?
I guess you've learned nothing from me over all these years." Posted By: Dr. Reverend May 29, 2004
"Sometimes a bitch just has to die." Posted By: Ford W. Maverick May 29, 2004
"It looks like we have more in common than the swastikas carved in our foreheads."Posted By: Dr. Reverend May 29, 2004
"This might be a shallow and 'Waiting-for-Godot-like' comment but...you seem to have not only brains but also beauty." Posted By: Nietzscheswife June 7, 2004
"Skippy, you are such a twisted bastard. Seriously. Why haven't we had sex yet?"Posted By: 0phelia June 25, 2004
"Just found your site. I find some of the things you say quite disgusting. And really quite enjoyable,so keep up the good work."Posted By: Big Al June 28, 2004
"I've read most of your blog. I'd say that so far it's the best I've come across, and believe me, I've seen a few. It's funny, well written (except for the spelling...) and interesting. There will always be those few idiots who just don't get it. It's useless to get worked up about it." Posted By: Johnny June 30, 2004
"Skippy... Go for the facial tattoo. I dig em', and fuck what those other bitches think. You can always bite their tits off if they back talk you." Posted By: Mary Magdalicious July 1, 2004
"Go fuck yourself up your butt." Posted By: Reek Stankleberry July 6, 2004
"Well if ass-fucking won't keep Satan away, I just don't know what will." Posted By: Dr. Reverend July 7, 2004
"dude, you're killing me. keep it up." Posted By: Son of Nixon July 22, 2004
"Are you always either naked or in a suit?" Posted By: Rehella July 22, 2004
"That person should speak for himself or herself. 'Cause you really are that much of a cunt, skippy." Posted By: Kilgore Trout August 4, 2004
"I've read you for a long time but have never commented before. That isn't a slight to your great writing ability, it's mainly because I don't want to be seen here!" Posted By: Paul August 4, 2004
" Dead on. Bulls-eye. I take back what I said about you being a cunt. For now." Posted By: Kilgore Trout August 4, 2004
"Know what, Skippy? You're alright." Posted By: Anna August 18, 2004
"Excellent work. Damn you for being so dead on." Posted By: The Maximum Leader August 24, 2004
"Skippy, fuck the puppy idea. Try getting a monkey that smokes. That will get you laid." Posted By: Mary Magdalicious August 27, 2004
"As to the beard - I like the clean shaven better - and what's wrong with a bald head? Bald heads are hot on some guys - unfortunately most can't pull it off * sigh * You look like you can pull it off though and that's a good thing - not a bad.
BTW, love your blog. I saw it in my referrers and thought it was just a random hit. Then I started reading and found you to be hilarious - it was only after about 10 posts that I noticed you linked me. I was more than flattered - linked by someone I was about to link anyway - awesome. Thanks" Posted By: Kinky August 27, 2004
"Fuckin' Goy bastard." Posted By: Dr Reverend December 19,2004
"Who does a guy have to sleep with to get one of his Skippy quotes pasted to the sidebar?
Great googly-moogly." Posted By: Smallholder December 20, 2004
"Are you a child molester or what's the story?" Posted By: Fukinator, December 28, 2004
"Sick dude." Posted By: DCayer December 29, 2004
"You officially suck." Posted By: Sorry, January 22, 2005
"I heart you, Skippy" Posted By: Karinsky, January 25, 2005
"As I've stated before, you were quite skilled in bed and I had no need to fake any of my multiple orgasms." Posted By: 0phelia, June 30, 2005
"I love Skippy. I swear I do. The only blogger more twisted than me." Posted on: Velociworld, July 26, 2005
" You are so fucking ignorant about America. And while the American people ARE stupid, so are you." Posted By: Bill Lassiter, August 2, 2005
"How can you not love a man who hates himself so viciously?" Posted on: It's All About De , August 31, 2005
"If I wasn't positive that all Canadian men had tiny penises, I'd be all over that Skippy." Posted On: It's All About De
"I've seen pictures of you and I'd say you're fuckable." Posted By: Joan, September 29, 2005
" I love your posts on Canadian politics even more than I love your posts on porn.
And I love your porn posts.
Why the hell do you waste all this talent on the internet? Write a book or something, goddammit! Posted By: Cliff S., November 17, 2005
"Let it never be said that underneath your self-cavilling, bitter (yet strangely egomaniacal) surface that you never take the time to give the people what they want. Even if it's just one people. Gawd bless you, Skippy! Posted By: Locke, November 18, 2005
"Wow! I don't know that I've ever been flattered and yet somewhat revolted at the same time... It's an interesting sensation." Posted By: Dewey in Toronto, December 1, 2005
"Very often, debating you is like playing whack a mole: You pop up some premised assertion moles, I pull out my mallet and start whacking, then you pop up more premised assertion moles - which are mostly or completely unrelated to the original moles I was whacking at. Your stock of moles seemingly stretches into infinity. And yet, an endless supply of moles does not equate to cogent argument.
Very often, debating you is like speaking to a salesman who will not answer a particular direct question, and instead flies off on the flight of rhetorical splendor known as "baffling them with bullshit." I'm impressed with your rhetorical skills, and your IQ, and your accumulation of knowledge. I'm impressed that I'm the American citizen, yet you might have a more thorough knowledge of the American Constitution than I. And yet, these impressive things are not substitutes for cogent argument."Posted By; gcotharn, December 21, 2005
"Besides, you seem to think you're the least respectable person I know. While you're often right, you're wrong on that count. Careful, I might out YOU as a nice guy. Or something." Posted By: Dewey In Toronto, December 27, 2005
"I've been to Toronto. The most dangerous thing I saw there was an 11 foot tall red head with shaved balls."Posted By: Judy, December 31, 2005
"There was this "Caught on Tape!" video I watched back in my highschool days where one of the scenes shows two people starting to cross the railroad tracks. One looks up at the last minute and sees the train, the other does not. In the commercial, it cuts away just before the train does its thing, but the video...
Your blog is like a twisted version of the video. We know the train is going liquify you in shocking gory fashion, but that's why we keep coming back. It's so much more fun that we both know the train is coming and you still gleefully walk into its path...and we love you all the more for it." Posted By:Locke, January 13, 2006
"Fuck. I'm hooked." Posted By: DeAnna, January 14, 2006
"Your Maximum Leader has found Skippy's commentary more insightful and interesting than anyone elses. So now he supposes that Skippy will go back to writing about porn and strippers he meets in the subway." Posted By: The Maximum Leader on Naked Villainy January 24, 2006
"Slightly crazed is fine, but with the beard you look like a total nutjob. If you ever hope to get laid again, for fuck's sake, Skippy, NEVER, EVER grow a saddam beard. You're welcome."Posted By: The Lady O, 28 January, 2006
"Maybe we should get married. My readers could support us by purchasing my worn panties and you could be the panty pimp." Posted By; Joan 28 January 2006
" I know it must be hard for you...being objectified by women all the time. But come on, how can they really help themselves? Have you seen yourself lately? Your pheramones preceed you into a room (as does your crotch). Don't blame it all on them...you did choose to leave your house. :D" Posted By: Joan, 3 February, 2006
"Skippy, you sarcastic twerp." Posted By: Arwen, 8 February 2006
"Just so you know.. if I had to choose between Moussaoui or Skippy.. You'd win. Even if I know what an asshole you are. Posted By; Judy, 13 February 2006
"I'd be willing to sign a legal document stating that is IS ok, in fact, to masturbate whilst thinking of me." Posted By: DeAnna (Who seems unaware of my reputation as an outlaw) February 24, 2006
"Feel free to masturbate while thinking of me...actually, do you need some of my panties to help you with that?" Posted By: Joan, February 24, 2006
"I blame myself for this. I have been too lenient with you. Your Godless behaviour must come to an end. You will receive a severe beating this weekend and I am contemplating removing your testicles." Posted By: Dr. Reverend, February 24, 2006
"Just remember skippy, the US never threw a fit when you smuggled your own personal WMD over the border twice a year. After all, it wasn't like you were hiding in your pants or anything.
All's fair in love and war, so to speak." Posted By: Judy, April 4, 2006
"Wow...nothing hotter than a man willing to issue fatwas for pussy." Posted By: Joan, April 16, 2006
"You sir, are a brilliant writer." Posted By: Judy, May 4, 2006
"I think I'm falling in love." Posted By: DeAnna, May 11, 2006
"THIS IS THE MOST DIABOLICAL FALSITY YOU HAVE EVER ENGAGED IN!!!!
I was intending to kick you in the face upon our next meeting, but now it's obvious that I must douse your scrotum in kerosene and set your testicles aflame. Alas, it is the only way you will learn." Posted By: Dr. Reverend, May 12, 2006
"And i would like to commend you on some excellent blogging. This particular story would normally warrant a few cryptically humorous lines and a link. To an ordinary blogger. But you managed to wring an essay of New Yorker-esque proportions out of it. That takes talent. Your beautiful young friend is right. I see big things for you in the future." Posted By: Annika, June 4, 2006
" I like a man who will unabashedly tell someone his penis size because hes unashamed. Thats hot.
*raises hand* I'll take that 6.5, thank ya" Posted By: Kinky, June 6, 2006
"Elvis, like skippy, is the very definition of rock and roll. Posted By: Rube, June 10, 2006
" I'm beginning to think you're the only good man left in the world, skippy. WTF?" Posted By: By: DeAnns, June 11, 2006
"Just so everyone knows.
Skippy does indeed, taste like bacon.
And, any guy who doesn't know cum tastes good to real women, is clueless." Posted By: Judy, July 2, 2006
"There was a British columnist whose work was described as 'a suicide note in weekly installments.'
This blog is sort of like that." Posted By: Gadfly, July 6, 2006
"Jeez, Skippy. Sometimes I really hate coming here." Posted By: Cynlee, July 18, 2006
"Someone needs to throttle you with a riding crop...truly!" Posted By: Joan, July 18, 2006
"Holy mother of god. I just had an orgasm. It's official: I'm devoting the rest of my life to you, skippy." Posted By: DeAnna, July 19, 2006
"Skippy, sometimes I'm not quite sure of your sanity, but you are without a doubt the baddest morning news reading, quiz show hosting, talent introducing PIMP in the motherfuckin' blogosphere." Posted By: Shank, July 19, 2006
FUN WITH WMD, DEMOCRACY, STUPIDITY & IRAQ
