The Dark Window

If you're up late tonight (Wed. June 30th) and want some fine entertainment, check out the Dark Window's first promotional tie-in live at the DNA Lounge. They're offering a live webcast with several rotating cameras so turn off the television and step into the Dark Window. Several of the freakish folks you'll see walking around are your fellow liberal readers. And if you look closely during the Drop Black Sky set, you'll see Scott (the guitarist) wearing the world's very first Dark Window t-shirt.

Okay...So it's late and I'm really tired and I have to get up for work soon and with all due respect to Ian Curtis, I now realize why none of the 24 hour party people ever ran their own blogs. So I'm going to take the easy way out tonight and leave you with a couple of bonus Christian t-shirt designs. Tonight's logos come from a company called Fear God.

Fear God takes a slightly different approach than the other t-shirt companies we've examined in that they advocate t-shirts without any scriptural references.

The idea behind Shirt Evangelism is simple: get the lost to start the conversation! Imagine how much easier it is to share the Gospel when someone asks you! What were once uncomfortable situations, now become normal conversations. People are more willing to listen when they are not threatened.

So we're supposed to trick them, right? Anyway, it may just be the last couple of poorly-planned drinks but most of the t-shirts at Fear God actually seem to me to contain some kind of scriptural reference.

The only thing you need to get started with Shirt Evangelism is the desire to share the Gospel and a Christian shirt without scriptures on it.

Right. Sounds like a plan.



Yeah, that one's not threatening at all. Good plan, guys!



That first grave seems slightly strange to me. It appears to say "mortal flan." The creative folks at Fear God obviously don't go to the same taquerias I do because at Cactus, one never expects the flan to stay down.



Maybe he's coming back for a haircut? Or to break into modeling as a poor man's Fabio? Kind of hard to tell.



Sirens sound. Doctors shout. Tying of a sleeve. Yup, you're next. 5...4...3...2...1...

And speaking of...Don't forget to join us later (when you read this I guess it will be "tonight" - June 30th) at the DNA Lounge in San Francisco for a night of Dark Window fun.

Turn it on.

Well, as the lovely S.Z. mentioned in yesterday's comment section, our old friend Vox Day has a new column out that references us. While we were having fun with women's suffrage a couple of weeks back, somebody evidently called Vox a fascist. To be honest with you, I don't remember anybody calling him that (I know that nobody called him that here in the Dark Window comments section - I just checked) but maybe somebody at another blog felt it appropriate.

Anyway, I apologize for devoting such a lengthy entry to something other than mockery and sarcasm but since Vox appears to be singling us out in his article, some sort of response is probably in order.

His new column implies that it's actually modern-day liberals who are the fascists and to prove his point, he gives us his own translation of Mussolini's Fascist Manifesto. I encourage you to go read the article itself as it's a little long to quote here at length.

I found the first plank in the above platform to be particularly amusing, as last week on my blog, Vox Popoli, a five-day debate sparked by a post on the historical consequences of women's suffrage caused some hysterical leftists to label me a fascist.

Frankly, I don't like it when any side throws around highly-charged names like Nazi or Fascist or Communist to describe a political foe. And unfortunately, this seems to be happening with alarming regularity these days. These terms come flying from both Left and Right and although the people throwing them will generally say they're simply pointing out similarities between a particular person and a particular historical policy of one of the above-mentioned groups, their actual intention is obviously not to engage in a close historical reading of political theory. Rather, it's to generate the extremely visceral reactions associated with things like the Final Solution or Gulags or Death Camps or Totalitarianism. I think it's wrong when either side engages in this activity and, frankly, I think it generally masks an inability to debate the merits of particular issues or policies. It's far easier to call somebody a Nazi or a Commie than it is to participate in a reasoned debate.

But back to Vox. His main argument seems to be that since Mussolini used what amounts to a propoganda piece to advocate things like women's suffrage, a minimum wage, and systemization of national transportation, that liberals are far more fascist than conservatives or libertarians.

The mistake Vox makes is to draw the simplistic conclusion that if Mussolini wrote something in his manifesto, it's what fascism came to be and what we mean when we use the term today. Quite the contrary, the manifesto was written to wrest control of the government by gaining wide popular acceptance through political compromise. The words of the manifesto bear very little resemblance to what is meant by modern political theorists when they describe the doctrines of fascism. Once Mussolini gained power, he governed in a very different manner than that espoused in his manifesto. Industries were not nationalized but run under a structure of corporatism strongly influenced by the Church. Even more importantly, the driving factor of actual fascism was not to create an egalitarian society but to centralize power in the hands of a small and strongly nationalistic ruling body.

And yet, the only serious question is if it is more ironic to tar a libertarian or a member of the Religious Right with the fascist brush, as one seldom hears James Dobson calling for the government seizure of all church-owned property.

That's your only serious question, Vox? Considering the very strong ties between the Catholic Church and Mussolini's fascist party during the early years of power and the Church's strong influence over him and his policies during his entire reign, your example seems to break down. Because if there's one thing Dobson is calling for, it's more religious influence on our national leaders.

In 1925, Mussolini encapsulated the heart of fascist philosophy in a memorable phrase:

Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato. This means "Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State." Now, I ask you, in the Year of Our Lord 2004, does that sound more like a Libertarian, a Republican or a Democrat?

If you read that in light of Mussolini's actions, you know that his definition of "the State" is far different than what Vox is implying. Replace "State" with "Strong Nationalistic Leader" and ask that last question again.

Come on, Vox. This was a pretty goofball column even by World Net Daily standards.


Update: Vox has posted an enjoyable and spirited response to this piece over at his own blog. Sadly, I will not be at home much the next couple of days so in lieu of a proper riposte on my part, I simply direct you over to him and invite you to formulate your own conclusions. In this instance, I happily cede the last word to him.

Just so this day isn't entirely laughter-free, I thought I'd link you to an article from the fine news source that gives us Vox Day. Whether coincidentally or not, it emblazoned their front page the same day as his column.

Iranian woman 'gives birth to a frog'

I would like to remind you that this is the "news organization" whose leader whined incessantly about being denied proper press credentials by the White House. Guess he showed them!

An Iranian woman has reportedly given birth to a frog.

You know, what could I even say to compare with that? Just go read the rest of the article and bask in the radiance that is conservative news.

It's Monday and that can only mean one thing...It's time for another look at Christian T-shirts and their role in End Times witnessing. Today's shirts are made by a company called Christianshirts.net. On their site they have a list of core beliefs, including this one:

We believe in the inerrancy (historical and otherwise) of the sixty-six divinely inspired books of the Bible (when properly understood).

I like that last part. Kind of puts everything into perspective. I would have added one more statement, though. "We believe in making a profit off of our faith. Want to save a soul from hell? Good, because we want to make a buck."

There's also a section on the site for testimonials about the shirts. Here's my personal favorite:

"The t-shirts are holding up well. I wore the excommunicate John Kerry t-shirt to a canon law conference recently. It drew several comments -- including one from a fellow canon lawyer who has worked tirelessly to see pro-abort Catholic politicians denied Holy Communion. The t-shirt led to a wonderful conversation over dinner as we discussed various possibilities for turning up the heat on those Catholic politicians who, contrary to the teachings of Christ and the Catholic Church, embrace the death of over a million children in the womb each year."

Pete Vere
Canon Lawyer and Catholic Author

So anyway, let's see how Christianshirts.net properly understands the inspired books of the Bible.




This one's probably a big hit in Iraq. The bayonet's an especially nice touch. Take that, you stupid liberals!



We serve a risen gangster.



But things sure suck those times when he's death.

Thanks to reader Bellatrys for drawing our attention to this one:



I still can't tell if it's saying Jesus saves the USA or vice versa. Or maybe it's saying that both Jesus and the USA save. In any case...USA!...USA!...USA! Up yours, Luxembourg!



Because I'm pretty sure he drives an SUV and likes to cut people off.



It's too bad Jesus keeps becoming obsolete. I really hate having to buy a new savior every couple of years!

Don't forget to tune in next time for another exciting installment of Trends in End Times Witnessing! And next week we're going to take a look at non-t-shirt related witnessing tools.

The Boy Emperor seems to be losing touch with reality. He's now making bizarre, Howard Hughes-like pronouncements.

President Bush declared an end on Saturday to Western rifts over Iraq but won little in his search for European military help and took heat over prisoner abuse.

Kind of like he declared an end to the war in Iraq. The Bushman seems to believe that the simple act of his saying something will make it true.

"The bitter differences of the war are over," Bush told a news conference, which was delayed by anti-American protests staged around the lightning U.S.-EU summit in Ireland.

Fenced off from his detractors by 2,000 soldiers and 4,000 police -- a third of the Irish security forces -- Bush holed up in a western Irish castle with European Union leaders.

Those two paragraphs could have come straight out of the Onion.

In their private talks and a joint U.S.-EU statement, European leaders made clear their disquiet over both the detention of terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and the U.S. military abuse of prisoners at Iraq's Abu Ghraib jail.

The statement pointedly stressed "the need for full respect of the Geneva Conventions."

Bush responded that the Abu Ghraib scandal made him "sick."

Sick but in a, you know, completely not-my-responsibility way.

This is all so unbelievable. I have a feeling that a lot of other people are starting to feel "sick" too.

I would like to invite everybody who lives in or near the San Francisco Bay Area to come out to the DNA Lounge this Wednesday night for an evening of dark fun and a chance to hang out with some of your fellow Dark Window readers (and if you can stomach it, me).

Scott W, a long-time friend and frequent commenter here at the Dark Window, will be performing with his band Drop Black Sky. If you haven't yet heard of them, they're one of the hottest underground bands in Northern California and have a unique sound that is nearly impossible to qualify. Haunting and melodic, edgy and brooding, their music will take you on a deeply-moving excursion into a darker, more beautiful realm. And if that's not enough, they have a hot singer.

Drop Black Sky will be sharing the bill with Elephone - another excellent San Francisco band offering a dreamy and richly textured sound that has been described by DIY Magazine as the West Coast's indie rock answer to New York's post-punk/new-wave renaissance.

If you'd like to hear a sample of Scott and Drop Black Sky, here's their song Tet Knot.

In addition to all the great music, Scott tells me he has designed the world's very first Dark Window t-shirt and will be wearing it onstage during Wednesday's show. It even has my silhouette on it. Trust me...You won't want to miss it - if for no other reason than to mock it (and me) mercilessly.

So please come out and support the local music scene this Wednesday night (no Clear Channel garbage here). And come say hi to me (I'll be the Brad Pitt-looking guy - see photo above), Scott, and several other regular Dark Window readers. We'd all love to meet you! Between sets we can make Ann Coulter jokes and laugh at Scott's shirt.

Admission is $10 and 21+. Yours truly will be there starting at 9:00 PM and Drop Black Sky is scheduled to take the stage at 10:30. Directions to the DNA lounge can be found in the link above.

I hope to see you there!


Drop Black Sky

Once again Sultan Seb presents something that must be watched to be believed. It's an Irish television interview with our Bushman that reveals a terrifyingly snide, smug, who-the-fuck-cares-what-you-think attitude. Sorry for the language...Too much Cheney.

And speaking of Cheney language, the wise folks at the Moonie Washington Times discuss said interview under the unbelievably ironic headline "Bush pleads for courtesy."

It just gets more and more surreal.

So go. Watch it for yourselves.

Today the Dark Window mourns the shocking departure of France from Euro 2004 after being defeated by lowly Greece during yesterday's quarterfinal match.

In a surprisingly frank interview with French TV station TF1, coach Jacques Santini reminded us all that yesterday's defeat marks the end of a generation in which many of the world's greatest players wore the blue jersey.

And so I leave it with the haunting words of Etienne Daho:

Tout ce qui se passe au dehors m'indiffère
Que le monde saute ce n'est pas mon affaire
Dans ces draps bleus traîne encore l'odeur de tes cheveux
Ce bleu infiniment bleu que j' trouvais dans tes yeux

Our friends at World Net Daily are hawking a new book called Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! It's a delightful storybook designed to warn children (our most precious commodity) about the dangers of liberalism.

The story of two boys who dream about opening a lemonade stand when a strange thing happens...Their dream gets stuck in Liberaland!

Yeah, clever.

"Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! A Small Lesson in Conservatism" is a wonderful way to teach young children the valuable lessons of conservatism.

Awwww. How cute! Little Suzy's growing up to be just like Ann Coulter!

In simple text, parents and children follow Tommy and Lou on their quest to earn money for a swing set their parents cannot afford. As their dream gets stuck in Liberaland, Tommy and Lou’s lemonade stand is hit with many obstacles.

So Tommy and Lou want to be swingers. It's too bad these young Jack Ryans had the misfortune of being born into poor families.

Liberals keep appearing from behind their lemon tree, taking half of their money in taxes, forbidding them to hang a picture of Jesus atop their stand, and making them give broccoli with each glass sold.

Perhaps this is minor but why on earth would Tommy and Lou be using a picture of Jesus to sell lemonade in the first place? Is that one of the essential lessons of conservatism - that good conservative boys and girls exploit their religion for financial gain?

And where, exactly, are their parents while all these creepy people keep appearing from behind trees? Well, since they're poor, the parents must be liberal too. No wonder they don't care that their kids are being accosted by strange adults.

Law after law instituted by the press-hungry liberals finally results in the liberals taking over Tommy and Lou’s stand and offering sour lemonade at astronomical prices to the customers.

Unfortunately, that's the entire description WND gives us of the book. We don't know if Tommy and Lou get their swing set or even if they're still alive. Their story seems to be somewhat peripheral, though. The important thing is showing that all the liberals are evil.

So remember, kiddies, don't ever fall asleep again because if you do, the liberals hiding under your bed will make you disappear!

Joseph Farah has a new column today and boy, is he mad!

Turns out Tony Campolo, some guy who tells people he's a "Christian," has been saying nice things about the Palestinians. And evidently feeling the need to blaspheme God even further, Tony also had the nerve to say, "Some evangelicals have gotten caught up in the theology that before Christ can return, the Holy Land must belong to the Jews. They're really advocating ethnic cleansing. There's no justification for that in Scripture."

Fortunately, Farah puts him in his place.

This charge of Israeli ethnic cleansing is the 21st century version of the blood libel. Worse, perhaps. In effect, the Jews are being charged with the crime perpetrated against them.

Worse yet, Campolo hurls these misinformed accusations in the name of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

No irony there.

Farah then goes on to point out that there's never been any such thing as Palestine in the first place and that any problems that have happened in the region have been entirely the Arabs' fault. He then adds this exclamation mark:

The only people getting thrown out of their homes in the Middle East today are Jews – Jews who happen to have made the mistake of living in traditionally Jewish lands now claimed by the genocidal maniacs who control the Palestinian Authority and who say no Jews can live in their lands.

Oh, those poor settlers!

But here's the entire point of Farah's column.

Hurling false accusations against the persecuted is not the Gospel of Jesus. Bearing false witness against Christians who seek to aid their Jewish brothers and sisters in Israel is not the Gospel of Jesus. Confusing misinformed political analysis with Scripture is not the Gospel of Jesus.

That's quite an admission, Joe!

When Sultan Seb No, my dastardly nemesis, phoned last week and demanded access to my prized Wing Nut photo collection, I could hear a note of frantic alarm in his voice.

"Seb...are you okay?" I asked, pretending to be concerned.

"No, Pete, I think I may have destroyed a marriage."

"What?! Yours?"

"Don't worry. Pat and I are fine. But it's because we're fine that, well..."

"I don't understand what you're saying, Seb. Have you been taking E and blogging again?"

"Pete, listen to me. Mrs. No is...well...I don't know exactly how to say this but...she's not actually a she...and..."

And I'd better just direct you to his latest flash animation masterpiece so you can understand what he was talking about.

Make sure you keep watching to the last wonderful frame. Trust me. You'll be happy you did!

There's a new Wilson C. Lucom column out and it's called Fighting Terrorists Effectively. The Dark Window is currently trying to track down this elusive figure and will report back when we uncover his true identity. Until then, we'll just have to take his wonderful words at face value.

"Birds of a feather flock together" is an old commonsense proverb. Eagles with eagles: the United States and Great Britain. Vultures with vultures: Iraq, Iran, Sudan and al-Qaida in these and other vulture countries.

Titmice with titmice: NewsMax and Lucom.

Undoubtedly Saddam Hussein, because of his wealth, supported the terrorists and was a leader of the "vultures." They are enemies of the United States for harboring and/or supporting terrorism. Remember, President Bush said, "You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror."

Undoubtedly Lucom, with columns like this, is a leader of the "titmice." And remember, President Bush also said, "I'm gracious that my brother Jeb is concerned about the hemisphere as well." Just wanted to point that out.

Realistically, al-Qaida and terrorist countries use the policy of "rules are for fools." They apply this policy to the U.S. 9/11 Commission, President Bush, Congress and any other "fools" who believe in rules of any kind, including evidentiary rules.

I'm going to let that paragraph bask in its own glory.

President Bush is severely criticized when prisoners are abused, not as a matter of policy but as aberrations of individual troops. The major media and TV are making a big thing out of something that should be "small potatoes" when the United States is at war. In this way they are helping the terrorist enemy.

Small Potatoes. That'd make kind of a cute nickname for old Lucom, wouldn't it?

The news media, biased 80 percent to 20 percent toward Democrats, simply mention the horrible acts of beheading or the taking of hostages and/or prisoners of war, dropping these stories after a short time. But the much less serious violation of prisoner abuse, such as making prisoners strip naked, has been constantly kept alive for over five months and will probably continue until election time.

In this instance, the American news media are benefiting the terrorist enemy, not the United States. The news media should constantly work to benefit the United States, which gives them very important rights and freedoms they would not receive in other countries.

That's right (I'm looking at you, Dan Rather)! Your role is not to report the news but to constantly work to benefit the USA (i.e. the Bushman) because if you lived in Switzerland you wouldn't be able to!

The 9/11 Commission in its final report said "no credible direct evidence" exists that there were ties between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein. On deeper examination, this finding is useless and conveys a false impression that Bush was wrong to start the war against Hussein. It is a Democratic attack on Bush.

What does "no credible direct evidence" actually mean? No credible direct evidence actually does not mean anything, and the 9/11Commission looks really stupid in issuing such a statement.

You're right about one thing, Lucom. Somebody definitely looks stupid here...

Why does the 9/11 Commission look stupid? It is virtually impossible if not impossible to get credible direct evidence on an organization that keeps all its plans a deep secret.

It is virtually impossible if not impossible to make sense out of Lucom's columns. But they're still fun to read anyway.

President Bush had to start with one of the "biggest birds" of terrorism, Saddam Hussein, because if unopposed, the terrorists would have regrouped and again attacked the U.S. President Bush prevented future terrorist attacks by attacking terrorism on foreign soil, not United States soil, where you could have been killed.

Be glad you live here instead of there because we're killing civilians there!

Every American, instead of criticizing President Bush, should give thanks to him for thwarting any further attacks on you for two and a half years.

Kind of hard to argue with that. Thanks, Bushman! And thanks, Lucom!

Blondesense, the proprietress of one of my favorite blogs, received a delightful spam message a couple of weeks ago and it really made me ponder the future of the Dark Window. She found out that you can become a legally ordained minister in less than 48 hours.

Minister Charles Simpson has the power to make you a LEGALLY ORDAINED MINISTER within 48 hours!!!

Right, I just said that.

Anyway, Blondesense sure got me thinking. What if I became a legally ordained minister? Then I would run a legitimate ministry just like Hal Lindsey and Pat Robertson. I could begin to build an empire dedicated to my name and amass a fortune from my faithful readers - all while mocking those who disagree with me and, more importantly, ALL IN GOD'S NAME!

I wonder what else I could do...

MARRY your BROTHER, SISTER, or your BEST FRIEND!!

Hmmm. I don't think I like any of those choices. What about the hot chick who plays the organ during Sunday blog entries?

BAPTISMS: You can say "WELCOME TO THE WORLD!!!! I AM YOUR MINISTER AND YOUR UNCLE!!"

I can say, "Welcome to my blog!!!! I am your minister and a fraud!!"

Forgiveness of Sins

Ooooh...I like it. If Glenstonecottage doesn't wash my car he's so going to hell.

Preach the Word of God to those who have strayed from the flock

Hell-ooo Jessica Hahn!

WANT TO START YOUR OWN CHURCH??

Do I ever!

After your LEGAL ORDINATION, you may start your own congregation!!

I can see it now. A flock of smart-ass liberals coming together to worship God through second-rate satire.

This would mean some minor changes to the Dark Window but I think everyone will agree that they're all positive.

Readers would be expected to tithe. For those unchurched among you, that means you have to send me 10% of your income. I assure you that it's a small price to pay for your eternal soul.

Although the Dark Window is partial to heathen girls, Reba and her friends would be strongly encouraged to convert to Fenestrism in order to enjoy most fully the new Dark Window fertility rites.

Readers would be expected to "witness" in order to gather new converts into the Dark Window fold. They could do this by wearing catchy Dark Window t-shirts (available for a nominal fee small love offering) and passing out copies of recent blog entries to the "unsaved."

Since I know how much you want to help others, you're going to receive your Minister Certification for under $100.00...
Not even $50.00...
You are going to receive the entire life-changing course for only $29.95.

Did I mention that I'm poor?

For only $29.95 you will receive:
1. 8-inch by 10-inch certificate IN COLOR, WITH GOLD SEAL.
(CERTIFICATE IS PROFESSIONALLY PRINTED BY AN INK PRESS)
2. Proof of Minister Certification in YOUR NAME!!
3. SHIPPING IS FREE!!!

Printed in ink? That's pretty classy! And it's in my name? I guess I'd better sign up.

Let's see here...I don't have the $29.95 so maybe I'll just write and ask if Charles Simpson will ministerize me for free and...uh, there doesn't seem to be an e-mail address here. The only way I can contact him is by sending my credit card information.

Well, I'm sure it's legit. This is, after all, about God. So if some heavenly soul out there will just pony up the thirty bucks, we'll get some old time religion here at the Dark Window.

Hallelujah and will somebody PLEASE pass the damn collection plate already!

There's an exciting new update at NewsMax today about Bill O'Reilly's plan to boycott France.

Even since the French decided to oppose the United States and our approach to disarming Saddam Hussein, millions of Americans have been boycotting France and French goods.

Kind of like how NewsMax has been boycotting copy editors. Just goes to show that some boycotts are really dumb.

The leading voice of this movement – which gained a fresh inhalation of steam when Jacques Chirac decided to boycott Ronald Reagan’s state funeral – is Fox News star Bill O’Reilly.

A "fresh inhalation of steam?" Sounds like somebody's been taking a fresh inhalation of something but I'm pretty sure it wasn't steam.

Bill O’Reilly reports on his “Factor” show that his “Boycott France” bumper stickers at $2.50 a piece have sold in the tens of thousands and continue to fly out the door.

And we all know how accurate Bill is when he gives sales numbers.

These days, CNN, Financial Times, Advertising Age and the like are burning column inches -- not about the boycott-France campaign -- but about ominous reports that the total percentage of consumers worldwide who use U.S. brands has fallen to 27 percent from 30 percent just a year ago.

Damn liberal media. I just hate it that CNN isn't "burning column inches" (in their legendary daily newspaper) about the France boycott. But wait, NewsMax seems confused here...the boycott doesn't really seem to be doing anything so why would people burn inches about it? Even they point out that the effects of Bill's boycott appear negligible.

Gone apparently are the heady days in 2003 when angry Americans could point to double-digit drops in French wine consumption by U.S. sippers. Despite the dip, however, those French vintages never lost their number-three ranking in sales in the U.S. – behind Italy and Australia.

Ah, yes. Those heady days when Americans were angry, the French were poor, and Chalabi was the toast of patriots everywhere.

And about a year ago Fromage.com, a French cheese distributor, was reporting that its U.S. sales had gone down 15 percent. But such relished factoids are missing from the headlines these days.

"Relished factoids?" I like that even better than "fresh inhalation of steam."

O’Reilly believes the boycott has worked – and recently caused a raucous by comparing France to a latter day “Dresden” – shell shocked and burnt out by the economic clout of Americans eschewing the French cheeses, handbags, perfumes and stinky foie gras.

O'Reilly tends to believe a lot of strange things. And 'caused a raucous?' I know the copy editor boycott seemed like a good idea at the time but really...

And how could you not compare a boycotted France to a firebombed city in which 100,000 innocent civilians were killed? Again with the stupid liberal media bias.

When John Magnus, a trade expert, was on the Factor, he pointed out that “the vast bulk of what France sends to us is not identifiably French by the time it gets to consumers and would be very difficult to catch with a boycott.” Such disguised French goods include chemicals and engine parts.

Oooh, those sneaky French! Disguising their goods! It's true, though. Just the other day I tried to buy a new Christian T-shirt and found out it was really a 1985 bottle of Château Pétrus Pomerol. The nerve!

Anyway, the good folks at NewsMax don't let actual facts get in the way of their important message and end with a bang.

Question: Why are there big trees up and down the Champs Elysees in Paris?

Answer: Because the Germans like to march in the shade.

If you got a chuckle out of that one and found yourself unconsciously nodding your head, go directly to Bill O’Reilly’s Web site, www.billoreilly.com, and order up a dozen or so of his "Boycott France" bumper stickers.

Actually, I found myself unconsciously bludgeoning myself with my bottle of Pétrus. So a few people are buying dozens of bumper stickers apiece. Richard Melon Scaife probably bought a few thousand to give away at parties. No wonder they're flying off the shelves.

O’Reilly’s war may have suffered a setback with the backlash against American products, and French trade may have survived the negative PR onslaught, but the battle for the hearts and minds of many Americans wages on.

With opponents like Bill and NewsMax, I've got to say that I like France's odds...


Update: I see that my evil nemesis, Seb the Sultan, is discussing NewsMax's companion article to this one: The Global Boycott of US Goods. Check it out.


In related news: Treasonous liberals like Uncle Horn Head and me are very happy to announce that our beloved France has moved into the Euro 2004 Quarter Finals after a couple of spectacular late goals against Switzerland by Thierry Henry. Allez les Bleus!

Last week we took an in-depth look at cutting-edge tools for effective End Times witnessing. Today we're going to continue our research and examine several t-shirts made by a company called Christian Outfitters. Here's what they have to say about their products:

At Christian Outfitters we are committed to providing products which portray the teachings of the Holy Bible. Our catalog is full of inspirational designs, featuring some of the finest artwork available.

I should probably take this opportunity to disclaim that the Dark Window is not at all opposed to religion or religious expression (Hell, I even went to seminary back in my pre-godless days!). By the same token, though, there are some aspects of the Religious Right that simply beg to be mocked. Were I to keep silent, the stones themselves would cry out upon seeing the following t-shirts.

So sit back, relax, and find yourself falling in love with Jesus all over again.



Drink Pepsi, evidently. I guess the fruit of the vine just isn't as cool and refreshing as it used to be.



And even if it doesn't, this t-shirt sure will.



It appears as though Jesus is doing the splits while slam-dunking the earth. Somebody definitely seems to be on an "ultimate high" but I'm not so sure it's Jesus.



Gives whole new meaning to the phrase "He touched me."



Jesus was last seen walking to school wearing beige corduroy pants and a red jacket. Please be on the lookout.



Uh...Wanna suck?

Don't forget to tune in next time for another exciting installment of Trends in End Times Witnessing!

Wing Nut Catfight!

Jack Wheeler's not at all happy with what Peggy wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal column. So Jack smacks her down and reasserts that he alone is the rightful owner of Reagan's memory. Here are a couple of highlights:

For all her self-promotion, the facts are that she never wrote many major presidential speeches and had quite limited access to the president. The Reagan speechwriters were the ultimate Reaganauts in the White House, and Peggy was an outsider. The saga of how the speechwriters got around senior Administration officials to get speeches President Reagan wanted to give in his hands is one of untold heroism.

I can't wait to purchase my Ultimate Reaganaut action figures!

Here's the question she needs to ask herself: Do you think that President Reagan would think more or less of you for writing what you did, Peggy? You know the answer. He would be ashamed of you. The knowledge of that shame will stain your soul, Peggy. You owe your fellow speechwriters the deepest of apologies - just as you owe an apology to the memory of Ronald Reagan.

Mraaawr!

It's time to take a walk through Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network website and play Find The Repression! It's an easy game to play. Simply find the references to repressed sexuality being expressed in CBN headlines.

Here are some of their current stories:

Single, Saved...And Not Having Sex

Okay, that one's kind of obvious.

The Fountain of Youth: In a Pill?

Sounds like somebody's been watching Bob Dole again...

The Re-Measure of a Man's Success

See previous headline.

They Called him Prophet, But he was a Pimp

Ralph Reed?

They Called Her 'Sugar'

Oh, yeah...Condi!

'I Do'...And You Die!

Does Pat have Syphilis?

Okay, so now you all know the rules. Please play responsibly.

And as I was analyzing the CBN unit for headlines, I also found this tantalizing article:

Exposing Faith Through The XXX Church

'Oh, boy!' I thought. 'I'd love to attend a triple-X church and see Faith exposed!'

Unfortunately, the article is actually about a website that promotes the complete rejection of pornography. There's even a photo of one of the website founders wearing a t-shirt that reads "Jesus is watching."

That's just wrong on so many different levels.

The truly alarming part of the website, though, is a puppet named Pete. I'm just going to let you watch Pete for yourselves. I don't think I could ever do him justice.

Feel free to take your own trip over to CBN to look for fun symptoms of raw, throbbing sexuality just about to burst through the placid (I said placid!) surface.

And make sure you tune in next time for another exciting episode of Find The Repression!

It's Friday in Deutschland and my self-proclaimed archenemy has posted his latest foray into flash animation. I know he worked hard on this piece (you can tell by the rapidly declining quality of the rest of his blog) and it's a good one.

After you see it, you'll realize that it's not for nothing that people say: "Seb puts the anti in anti-American."

Okay, maybe I'm the only one who says that. In any case, I direct you to his latest chef d'oeuvre. It's guaranteed to put a smile on your face and a beret on your head.

While researching yesterday's entry on t-shirt ministries, I came across the delightful Santa Clarita Bible Baptist Church - a group of godly people who make Doug Giles look like Shirley MacLaine. Fearful that modern-day Christians are becoming too nice, the SCBBs have put together a fun website that encourages, exhorts, and just plain badgers the faithful to stop being wimpy Christians and to start making people mad. Think I'm exaggerating?

God-honoring ministries are often confrontational and sometimes harsh. Such ministries know that non-Christians will often listen to straight talk, including appropriate harshness and offensiveness. Many people have a hard shell of rebellion in need of blunt penetration prior to any chance of repentance.

I don't know about you but if I'm talking to somebody who's not harsh and offensive, I tend not to listen at all.

Tragically, Christians today are nicer than God. The Church has sunken into a spiritual slump by conveniently reducing confrontation. Nice people rarely rebuke, judge, confront, accuse or condemn the wicked. Nice people have less stress. Nice people get along well with others of the world. Nice people respect and compromise with ungodly value systems. However, it appears that nice people are quick to judge and condemn fellow believers who dare to rebuke and stigmatize ungodliness. Go figure.

Yeah, go figure.

Anyway, our Bible Baptist friends have pages and pages of fine teaching on subjects as diverse as why God commands us to be capitalists, why Jesus wants us to become more warlike, and why those who don't spank their kids are probably not real Christians. I'm sure we'll revisit some of these excellent teachings in the future but today I'd like to focus on a helpful quiz they offer that lets you know whether or not you have a qualified pastor.

All of the questions are fun but, for the sake of brevity, we'll only touch upon a couple of my personal favorites.

1. By example and doctrine, does your pastor teach church members to judge others?

A. No. He does not teach people to judge other people.
B. Yes, and he is ashamed of Christians who don't judge others.
C. Yes, but only for judging pro-life activist or homophobic Christians.
D. No. He teaches that only hypocrites judge people.

The correct answer is, of course, B. Not only should your pastor judge others, but he should teach you how to judge them better, too!

Sadly, most ministries don't even teach their members HOW to judge rightly...Ministries that teach people not to judge are usually the first to judge Christians who do judge. Such conduct is hypocritical. If you are not trained to rightly judge, then tendency will be towards judgementalism.

That may very well be one of the greatest feats of logic I have ever heard. But let's talk about Jesus.

14. What does your pastor teach that Jesus wants do upon His return to Earth?

A. To forgive the rest of the world of their rebellion and sin.
B. To drink the fruit of the vine with his friends the way he used to drink it.
C. To see people butchered in front of Him.
D. Both B and C.

Haha. This one was a trick. The correct answer is D. Jesus wants to be a drunken rabble rouser and to kick some serious ass. Here's why:

Speaking of future things, Jesus said in Luke 19:27, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."

and

If you think Jesus Christ is coming back to forgive the world, you are in for a big surprise.

Here's a good one:

20. Which has your pastor been known to do since he entered ministerial leadership?

A. Had bill collectors trying to collect a defaulted debt or filed a bankruptcy.
B. Called someone a fool because of their beliefs.
C. Had sexual relations with someone other than his wife or has been caught drunk.
D. My pastor would never be guilty of any of the above.

Any true Christian would know immediately that the correct answer is B. If you're not calling people names, you're not a man of God.

David called atheists fools. "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." Psalm 14:1

Kind of hard to argue against that! Now let's turn to the Big Dog, Himself.

29. Which best describes your pastor's teaching regarding God?

A. God kills more people in the New Testament than in the Old Testament.
B. God treated Jews under Moses in the Old Testament differently than He did under Jesus.
C. God was much harsher in the Old Testament than He is in the New Testament.
D. Many of the world's religions (Islam, Romanism, Hinduism, et cetera) all point to God.

If you didn't say A then you're probably a godless liberal like me.

There is a liberal tendency to soften God's attributes and personality to make Him more palatable to the public. The public is more at ease with the thought of "baby Jesus in the manger" than with King Jesus coming to slay the wicked and rule the world.

Life is real. This is not a dress rehearsal. We don't need a watered down version of God. Mercy and Truth are part of His character, but mercy comes as a result of submitting to truth. Liberal theology virtually castrates Jesus and turns Him into someone much nicer and forgiving than He is in reality. If your pastor implies or teaches that God is kinder and more gentle or is more mellow in the New Testament than He was in the Old Testament, then he is not the best candidate to help you to know God better.

I'm beginning to think I don't really want to know God better. And wow, all this theology is starting to make me hungry. Or maybe it's just our final question:

34. Which is closest to your pastor's opinion of vegetarians (vegans)?

A. They are purer in faith.
B. They are weak heathens, worshipping other gods (or Jews observing the Law).
C. They will be stronger in the long run, by resisting temptation.
D. A and C.

B! Vegetarians are heathens!

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils . . . commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth" (1 Timothy 4:1-3). "For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs" (Romans 14:2).

I hope you've learned as much about God today as I have, dear readers. And don't forget to check back soon for more Fun with Theology! As for me, I'm heading out to grab a burger and to see if I can't find a limp-wristed liberal pastor to beat up in God's Holy Name.

For all of you who read Seb's Sadly, No!: Do you remember how his blog had all those really good entries a couple of months ago? The reason they were so good is because Seb was in the hospital and a lovable girl named Peanut took the reins while he was gone. Well, now she has her own website and a terrific post on a subject very near and dear to my heart: Stephen Dedalus. So go and read.

And since we're talking about Stephen, I can't resist...

Sitting at his side Stephen solved out the problem. He proves by algebra that Shakespeare's ghost is Hamlet's grandfather. Sargent peered askance through his slanted glasses. Hockeysticks rattled in the lumberroom: the hollow knock of a ball and calls from the field.

Across the page the symbols moved in grave morrice, in the mummery of their letters, wearing quaint caps of squares and cubes. Give hands, traverse, bow to partner: so: imps of fancy of the Moors. Gone too from the world, Averroes and Moses Maimonides, dark men in mien and movement, flashing in their mocking mirrors the obscure soul of the world, a darkness shining in brightness which brightness could not comprehend.

Rush wowed us all with his scientific knowledge today during his latest Enviro Wacko Update. Evidently, Rush read a story about the alarming rise of global desertification and this made him unhappy. Fortunately, he had some great advice.

Why don't we just go over there, hire some lawn control outfits here in America and build some sprinkler systems in these places?

Is it too much of a stretch to draw a correlation between people who listen to Rush and people who want to pull their kids from public schools?

"Rush, are you denying whether it's happening?" I don't know whether it's happening or not but I'm waiting for the next shoe to fall. The next shoe to fall is, "WE are causing it in the United States of America."

In other words, trivial little things like knowing the facts of the matter aren't going to stop a big strong hero like Rush from telling us what we should think about it.

This little leak here: (sniveling liberal voice:) "These peoples are going to invade the green lands of the world." Of course that's supposed to wake us up and get us going into gear because we don't want any more immigrants from anywhere, especially from dustbowls. Didn't we have our own Dustbowl in the 30s in this country? We did, didn't we? And it didn't exist anymore, does it? and what did we do? Did we cloud seed? No. In fact, we created the elements -- they say -- that are causing global warming. Got rid of the Dustbowl. The desertification of Kansas or wherever the hell it was.

Why this man isn't teaching graduate-level atmospheric physics, I'll never know.

So how about a solution, Rush? What should we do about this alarming report? Should we learn the facts? Should we consider the future?

Nah.

The wackos have not gone away, they are not going to be away, and they are going to keep ringing the crisis klaxons at every opportunity, folks, and it's best just to react the way you normally would when you hear something like this and just laugh on your ass off at it.

As a service to my readers, I'm starting a new feature here at the Dark Window. Each week we'll take an in-depth look at the latest developments in fundamentalist Christian witnessing tools. This will help the godless liberals among you avoid undue surprise and panic upon seeing these tools in public use. Republican and Libertarian readers are encouraged to follow the links and purchase as many of these fine products as desired. The End is Near, my brothers and sisters, so let's not waste any time.

At ChristianShirts.net, you'll find 150+ original Christian and Pro-life designs that have been specifically created for Christians and Pro-life supporters. If you strive to be on the front lines of the culture and challenge people's hearts and minds, then you have come to the right place.

Once you see the shirts, you'll realize that their methods of winning "hearts and minds" bear an uncanny resemblance to the Bushman's.



Here on our first t-shirt we have a scary-looking Jesus wearing a windbreaker and standing on a windswept island in Maine. He points to an empty cross and says "Put on the new man." That's right, liberal readers...You're next!



Can what, exactly? Pollute?



Here's our first example of a corporate logo Jesus shirt (you'll see several more as the series progresses). This particular t-shirt provides instructions on what to do during communion when the wafer just isn't filling you up. And don't forget the Holy Spirit Sauce!



Is it just me or does the little star above GI Jesus look disturbingly like an Abu Ghraib prisoner? And why is GI Jesus fighting for Holland? I thought he was an American!



Awwwww. You're so sweet! I can feel my heart and mind being won already!



Don't worry, fearless witnesser! Your religion has nothing to do with it!


The Dark Window hopes you've found this information edifying and that the next time you see one of these t-shirts, you'll give some thought to its deeper meaning. Tune in next time for another exciting installment of Trends in End Times Witnessing!

Remember World Net Daily's awe-inspiring plan to honor former President Reagan last week? The brilliant plan that called for all of us to turn on our car headlights to honor him? Well, they have an update and it appears that the tribute is going splendidly!

In case you missed our original piece, here's the tribute idea in a nutshell (pun intended):

"Ronald Reagan always talked about his beloved 'shining city on a hill,'" said Bob Just, a veteran talk-show host, WorldNetDaily columnist and self-proclaimed "Reagan Democrat." "So, let's shine our headlights from now until Independence Day. Let's give Ronald Reagan one more July 4th with the people who love him."

So what's happened since then?

Indeed, after just a few days of national publicity, reports from across the country of thousands of cars with their headlights on – during the day – seem to show Just's "bright idea" for honoring Ronald Reagan with the help of halogens is really gathering momentum.

Hehe. Get it? "Bright idea?"

"There was an instant response in Las Vegas when WorldNetDaily posted the original article," said WND's Executive News Editor Joe Kovacs, who observed up to 40 percent of drivers illuminating their headlights in daylight hours. "People are still driving with their lights on even though the Reagan story is dropping off the mainstream media's radar."

Isn't at least 40% of Las Vegas traffic made up of tourists? And don't most of them drive rental cars that always have their headlamps illuminated? And come to think of it, what the hell was World Net Daily's Executive News Editor doing in Sin City?

Just wanted to honor the famous ex-Democrat by doing "something personal." He explains why he wanted Americans to turn on their headlights not just during the funeral, but to keep them on right up through July 4

And what could be more personal than turning on your car's lights? I can't think of anything.

"People forget that in his farewell address to the American people, President Reagan warned us that freedom was not something we can take for granted. He called it 'fragile,' and he was right. We need to shine our headlights not just to remember Ronald Reagan, but to remind ourselves of the true significance of the 4th of July. It commemorates the signing of the Declaration of Independence – the primary statement that we Americans get our rights from God and not from government.

I commemorated the signing of the Declaration of Independence myself just a few minutes ago while driving home. I'll bet Thomas Jefferson would have been so proud!

And lest you think this "bright idea" is only a World Net Daily tribute, all kinds of other Wing Nuts are getting in on the act. Enter Sean Hannity.

"What could be more fitting," Hannity told WND, "than to shine a light for Ronald Reagan, who was such a light in all of our lives."

And Rebecca Hagelin.

Rebecca Hagelin, a Heritage Foundation vice president and WorldNetDaily columnist, told WND: "I've heard reports of thousands of people across the country participating in this unifying act on behalf of liberty and love. When I get in my car and switch on the lights, I feel as if I'm sending a clear signal of my belief that Ronald Reagan was right – ours is a country that can illuminate the world and individuals everywhere if we will only be true to freedom's call to share the truth."

That's right, godless liberals. Every time you turn on your headlamps, you're sending a clear signal that Ronald Reagan was right. In your face!

And guess what...Bob is too much of a visionary to stop now. He has even bigger plans!

Meanwhile, Just is thinking big – really big: "Imagine if Eastern Europe and the rest of the old Soviet empire freed by Reagan started turning on their headlights too," he said.

"I can dream, can't I?"

Some people dream of freedom. Others dream of wild sex. World Net Daily writers dream of Eastern Europeans using car headlamps.

God bless America.

Today is one of my favorite times of the month: the day the new Wilson C. Lucom column comes out over at NewsMax! If you've never read Lucom before, you're missing out. Bizarre even by NewsMax standards, you'll generally find him complaining that President Bush isn't giving him proper credit for using Lucom ideas. Today he has an excellent piece entitled Why the Working Class Should Not Vote for the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party knowingly and disloyally contains a far-left wing that helps the cause of communism-socialism, not democracy. As long as the Democratic Party contains any communist-helping left-wing members, it is the party of treason.

It's not easy to make Carl Limbacher look fair and balanced. Yet somehow Lucom manages to do just that.

After discussing treasonous Democrats through history, Lucom starts comparing the modern Democratic Party to Chinese Communists. He draws no direct connection or link (hell, he doesn't even say why he's comparing the two) but within a couple of short paragraphs, the two groups have become synonymous.

The Chinese Communist Party pays its workers from 23 to 32 times less in wages than the American worker receives, and China does not allow its workers to strike, so workers have to accept these very low wages or else go to jail.

This huge failure of communism is never talked about by the major media in the U.S. The major media should constantly mention this vast difference until the Communist Chinese worker wage approaches the American minimum wage. By not mentioning China's miserable wages, the major media, by omission, are helping communism.

I'm guessing Tom Stoppard would be proud to have written those words. Not even Rush Limbaugh "constantly mentions" Lucom's "23 to 32 times" bit. I guess that means even Rush is helping the godless Chi-Coms!

If the left wing of the Democratic Party gains control through the election of a communist-aiding president and brings communism to the United States, all you Democratic and U.S. workers could have your salaries reduced by 23 to 32 times. If this happened, Communist China would control you, not John Kerry or any other Democratic president.

I like how he draws a distinction between "Democratic" and "U.S." workers. But why would Communist China control me if my salary were "reduced by 23 to 32 times"? It's not like their salaries would be any higher. And what does it say about Lucom's view of "democracy" that he thinks we are "controlled" by our President? I don't know about you but I'm picturing a robot Bushman stomping around with outstretched arms and laser beams shooting from his eyes.

The Democratic left wing says it is patriotic and for America, but it then shows it is not for America by its actions of demonstrating against America winning a war, causing America to lose the war, or supporting the victory of a communist or anti-American country.

That's right. The only way you're truly "for America" is if you support invading a sovereign country under false pretenses, want to torture its citizens, and carefully avoid any dissent. If you think America has anything to do with decency, freedom, human rights, and intellectual honesty, then you are most assuredly not patriotic and not for America. Not to Lucom anyway.

John Kerry, because of helping communism in the past (Communist North Vietnam and Communist Ortega in Nicaragua), belongs in the left wing of the Democratic Party, so do not vote for him. You need to have your minimum wage reduced by up to 32 times the way you need a hole in your head.

Kinda makes a catchy slogan, doesn't it? "Don't vote for John Kerry or your salary will be reduced by up to 32 times."

Ahhhhh, Lucom. Gotta love him!


Wilson C. Lucom

Lest you think we're only about mockery here at the Dark Window, we point you to a very insightful blog entry by Vox Day written in response to an e-mail from us. While Vox may be wrong about unimportant things like politics, economics, and religion, he demonstrates an excellent grasp of what truly matters in life:

Euro 2004 Football!

As for Les Bleus, I'm a little conflicted. I can't hate the team that supplied Henry, Viera, Wiltord and Pires to my Gunners, but I really can't cheer for them either.

Conversely, I feel exactly the same way about Arsenal. I can't ever really root against the team that draws so liberally from France. I guess that makes us inverse relationships. I'm shaving the hair on the top of my head (but leaving the sides) as we speak.

Space Bunny and I watched the game and were very disappointed for the Lions. She's a big England fan and felt especially bad for David Beckham.

This is where we part company. I didn't feel at all bad for Beckham.

I was worried about that free kick, Zidane is still, as he once said, "at the pinnacle of his art". And why is England STILL not practicing penalties - I take better penalties than that. I was surprised how flat the Blues were otherwise, though. I'm not impressed by Trezeguet, as he doesn't make enough runs to keep teams from keeping two and three defenders on Henry. It didn't hurt England that Sol Campbell and Ashley Cole know Henry better than anyone, of course.

Proving once again that there are things in this world that are capable of bringing us all together. Well, when they don't have us looting, rioting, and hitting each other with chairs...



And at the risk of alienating my English readers..."Allez Les Bleus!"

In spite of my best efforts to win the elusive S.Z.'s heart, she remains somewhat less than whelmed. The Donald Rumsfeld doll I bought her elicited little more than a pained smirk. Even my invoking of the language of love did not stir her to passion. In fact, I fear it only reinforced her impression of me as a virulently anti-American traitor.

In addition, several readers are now using the Dark Window comment feature to mock my inability to find girls who will go out with me.

As I was thinking about all these sad things, it dawned on me that unattainable chicks like S.Z. dig guys with really big bank accounts and solid careers (things which I badly lack) and, feeling depressed, I decided to go do some shopping to lift my spirits. And where else would I go but America's finest news source? Imagine my joy when I saw the answer to all my problems right there on the NewsMax front page: A promise of instant riches!

Dear Friend:

I am not particularly bright or gifted.

Since we're among friends, Robert, I can tell you that I knew that already. This is NewsMax.

About the only things I'm any good at are writing, speaking, and marketing. And I'm not great – just decent.

I think it's painfully apparent to anybody who reads my blog that I'm not even good at those things. But I'll keep reading. I am, after all, desperate.

Working from the comfort of my home, I made over half a million dollars last year in my little one-man consulting business.

Half a million dollars, eh? That could sure buy S.Z. a lot of Ronald Reagan commemorative earrings...

My home office window looks down on our wooded property, where chipmunk, squirrel, deer, raccoon, and fox roam freely. I sip my morning coffee in peace and tranquility, while other folks are already stuck in yet another boring, endless meeting

I've been calling in sick to work and writing my blog entries from the zoo. Pretty much the same thing. Unfortunately, this hasn't led to half a million dollars so I'd better keep reading.

My definition of success is "Doing what you want to do, when you want to do it – and being paid very, very well for it."

Wait a minute, Bob...Are you trying to tell me that I can get paid very, very well for making fun of people? Because I could get into that.

Although, I don't always do it! I prefer a modest lifestyle.

Unfortunately S.Z. does not. And constantly trying to keep up with the Cheneys to impress her has nearly bankrupted me.

Now, my consulting specialty is marketing, because that's what I know (my first two jobs were in corporate marketing). Yours will be in whatever field of knowledge, skill, or service you know best.

What if I have no skills or services?

Consultants are needed in virtually every area

Oh, well, okay then. I am now officially declaring myself a consultant. Want some help writing some stale insults or second-rate sarcasm for your blog? Then I'm your man!

Today you cannot buy How to Guarantee Your Consulting Success in a bookstore. In fact, you cannot buy it anywhere, at any price.

Just how the heck am I supposed to find this great treasure, Bob? It has become apparent that I can no longer continue without it.

But now you can get a PDF copy via email absolutely FREE when you become a member of The American Consultants League.

Oh, cool! I love how NewsMax always gives me free stuff when I buy something! And I can't wait until we meet the National Consultants League in the Super Bowl! I'll be the "tight end", S.Z.

I wonder what else I get with this incredible package.

how to find the highest-paying consulting assignments you can qualify for (see chapter 2)

To be honest with you, Bob, I think my readers and I probably already know the answer to that.

Shortcuts to writing proposals that win a maximum amount of new business with a minimum of time and effort (chapter 6).

The Dark Window is all about "minimum of time and effort".

Choosing the right name for your consulting practice: Does using a made-up name work better than using your own name? Surprising answer (chapter 3).

Too late for that. Especially since my last name is not "Window". Maybe that's been my problem.

Do you need a Web site? What should it look like? What should be on it? Plus: How to build your Web site for under $250. See chapter 3.

Already have one. And I obviously didn't spend a cent on it. I'm beginning to think I already know all this stuff, Bob.

What to send a potential client who calls and asks, "Can I see some more information about your consulting services?" Hint: It's not your resume. See chapter 4.

Okay, this is actually pretty good advice. Especially if you've seen my resume. I think giving it to S.Z. right away was probably a mistake.

What never to say to a potential client at the initial meeting. Utter these words, and you're out (chapter 5).

Hmmm. I'm afraid I've probably already said them. Is there a chapter about how to take them back? Or how to mask them with other, less meaningful words?

Making the sale even when the client says, "Your price is too high" – and 9 other common objections you can easily overcome (chapter 8).

What if one of those objections includes the words "I have a restraining order"?

Well, anyway, Bob's convinced me that I need his life-changing package. I'm sending him my credit card information as I type. I can't wait to tell S.Z. I'm a member of the prestigious ACL!

But boy, if this new consulting career doesn't win her heart, I don't know what I'm going to do. I guess I'll just have to sit under her window with my guitar and serenade her. I've even been working on a new song.

"Let the eagles soar..."

Coincidentally, Vox Day has some surprisingly good advice on love today. He wrote a column over at World Net Daily about how to know if the woman you seek is the right one to marry. I'm pretty sure I already know S.Z. is "the one" but I'll see what he says just to make sure.

1. Is she a woman of genuine faith?

I certainly hope not.

2. Does she accept the notion of personal responsibility?

See answer to question 1.

3. Are you comfortable with her?

Sure. Does she have to be comfortable with me too, though? If so, we may have a problem.

4. Can she entertain herself? Men need their downtime. This becomes problematic if she sees your free time as a violation of her time with you.

So far she seems to have no problem letting me have my space.

6. Do your friends and family think she's good for you?

Glenstonecottage does.

7. Does she attempt to control you? This tendency will only get worse with marriage, so any sign of this in a dating relationship is a red flag.

Please see today's other blog entry and search for the words "restraining order".

8. Does she treat you with respect, in public and in private? If she does, this is an excellent sign. If she's always putting you down, just "giving you a hard time" and "keeping you in your place," better find someone else. Marriage is not a buddy-cop movie.

Yeah, this one may be problematic.

9. Are you in agreement on the larger issues?

We both seem to share a disturbing obsession with Rebecca Hagelin and Rush Limbaugh.

So let's see here...By my tally, we meet at least 6 out of the 10 criteria Vox sets forth. Seems pretty clear to me.

If you are so fortunate as to find the right woman, don't let shallow concerns get in the way, pursue her and see it through.

Hey, S.Z. Even Vox says we're destined to be together. So whaddya say? Don't make me serenade you again...

Jim Rittenhouse nous indique un article que les Noix de l'Aile ne peuvent pas lire.

Les millions d’automobilistes circulant sur les autoroutes 5 et 405, qui traversent l’agglomération de Los Angeles, aperçoivent régulièrement des dizaines de grandes pancartes noir et blanc affichant des slogans hostiles au président Bush et à la guerre en Irak. Elles sont accrochées aux passerelles, aux grillages de protection, aux arbres, aux panneaux routiers, aux talus bordant la chaussée. Il y a aussi des images, notamment une reproduction stylisée de la célèbre photo du prisonnier irakien cagoulé, bras écartés, attendant d’être électrocuté, accompagnée de la légende “Pas en notre nom”.

Je pense que la Fenêtre Obscure va continuer avec l'autoroute 101. Peut-être nous pourrions faire la fête avec nos propres pancartes. Idées?

Pendant des mois, Scarlet agit seul, mais un jour, un habitant de Los Angeles, séduit par son action, décide de photographier ses pancartes et de les diffuser sur Internet. Très vite, il reçoit des courriels enthousiastes de tout le pays et entre en contact avec Scarlet.

C'est super parce que quand le Bushman est ici en Californie pour faire campagne, il verra des pancartes et...comment? Il ne va pas venir ici pour faire campagne? Tiens, ça ne fait rien.

Peu après, celui-ci décide de créer son propre site (freewayblogger.com), qui accueille désormais de 2 000 à 5 000 visiteurs par jour : "Aujourd'hui, au moins vingt-cinq personnes dans une douzaine d'Etats, y compris sur la Côte est, reproduisent mes pancartes et les accrochent sur les autoroutes. Le mouvement est lancé."

Rappelez-vous, les afficheurs-guérilleros...c'est notre secret...

So my dear friend Gerry decided it would be cute to make fun of me on the internet. He thought it would be even cuter to do it in an eBay auction. He thought it would be cuter still to pay to have the auction featured on the eBay home page so everybody would see it.

Not only did he steal my monkey for his website, but he also felt the need to mock my writing style in his "auction". And to top it all off, he tries to portray me as some ridiculous young William Bennett clone.

For the record, I have never even heard of Fast Suzie and besides, if you've seen her, you'd know that I never would have gone into her establishment in the first place.

All I can say is: "Mr. Porter, this means war."

Limbaugh announces end of 10-year marriage, his third

Conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh announced Friday that he and his wife, Marta, are divorcing.

The Limbaughs "mutually decided to end their marriage of 10 years" and have "separated pending an amicable resolution," according to a statement released by Limbaugh's publicist.

It was the third marriage for both Limbaugh, 53, and his wife, who were wed in May 1994 at the Virginia home of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Thomas officiated the ceremony.



Update: Just in case you think we're being unfair to poor Rush here at the Dark Window, we point you to Atrios who has collected several fun Limbaugh quotes on marriage and divorce. Check 'em out.

Today is the official end of our first annual Vox Challenge and I would like to thank all those who participated. The goal of our brave contestants was to convince Vox Day that women voting is, in fact, a good thing.

To make the contest results official, I asked Vox this question:

Do you, Vox Day, renounce your views on women's suffrage?

In his response, he said:

...I'm willing...

So there you have it and...okay, I'm kidding. That's entirely out of context. I just thought it might be fun to give Vox's Popolites a momentary scare. What he actually said was:

I renounce nothing!

So, in the interest of fairness and contest rules, I must make the following statement:

Challengers, because you were unable to change Vox's mind, you are hereby officially DISENFRANCHISED. Should you try to vote you will be met at your polling place by a mohawked man with a flaming sword.

Since Vox's only stated desire is to discourage legitimate voting, fraudulent voting on your part will still be allowed (and in fact, encouraged).

As much as we here at the Dark Window dislike many of Vox's goofball loony wacko timeless ideas, we actually quite like Vox himself. And to demonstrate our good will, we give Vox the last word by presenting the following historical poster:



Tune in next time to see the Dark Window try to steal Kyle Williams' lunch money and challenge Ann Coulter to an arm-wrestling match.

It's Friday and that means just one thing...it's time for the newest Sadly, No! Flash Animation. I knew this one was going to be different when Seb called me in the middle of the night begging for my secret stash of Linda Chavez photos.

"My what?" I asked.

"Don't play dumb with me, Pete. I know you've got 'em and I need 'em."

Silence.

"Pete, it's for my flash," he said at last.

"Good God, no!" I exclaimed.

"Not that, you idiot. My Friday Flash Animation."

"Ohhh. Why didn't you say so in the first place?"

And so without further ado, I direct you to Dr. No's latest masterpiece.

The Bushman welcomes Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika to the G8 Summit, building new bridges in the process.

We are now entering the fourth and final day of the Vox Challenge and I thought this might be a good time to reassess my own assumptions about women's suffrage. Who knows, maybe I’ve been wrong all along. So I decided to visit Vox's blog to find some accurate information that would help me make a more enlightened decision.

A common refrain from both Vox and his loyal readers (and a good reason to disenfranchise voters) is that women and liberals base their decisions solely on emotion and irrational fear while males (especially conservative Christian males) think logically, making decisions by actually processing information in an intellectual manner.

Sure it sounds like a simplistic generalization but what if Vox is right? Do we really want people to be able to cast their votes based on feeeeelings rather than on logical thought?

Since I already know how women and girly liberal men (i.e. Frederick and Seb) tend to vote, I wanted to find the kind of people Vox describes in order to understand how their superior thought processes work.

The first people I could think of to fit the bill were the intellectual sages over at BushCountry.org – the people "Promoting the Ideals of Conservatism." As a friendly service to Vox, I hold up these self-proclaimed conservative Christian voters as an example of what good voters should look like.

Fortunately, the good voters have a timely article up right now that should serve our purposes nicely.

June 2004...The Beginning Of The End?

This is a follow up piece from a previous article posted back in May. Bush Country promised our readers several weeks ago we would post the last email from an individual who has stumbled across "possible" disturbing events. Although the information in this article points to "apocalyptic" events within a month's time frame, unless the Anti-Christ is revealed to the entire world in June, we believe they will not occur.

Sounds pretty logical so far.

Therefore, unless the entire world is introduced to the Anti-Christ in June, we have to believe these events will not be taking place, so you should rest safely on that.

"Entire world, meet the Anti-Christ. Anti-Christ, Entire world."

The coincidences are incredible though and do lead one to check your salvation.

Check it for what, exactly?

This is a fairly interesting disclaimer. They're telling us they can't believe these things are true because then their view of the Bible would be wrong. But still, a lot of their readers are worried and it sure sounds like it might happen so they'd better warn us just in case.

Lastly, be it one month away, or one thousand years away from God's wrath upon the earth and its inhabitants, God will not pour His wrath out upon His children and that is the comfort all those who are His can have. With that, here is the article.

Their comfort is that God will pour his wrath upon the earth's inhabitants while they're kept safe? I may be way off base here but that doesn't sound very nice and...ahhh, crap. I guess I've just demonstrated how I'm ruled by my feeeeelings. Perhaps I should voluntarily give up my vote right now.

I assume that by "His children" they mean Bush supporters and other like-minded conservatives. This doesn't bode well for me.

Anywhoo, after their little disclaimer, Bush Country gives us "the article" itself which is actually an e-mail from some Australian guy (called Aussie Bloke) who claims a comet will be hitting the earth this month. Bush Country has been posting these "articles" regularly and they appear to have been a great hit among the conservative male voters.

To give you an example of what the logical mind is drawn to, some previous Aussie Bloke "articles" have included facts like:

PEOPLE....there IS IN FACT some very SERIOUS and DEVASTATING objects coming our way RIGHT NOW!!!!! RUN and try to survive. It will be the biggest light show in the history of the world.

and

It IS a comet...of sorts...surrounded by a hell of a lot of debris. There will be several impacts of differing sizes spread over the globe. The bombardment will last a week or so at most. The largest fragment will rock the planet and the smaller ones will wipe out a city here or there depending on where they come down. There WILL be quakes and firestorms and major flooding of coastlines due to ocean impacts. Yes...it will be much like the movie "deep impact" only worse.

Good heavens! What could possibly be worse than having to watch "deep impact" again? This really is a calamity.

After 2 Weeks of visiting his family/saying goodbye, Aussie Bloke came back and true to his word, posted on the 29th of May who he is. His comments are noted below:

True to his word. See? Aussie Bloke demonstrates that Conservative trait of honesty right off the bat. And his honesty makes what he's going to tell us even scarier and more believable. What's he telling us? That we will probably be destroyed during the month of June. (Boo for June!)

At this point, I'd like to interject another common line of thought from Vox's people – namely that liberals simply don't understand history. Let's see how the enlightened male conservative voter uses history so we can learn from him:

These fireballs have increased significantly over the last several weeks and are happening EVERYWHERE.

Fireball Near Grover’s Mill, N.J.

Startled New Jersey residents tied-up the phone lines late this evening calling authorities to report a large orange fireball that passed over the town and apparently hit the ground several miles west of Grover's MIll.

My friend Ivan, a noted old-time radio expert, would certainly be better equipped to comment upon this than I but I'll give it a shot...Grover's Mill, New Jersey was the town Orson Welles used in his 1938 "War of the Worlds" radio hoax. You know, the one where Martians landed in a small New Jersey town and started killing everybody.

At least now we know how the Martians have kept themselves occupied since 1938. They've wandered over to Bush Country.

Don't make the liberal mistake of thinking there's not more excellent logical evidence proving we're all doomed, though. One of the new developments in this current Bush Country article comes when Aussie Bloke reveals that he is actually an Australian astronomer named Dr. Elford Gartrell. Interestingly, as he mentions this fact, he misspells his name.

Ah, heck. I do that all the time, too.

It's getting late and I have to be up early so I'll let you find the rest of these anomalies for yourselves. Suffice it to say that there's a lot of fun information. If you read the "articles" you'll learn how most governments are secretly going to the highest levels of alert. You'll learn that nearly all the navies of the world are sending their ships to sea during the month of June. And you'll learn why these things all make such compelling evidence to conservative Christian male voters.

As an aside, the real Dr. Gartrell (now retired) has recently come forward and is apparently not very happy with what he's been telling people. I'm guessing good investigative skills must fall under the "feeeeelings" category.

So I leave it to you to decide, dear readers. Wouldn't we be better off taking away women's votes so that these godly men can use their logical skills (and votes) to save our country?

Tune in next time for the exciting conclusion to Voxic Shock Syndrome.


Update: I see that there's a new article up today at Tech Central Station explaining how the whole Aussie Bloke scare has been a hoax. Evidently lots of logical conservative voters believed it. You know, maybe Vox is right to make such broad generalizations after all...

It's now Day 3 of the Vox Challenge and Mr. Day is still proudly waving his fiery sword. Several brave souls have stepped into the arena but none has yet been able to convince him of the fallacy of his position.

Will the Eternal Warrior lay down his weapon? Perhaps the cover of one of his novels will provide us with a clue.



Tune in next time for another exciting episode of Voxic Shock Syndrome...

I've been wondering how best to honor Ronald Reagan and so was very happy to come across this well-thought out plan proposed over at World Net Daily.

GRANTS PASS, Ore. – Residents of Simi Valley, Calif., have the Reagan Library, and denizens of Washington, D.C., will be able to attend the various observances this week honoring Ronald Reagan. But what can the rest of America's citizens do to personally honor him, other than watch the events unfold on their television sets?

Sometimes the simplest ideas are the best.

And even if they're not the best, well, they're still the simplest.

"Ronald Reagan always talked about his beloved 'shining city on a hill,'" said Bob Just, a veteran talk-show host and WorldNetDaily columnist. "So, let's shine our headlights from now until Independence Day. Let's give Ronald Reagan one more July 4th with the people who love him."

Biblical reference to a land set apart by God, high beams on a Hyundai...yeah, pretty much the same thing.

"I loved Ronald Reagan," he said. "We'll all be watching this week's events on television but that's not enough. I think most of us want to do something personally to celebrate the life of the man who gave America back to itself."

So if I understand Bob correctly, we should all get into our automobiles and drive them around to honor President Reagan. Come to think of it, maybe that does seem like a fitting way to remember him. James Watt would be so proud.

Just is launching the idea locally on KAJO radio in Grants Pass, but hopes other talk show hosts, columnists, websites and news outlets will pick up the torch and inspire the millions of Americans who loved Ronald Reagan to "turn on their lights for the Gipper."

You know what this means, right? If you see somebody driving around without his lights on, he's probably a mean-spirited liberal. Or a gang member who'll kill you if you flash your lights at him. Not really that dissimilar when you think about it.

We are now entering Day 2 of the Vox Challenge. So far he shows no signs of releasing his white-knuckled grip on his flaming sword.

Of course he hasn't yet responded to many of his challengers. Challenges like this one from Bartholomew and this one from Discordia. And then there's also this comment posted on Vox's blog by Chris Vosburg that awaits judgment:

The implication is clear: to defend woomen's suffrage is to defend these things, ergo, these things could not exist but for women's suffrage.

To be honest, Vox, I think it falls to you to support your claim that these things are the result of women's suffrage.

Start with divorce. Well?

And so the clock ticks. Will our brave challengers be able to wrest the flaming sword from Vox's clutches by convincing him that he's wrong about women's suffrage? Will all of these challenges drive Vox to grow hair on the sides of his head?

Tune in next time for these and other exciting revelations here on Voxic Shock Syndrome.

Rush, firmly in command of Reagan's memory, was in rare form today:

Reagan was right just as George W. Bush is today, and I really believe that if Reagan had been able he would have put his hand on Bush's shoulder and said to him, 'Stay the course, George.' I really believe that.

I really believe that if Mother Theresa had been able she'd have beaten the living crap out of Rush. I really believe that.

Whatever the Democrats today want to hope and dream for, whatever the Clintons today want to hope and dream for, the intern scandal is going to be the legacy of the Clinton administration and the Oval Office. It's inescapable.

You start to realize how obsessed Rush is when even Ronald Reagan's death winds up being about Monica Lewinsky. Somebody pass that man some Oxy!

No symbolism here. Nope, none at all...

Steve Malzberg over at NewsMax was kind enough to show us the real meaning of Ronald Reagan's death with a delightful article entitled Phony Praise for Reagan.

With the passing of former President Ronald Reagan come the heartfelt words, sentiments and tributes from those who truly admired the man. But don't think for a minute that everyone who sings Mr. Reagan's praises really means it.

That's right. Reagan's death isn't about Reagan. It's about Steve being able to tell people that Democrats are "phony".

If you listen carefully you can hear the past words and true feelings of some, as their warm tribute in death becomes unraveled and tangled with the reality of what they thought of President Reagan when he was alive.

Senator John Kerry issued a statement which says in part, "Ronald Reagan's love of country was infectious. Even when he was breaking Democrats' hearts, he did so with a smile and in the spirit of honest and open debate." Almost believable if he would have stopped there, but he didn't.

"He was the voice of America in good times and in grief...Today, from California to Maine - from sea to shining sea - Americans will bow their heads in prayer and gratitude that President Reagan left such an indelible stamp on the nation he loved."

Okay, I actually thought that was very touching. Why was it phony?

It's too bad that a check of the record shows that Senator Kerry apparently didn't care much for the 'Reagan Stamp' while it was being used.

According to a recent story on NewsMax.com by Dave Eberhart, "Kerry was generally a thorn in the popular former president's side." Eberhart points to Reagan's air strike on Libya in April of 1986, which reportedly almost got Moammar Gadhafi himself.

Whoa, NewsMax wrote something like that? (I love how these NewsMax pieces always quote other NewsMax articles as sources.)

It was in retaliation for Libya's role in a terrorist attack in Germany that killed an American soldier and wounded 51 in a disco. Kerry had a problem with the method of striking back.

In a letter, Kerry said, "It is obvious that our response was not proportional to the disco bombing...there are numerous other actions we can take, in concert with our allies, to bring significant pressure to bear on countries supporting and harboring terrorists."

This is what makes Kerry's words "phony"? That he was concerned about innocent people getting killed in what he felt was a disproportional response to the German disco bombing? I can't believe God hasn't struck that bastard Kerry down yet.

The good Senator was also, not surprisingly, against Reagan's defense budget, while at the same time underestimating the threat of the Soviet Union. Eberhart pulls up some Kerry campaign literature from 1984. "We are continuing a defense buildup that is consuming our resources with weapons systems that we don't need and can't use.

"The Reagan Administration has no rational plan for our military. Instead, it acts on misinformed assumptions about the strength of the Soviet military and a presumed 'window of vulnerability' which we now know not to exist."

I'm guessing Steve isn't a terribly complex man.

He claimed that Congress lacked the moral courage to challenge the Reagan requests on defense and called some of those requests, "wasteful, useless and dangerous." Kerry also claimed that the buildup of our defense made Americans feel "more threatened by the prospect of war, not less so." (Wow, he hasn't changed one bit has he?)

Yes, Kerry would have cut some $50 billion from the Reagan defense budget according to Eberhart, while gutting the Strategic defense Initiative (Star Wars) altogether.

You know, I'm beginning to suspect that this article isn't really about Ronald Reagan at all.

But there's more. Turns out other Democrats have been "phony" in their praise of Reagan too. After quoting the moving words the Clintons offered upon hearing of Reagan's passing, Malzberg writes this:

According to the book Hillary's Scheme by NewsMax.com's Carl Limbacher, one time Clinton bodyguard L.D. Brown, a former Arkansas State Trooper, says that in the 1980's Bill Clinton actually did admire Reagan, and got along well with Vice President Bush. But not Hillary. According to Brown's 1997 book, "Crossfire: A Witness in the Clinton Investigation," the Clintons had been invited to a party at Bush's estate in Kennebunkport.

"Hillary flatly refused to go," says Brown in his book. Brown then quotes Hillary as saying, "F---him Bill. He's Reagan's G--D---Vice President."

Therefore, using true NewsMax logic, the words the Clintons offered are null and void. Why? Because Carl Limbacher once heard a guy say that Hillary once said something bad about Reagan's Vice President.

And guess what. There's even more! (Reagan seems to have been busy this week.) Carter's words are "phony", too!

"Carter appeared obsessed by his defeat at the hands of the former actor. He told the historian Douglas Brinkley in 1995 that "allowing Ronald Reagan to become president was by far my biggest failure in office."

Although Steve has excellent researching skills and easily demonstrates that these folks are really consumed by sheer hatred for Ronald Reagan, I have to confess that I'm a little confused. How could Carter's praise have been phony if he never offered any in the first place?

Anyway, Steve closes by showing us the real reason Ronald Reagan had to die:

While it's important and appropriate to mourn the death and celebrate the life of the greatest president in my lifetime, it's also necessary to remember that there are those jumping on the bandwagon, who never really had any use for Ronald Reagan or the greatness that he stands for.

Isn't it lucky he died? Just in time, too!

I don't know about you but I'm sure glad guys like Steve and Rush are keeping Reagan's memory safe for Americans everywhere.

Well, our friend Vox Day apparently enjoyed the Dark Window's reference to his take on women's suffrage enough to present this response over at his own blog.

In addition to that, Vox sent me an e-mail offering to post an argument chez lui from any upset reader here explaining just how, exactly, women's suffrage could possibly have been a positive thing for our nation. If you'd like to submit something to him, you can do it here. My assumption is that Vox or his readers will then decide if the argument is a good one.

If you're able to convince Vox and friends that they're wrong, you win Vox's fiery sword (pictured with him below). If not, you lose the right to vote for the next year. (And, well, if you're a woman, you shouldn't even be doing that anyway...)

Okay, so I just made those prizes up. But they sound pretty fair to me.

Update: In addition to Bartholomew's fascinating piece about Vox that was mentioned here yesterday, I direct you to S.Z.'s surprising new revelations as well.

One of my very favorite weblogs, Slacktivist, has been writing an excellent ongoing review of the Left Behind series. If you're not familiar with the Left Behind books, they're an apocalyptic fiction series devoted to the Rapture of the Church, the action-packed attempts of some bad-ass Christians to stay alive during the Tribulation, and Jesus' return to earth to avenge himself upon liberals everywhere. A particularly funny Slacktivist review discusses one of the main characters in the series, Cameron "Buck" Williams. Buck is referred to in the Left Behind novels as "The Greatest Investigative Reporter of All-Time." This is wonderfully ironic given Buck's strange lack of investigative skills and writing samples like: "To say the Israelis were caught off guard, Cameron Williams had written, was like saying the Great Wall of China was long."

Anyway, I mention all that to explain my delight upon reading the following article at World Net Daily today. Why was I so delighted? Because I immediately realized that I'd found an exclusive investigative report worthy of the GIRAT himself. So without further ado...

The 50th anniversary conference of the elite Bilderberg group – which many believe conspires semi-annually to foster global government – is under way in Stresa, Italy.

World Net Daily - which many believe conspires to write the lamest articles on the internet - wrote that as their opening sentence. This is the "news" organization that wailed to high heaven when the Bush White House refused to give them proper press credentials. What on earth could the White House have been thinking?

According to sources that have penetrated the high-security meetings in the past, the Bilderberg meetings emphasize a globalist agenda and promote the idea that the notion of national sovereignty is antiquated and regressive.

According to sources that have read World Net Daily exclusive reports in the past, this one may be the dumbest yet.

And according to a current BBC report on the conference in Stresa: "Not a word of what is said at Bilderberg meetings can be breathed outside. No reporters are invited in and while confidential minutes of meetings are taken, names are not noted. The shadowy aura extends further – the anonymous answerphone message, for example; the fact that conference venues are kept secret. The group, which includes luminaries such as Henry Kissinger and former UK chancellor Kenneth Clarke, does not even have a website."

I wouldn't be surprised if Vince Foster and Ron Brown were planning to be in attendance, too. That's just how shadowy this aura is. And come to think of it, I don't think they have websites either!

But, counter participants, the secrecy is not evidence of a grand conspiracy, but only an opportunity to speak frankly with other world leaders out of the limelight of press coverage and its inevitable repercussions.

Yeah, ri-ight. Like we're supposed to believe that. You have to get up pretty early to fool Joseph Farah's reporters. And they're about to prove it:

Here is the partial guest list of the current meeting obtained by WorldNetDaily

At this point, the report lists a long and very poorly formatted list of names. And just how did World Net Daily obtain this super secret information? Did they infiltrate the highest echelons of the organization with their probing reporters? Nah. They just went to Bilderberg.org and copied it.

Interestingly, one of the listed participants in the Bilderberg meeting is Ralph Reed, the boyish former executive director of the Christian Coalition. Has even the far right been co-opted by the evil march of globalism? Who the hell knows - the article doesn't say. In fact it doesn't really say why any of these people would be there and conspiring.

What it does say, though, is that a bunch of really spooky stuff is going on that may or may not be related:

In 1998, British free-lance journalist Campbell Thomas attempted to cover the conference in Turnberry, Scotland, for the Daily Mail. Thomas began by seeking the opinions of neighbors to the secret meeting being held nearby. One of those was a young woman who told him he was in the hotel's staff quarters and should leave immediately, which he did. A short while later, two local police officers arrested Thomas, who reportedly remained in custody for eight hours.

That paragraph alone should net Farah a Pulitzer Prize. Talk about breaking this thing wide open. Sadly, though, that's about the extent of the sinister activities World Net Daily is able to pinpoint for us. But that doesn't stop them from engaging in a little more fascinating speculation:

Some observers are even speculating that President Bush will make an appearance at this year's event, just as Bill Clinton did at the group's 2000 meeting. By coincidence, it just happens that Bush will be in Italy over the weekend.

So people from all parts of the political spectrum will be there - maybe even our President. What, exactly, is World Net Daily telling us? They don't seem to be telling us anything at all, frankly. This has got to be one of the dumbest articles I've ever read.

The crux of the article seems to be this: A bunch of important people are meeting someplace. We don't know what they're talking about so it must be pretty bad stuff. They have an anonymous answerphone and no website so they're obviously evil. Once a reporter showed up and was "reportedly" in custody for eight hours. Therefore, we feel it necessary to engage in some heavy insinuation based on even heavier speculation.

Call me old-fashioned but couldn't World Net Daily have at least tried to interview the detained reporter or something?

But anyway, why did World Net Daily not only publish, but also prominently feature (at the top of their homepage), this amazing piece of investigative journalism? I suspect it's because of this:

SPECIAL "BILDERBERG-WEEKEND" OFFER: Through this weekend only – that is, until the Bilderberg meeting ends Sunday, June 6 – WND will give away, FREE, two of its most coveted special reports on secret globalist groups:

All you have to do to get the special offer is subscribe to their Whistleblower Magazine. And one of those most coveted special reports mentioned is this:

"THE NEW WORLD RE-ORDER," takes on the globalists big-time. If you've ever wanted to understand what international elitists – from the "Bilderbergers" to the Council on Foreign Relations to the United Nations – are really up to, here's your answer.

Perhaps frequent Dark Window commenter SocraticSilence said it best when he wrote: "My god is there anything on that website that isn't a thinly veiled book pitch?" I don't know. Vox Day, maybe? Otherwise I think not.

Well, the boys over at NewsMax weren't happy enough with the outpouring of sympathy and praise for former President Reagan and his family so they decided to try to use his death (and a couple of NewsMax lies) to smear another former President in a lovely article entitled Carter Mum on Reagan's Death.

Still bitter that Ronald Reagan ended his political career in 1980, ex-President Jimmy Carter told reporters on Sunday that he would make no formal comment on Reagan's death.

Now that's interesting because the Associated Press said: "Former President Jimmy Carter said Sunday he joins the rest of the nation in mourning the loss of former President Ronald Reagan, the man who defeated him in the 1980 presidential election."

Doesn't really sound like a bitter man withholding kind words to another in death, does it? It also doesn't sound like Carter was particularly "mum". But let's allow NewsMax to continue:

But at the Plains, Ga., Sunday school class he still teaches, the 39th president was a little more expansive, acknowledging that it was "a sad day for our country."

"I probably know as well as anybody what a formidable communicator and campaigner that President Reagan was," he told his class, in quotes picked up by the Associated Press. "It was because of him that I was retired from my last job."

NewsMax implies that that is the only thing Carter had to say about Reagan's death. The implication is, of course, crystal clear. Carter's an angry jerk who's so self-consumed that he won't even offer condolences at a time like this and only grudgingly acknowledges that Reagan's death wasn't a happy occasion.

But NewsMax isn't done. For their final smear, they point out that even the ultra-liberal Walter Mondale showed more class than Carter (and for Wing Nuts, that's a supreme insult).

Walter Mondale, who lost 49 states to Reagan in 1984, was far more gracious.

"It was a fairly nice campaign," the ex-Carter VP recalled to reporters in Minneapolis. "[Reagan] was not mean. It was not a personal, harsh campaign. Although we were political adversaries, I always liked the guy."

That's the fucking end of their article. That's it.

If you're one of the millions of Americans who gets their news from "America's News Page" you'd come away thinking that Carter was a pretty dastardly guy.

Now in spite of my love of the NewsMax shopping mall, I have to point out that this is one of the lowest things they've ever printed (and that's saying something). In fact, their lies are so blatant that one only needs to visit Matt Drudge to find how low this is. Because even Drudge has a headline that reads "Carter expresses grief..."

And if one bothers to click on that article Drudge links to, it is immediately revealed that Carter also said:

"It was a very sobering day for the country to lose a former president," Carter said. "I want to express my admiration for him and his wife and associate myself with the grief that America feels."

And there's more:

"We go through ups and downs," he said. "I was distressed when we lost (to Reagan). But I think it's important to ask, 'What am I in the eyes of Jesus Christ?'"

What else can I even say?



Update: NewsMax has now changed the title of their article to read "Carter Brief on Reagan's Death" and added several more quotes from the former President (as well as removing the Walter Mondale bit). Their new title still implies a smear but the text itself no longer backs that up. Does this mean that Carl Limbacher reads the Dark Window?

The Dark Window would like to offer its most heartfelt gratitude for the unimaginable sacrifice and blood given for the cause of freedom sixty years ago today. May we all be so brave and willing in our service to its ideals.

Well, I'm feeling inclusive this evening and I thought it might be nice to give one of our friends from the right wing a chance to offer some words of wisdom to counteract all the evil liberalism that goes on here at the Dark Window. Figuring I should probably balance out the seditious words of Kurt Vonnegut printed below with some good old-fashioned conservatism, I came across this blog entry written by one of the young lions of libertarianism and freedom, Vox Day.

If you don't know Vox, he's a Christian libertarian, a World Net Daily columnist, a Southern Baptist, a science fiction writer, and a member of Mensa. In the interest of fairness, I'll quote the piece in its entirety and make no editorial comments of my own.



Why women shouldn't vote
An ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 70% of men favored smaller government, but only 48% of women believed the same way. So men are far more likely to view big government as part of the problem, not the solution.

It's pretty clear to me that one of the most destructive forces in our society has been women's suffrage. Women consistently and reliably turn towards government as a solution for perceived problems, which creates more intractable problems, which then is used to justify more government intervention. This process is unlikely to stop until the entire edifice collapses of its own weight.

It's too bad that the concept of the states as laboratories of democracy has been abandoned, because I'd love to see the difference between two neighboring states, one of which permitted women to vote and the other that did not. It would be particularly interesting to see in which state women would prefer to live. I suspect the answer might surprise a lot of people.

The fact that the Kerry campaign would run these canards reveals an unsettling truth - that in order to win the female vote, Kerry believes that he needs to continually nurture women's sense of grievance and victimization.

He has no other choice. Feminist women believe that they exist for no other reason than to be aggrieved. "I am a victim, therefore I am" could serve as the motto for the entire movement. I'm not advocating some sort of sharia here - as far as I'm concerned, women can work wherever and wear whatever they want. But allowing them a voice in government and politics is disastrous, if not suicidal, and has led directly to the loss of more American lives in three decades than in every war since the Revolution.

Someone had to say it. I just did.


Update: For those interested in learning more about the somewhat enigmatic figure of Vox Day, Bartholomew has written a most fascinating piece here.

Some words of wisdom from Kurt Vonnegut:

Eugene Debs, who died back in 1926, when I was only 4, ran 5 times as the Socialist Party candidate for president, winning 900,000 votes, 6 percent of the popular vote, in 1912, if you can imagine such a ballot. He had this to say while campaigning:

As long as there is a lower class, I am in it.
As long as there is a criminal element, I'm of it.
As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free.

Doesn't anything socialistic make you want to throw up? Like great public schools or health insurance for all?

How about Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes?

Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth.

Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. ...

And so on.

Not exactly planks in a Republican platform. Not exactly Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney stuff.

For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that's Moses, not Jesus. I haven't heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.

"Blessed are the merciful" in a courtroom? "Blessed are the peacemakers" in the Pentagon? Give me a break!

We like to have a bit of fun with our old friend Hal Lindsey here at the Dark Window. But today we're going to take a look at his lesser known sidekick, Jack Kinsella.

Jack is the unhappy-looking editor of an up-to-the-minute intelligence digest (the kind so popular with Bible Prophecy nuts) called the Omega Letter and also a frequent contributor to Hal Lindsey's Oracle. Both ministries, from the looks of their websites, have the blessing of God.

Jack starts off by quoting the Al Qaeda guy who killed Nicholas Berg, a Palestinian member of Hezbollah, and a Tunisian intellectual. He masterfully uses these quotes to demonstrate convincingly that Americans and Israelis love life while Muslims love death. And to the discerning Christian (so lovingly represented by Jack), this can only mean one thing: that liberals worship the same evil god as the Muslims and French.

America's goal was to free Iraqis from the brutality of Saddam, but night after night, new pictures of American soldiers humiliating Iraqi prisoners, like a constant drip from a leaky faucet, continue to show up, two by two, on the nightly news.

Hmmmm. Those pictures sound suspiciously like Noah's Ark. Perhaps Jack is telling us that once we have two of every torture picture, the nightly news will safely sail off into the flooded sunset. Just kidding. Jack isn't telling us that at all. But for all the sense he makes, he might as well be.

For every story of a positive development in Iraq brought about with American assistance, there are ten stories about Iraqi resistance, American brutality, or the frightening collapse of order in Fallujah and Najaf.

For every reasoned argument from a conservative pundit, there are ten goofball columns by Wing Nuts like Jack. I wonder what his point is.

It is a conundrum that the only way for Bush's political enemies to achieve political victory is to join forces with the enemy in the propaganda war.

Aha. I thought that might be where he was going with this. See, readers...I'm discerning too!

I've spent considerable time and prayer examining that conundrum. The enemy is committed to the path of jihad, following his god into battle - not against a political enemy, but against a spiritual enemy.

Well, if Jack's spent considerable prayer examining the conundrum then he must share God's opinion. So what, exactly, is God's opinion?

Now we come to those in America who have chosen to ally themselves with the jihadists in the propaganda war; the politicians, the news media executives, the liberal media establishment in general, and even those states that sent the politicians to Washington in the first place.

Wow! Jack and God are taking things to a whole new level. Now we have entire states that are anti-American (and a lot of them at that!). Next thing you know, America will be anti-American! This is truly a disturbing development. I happen to live in a state that's allied with the jihad. How about you?

In the spiritual war now ongoing, what god do they follow? There is no question that Christianity has historically had a positive effect on American life. They owe their freedoms to its influence in America's foundation, as well as America's development right up to World War Two.

What happened to America's development after World War Two? Did godless heathens like Truman and Eisenhower hate America, too? I'm not sure because Jack isn't saying. But I'll bet they did!

It would seem logical, then, to at least give Christianity the benefit of the doubt. When was the last time you saw a positive portrayal of Christianity in the mainstream press?

Sounds like somebody's been reading David Limbaugh's book again. And I'm not sure why Jack expects to see the mainstream press portray "Christianity" in a positive light. Wouldn't that cause their terrorist allies to get mad at them?

Or any of the Anybody But Bush political spectrum standing up for Christian values? What god do they follow? Is there evidence that they have a special hatred for the God of the Bible, Jesus Christ, and the tenets of Scripture?

(Think Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Daschle, Jennings, Brokaw, Rather, CNN, the NYTimes Michael Moore and his crowd, Al Gore, Al Franken and Air America. Where are they on issues like abortion, euthanasia, public prayer, etc?)

Ah, damn. Nancy has a special hatred for Jesus Christ? She's practically my Congresswoman. (My actual Congresswoman is Barbara Lee. She must really hate Jesus!) And Peter Jennings, too? And John Kerry even? God I hate those evil people. How they could turn their backs on "Christian" values like torture, hatred, and the invasion of sovereign countries? I hope they roast in hell. God, puh-leaze let them roast in hell!

Now, how many gods are there? Scripture tells us there are two. There is the God of Creation, the Creator God of Scripture -- the same God worshipped by Christians and Jews. Christians call Him 'Father' or 'Lord' and Jews call Him 'Adonai' and 'Lord' - both call Him by His revealed Name, 'Jehovah'.

Wait a minute…so everybody who is not a Christian or a Jew worships the same god? Evidently so because Jack tells us just that.

Scripture says that the 'god of this world' is "the prince of the power of the air" further identifying him as "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience."

So basically, anybody who disagrees with Jack is disobeying God. Ergo, anybody who disagrees with Jack has a fiery seat in hell reserved for all eternity. I've gotta confess...I kind of like Jack. He really seems like a stand-up guy. Hooray for Jack!

Pulling it all together, a picture begins to emerge of the spiritual battlefield. On one side are those who follow the god of this world, and on the other, those who follow the God of Creation.

There are no borders in the asymmetrical, spiritual war of the last days. And not all of our enemies follow Islam, but they follow the same god.

That's right, readers. And you know who that "same god" is, right? The "god of this world?" It's Satan, of course! I worship Satan. (Hooray for Satan!) How about you?

Rather than ending with my usual hymn to the Prince of Eternal Darkness, I'd like to close this piece with an interesting quote that Jack has up at the top of his website. It's from the Old Testament book of Hosea and reads: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge..." And for once, we here at the Dark Window whole-heartedly concur.

Well, summer's nearly here and I thought it might be a good idea to go do some shopping. Thinking maybe I could pick up a cute new outfit to impress S.Z., I grabbed my wallet, jumped into the old Civic, and headed down to the NewsMax Shopping Mall.

NewsMax has always seemed to me like the place to go if you feel you're not getting enough spam in your inbox. If you need to enlarge your penis, buy gold, or lose weight without exercising or changing your diet, then NewsMax is for you. Uh...not that I need any of those things, S.Z....I just wanted to find some high-quality merchandise and figured that, given their track record for excellence and honesty, NewsMax was probably the place to find it.

As soon as I entered the mall (a garish and somewhat dated sort of place) I was greeted by a friendly pop-up banner announcing that I was visitor number 1139510 and that I'd been awarded a "pre-paid 7-night 'Disney Planning Resort' vacation from a DIRECT activation." I'm not sure what that meant, exactly, but it was really nice of them to offer it. Lord knows I could use a planning resort vacation.

With visions of thatched huts and tropical drinks in my head, I started browsing through the apparel section. Sadly, I decided that the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan hat and Bush Country T-shirt package was probably beyond my somewhat modest means (I am a blogger, after all). Even the "Live Free or Die" fleece was too expensive.

Thinking I might be able to impress S.Z. with some cool new artwork instead (I've heard that chicks dig culture), I wandered over to the American Historical Art department. Kind of a meager selection. A lithograph of Ronald Reagan wearing a cowboy hat and a picture of Richard Nixon meeting Elvis. Fine selections, both of them, but neither elegant enough to complement the black velvet nude of Newt Gingrich already hanging above my sofa.

Just as I was about to give up hope, I noticed a sign advertising a NewsMax clearance sale. After carefully counting the eleven dollars in my wallet, I gleefully began to browse the excellent selection. Let's see here...a Deck of Weasels poster, an FDNY shirt, a book by David Horowitz...a...wait, what's this?

The Donald Rumsfeld Talking Action Figure



List Price: $29.95
NewsMax Price: $9.95

A true patriot, Donald (Rummy) Rumsfeld is tight-lipped and reluctant to let the press know exactly what is going on behind closed White House doors for secrecy’s sake and the safety of our military.

That's one way to look at it.

Although he may disagree with the President and members of the President’s cabinet on certain areas of defense and security, he has shown himself to be a trusted and loyal friend to the Presidency and to the people of the United States, always placing their welfare first.

Hey, isn't that what they said about Chalabi? Well, anyway, the Rummy doll says all kinds of really great things when you "press his button". Things like (and I'm not making these up):

"I believe what I said yesterday...I don't know what I said, uh, but I know what I think and I assume it's what I said."

"The only choice one has is to proceed...and use coercion."

"The question you ask, however, is not a question I can answer."

Pretty damn adorable, that's for sure. And come to think of it, Chalabi might have said all those things, too. It's practically like getting two talking action figures for the price of one! I'd better add it to the cart.

Hmmmmm...What else is there? I know S.Z. likes books so I'll look through them and see what I can...

Vincent Foster: The Ruddy Investigation

List Price: $19.90
NewsMax Price: $4.95

Well, that certainly does seem like a good value. Perhaps I'd better take a closer look.

This 223-page soft-cover book includes all of Chris Ruddy's news reports from the New York Post and Pittsburgh Tribune-Review plus crime scene sketches and charts. Sure to be a collector's item.

That's the entire description? Not much to go on. But if it's sure to be a collector's item, I hate to let it go. Besides, if I buy it now, I get four free months of NewsMax Magazine - a $20 value. So I'll just get this Ruddy book, too, and...aw, jeez...I forgot that I only have $11.00 to spend. After paying shipping on the Rummy doll, I won't even be able to afford the clearance-priced NewsMax Magazine: Dr. Laura Edition for 99 cents.

Where's Richard Mellon Scaife when you need him?

I guess my shopping trip didn't turn out to be very successful. As I was getting into the car I accidentally dropped my new Rummy Action Figure onto the pavement and now, when I press his button, he only makes a strange groaning sound.

Maybe I should just remove his glasses and tell S.Z. it's a George Tenet doll...

A lot of people are talking about climate change right now and that makes Rush Limbaugh pretty dang mad.

You know, everybody is out there getting all hepped up, the environmentalist wackos.

You know, it sounds like somebody else is all hepped up too. Probably on OxyContin.

Anyway, Rush is angry because there's a new movie out about climate change and now some people at the New York Times are talking about the environment and how maybe humans are doing something to change it. He devoted a substantial part of his radio program on Tuesday to tell us all the way things really are in case we're dumb enough to go places like the New York Times for our news and information.

Now, stop and think about that. What is it that allows some human beings, what kind of vanity must they have? You know, we are amazing creatures. There's no question. But do you realize that in the grand scheme of things, we are but passing molecules through the great cosmos, my friends? The idea, the very idea!

The very idea indeed! Why can't everybody be humble like Rush? After all, it's obvious that nothing we do could possibly have any effect on the environment. We're Americans, after all. Don't those commie pinkos at the Times understand that?

Things change every day. My body changes every day! It does different things every day.

That's true. One day it does Oxy. Another it does Hydrocodone.



To sit here and to believe that our basic existence, which is oriented in this country to improving the quality of life for as many of our human and animal and plant friends as possible is going to result in all of these disasters, and then to have the audacity to publish this apocalyptic bilge day-in and day-out in the so-called newspaper of record is the height of ego and vanity and self-centeredness.

How dare the Times question any possible consequences of our mass-marketed, corporate-driven consumer culture dedication to improving the quality of life! Talk about self-centered! Interesting, though, that Limbaugh uses the phrases "our basic existence" and "the height of ego and vanity and self-centeredness" in the same sentence. Must have been a slip of the otherwise golden tongue.

We are so powerful and dangerous that we can destroy all of this simply by designing the automobiles we design, by increasing food production. But increasing and enabling mobility and upward mobility and all kinds of prosperity for all the peoples of the world who wish to take advantage of the secrets -- well, the blessings -- of our way of life. It has always offended the hell out of me -- and then for this business that we are now past the threshold of inevitable change on the cusp of "climate destabilization."

When will the wacko environmentalists finally learn that if only everybody had a Hummer, a supersized McDonald's meal, and a Walmart, this world would be a paradise? No wonder the hell has been offended out of Rush.

I want to know when the climate has ever been destable, or destabilized or stable. The fact is it is unstable by definition. There have always been tornadoes. Predictable, but I'd say it's unstable.

Rush makes the somewhat common mistake of confusing weather and climate (the two words are, in the technical sense, not at all synonymous) in referring to tornadoes as climate. But the rest of his environmental knowledge is so vast that I'm inclined to let that one slide.

Actually, you know what I would say? I'd say none of it is unstable. I'd say, "It's all what is." It's all natural. Hurricanes are natural. These things that destroy and provide destruction, things that provide beauty, it's a part of the mix. It's always been here, always going to be here. We didn't cause it. We didn't invent hurricanes. We don't make 'em worse; we can't stop 'em; we can't redirect them. We can't do diddlysquat because we are powerless, and we are not responsible for what they do -- except if we do stupid things like build houses in their paths.

Right. How could beings as powerless as we ever create something that causes destruction? Things that harm the environment - things like mass-consumption and mind-boggling waste - are simply natural. (Well, in Rush's case, I'm guessing that might actually be true.) So we aren't responsible for anything we do. We are, after all, nothing but powerless creatures. And whoever espouses the idea of personal or collective responsiblity probably just hates America and everything it stands for.

You know how many ice ages there have been? You ever heard of Nanook of the North? He didn't live in the Caribbean. I mean, the idea that all of this is happening for the first time, never before happened.

Wasn't Nanook of the North a movie? And wasn't it about an Eskimo in Alaska? What, exactly, does that have to do with how many ice ages there have been? I'm beginning to understand where Rush gets his vast knowledge about the environment.

Go to the Soviet Union during their period of time when they ruled the Eastern Bloc and go look at all of the environmental destruction that was brought about by the lack of capitalism, the lack of productivity, the lack of progress, the lack of freedom -- and you go to any industrialized country where there is freedom and prosperity and take a look at the living conditions and tell me where you'd rather be, and then tell me why in the hell these idiots are blaming the good guys for the problems.

Wait, I thought you just said we had no responsibility for environmental problems. Does this mean that only the commies are accountable and responsible for their actions?

And I know it's probably just nit-picking but "these idiots" have long placed a great deal of blame on the Eastern Bloc (Murray Feshbach's seminal work, Ecocide in the USSR, comes to mind) for "the problems." (By the way, why is Rush saying there are problems? I thought he just said there weren't any.)

In spite of this very minor flaw in his reasoning, Rush is able to take us to the heart of why some people are concerned about the environment. It's because they hate freedom.

It's because they're anti-capitalist. It's because they use the environmental movement as their platform for attacking freedom because they're threatened by it because they're elitists, and now all of a sudden... [Ellipses in original]

That's right, folks. Only socialist elitists want to pass along a clean and healthy planet to its future inhabitants. Don't you just hate selfish people like that? Next thing you know, they'll be telling us that personal responsibility is important!



Rush goes on to give us several more good arguments as to why we should ignore the environment, many of which involve making fun of the names of New York Times columnists. But I think some things he said during another segment of the same show sum it up better.

The only people that make news are the whiners and the complainers and they're all on the left; the environmentalist wackos, the feminazis. Go down the list: the Algores, the MoveOn.orgs. They're a bunch of angry, mean-spirited, affected people whining and moaning and complaining.

[snip]

The people that believe optimistically are out living their lives. They're not on a protest march; they're not whining and complaining, thus they're not making news.

Ahhhhh...The Dark Window just loves irony. And those last two wonderful paragraphs are ironic in so many delightful ways.

"You told 'em what now?"

Well, I'm back home after spending an extended Memorial Day weekend with my family and, for me, this holiday was a time of deep and solemn remembrance. I deeply and solemnly remembered why I live over two thousand miles away from them. In honor of these reflections, I'm declaring it Family Day here at the Dark Window.

Our first piece comes from the CBN "News" ministry. They have a very important message for us about John Kerry's family history and that seems like as good a topic as any for Family Day.

Emblazoned across the top of CBN's website is the sinister-sounding title John Kerry's French Connection. It's written by one of my very favorite CBN correspondents: Dale Hurd, CBN's Senior News Reporter (Hooray for Dale!). Dale has some shocking revelations about Monsieur Kerry that he'll relate to us from a godly perspective.

When Kerry got into the race in 2003, the automatic assumption in the pundit class and among anyone who hadn't studied his background thoroughly, was that the man is Irish.

Dale certainly isn't CBN's "Senior News Reporter" for nothing. It takes a great deal of talent to point out that people who don't actually take the time to read about something might have some misconceptions. But that's not really where Dale's going with this article. In fact, Dale seems to be saying the complete opposite. In true Wing Nut fashion, he places the blame for this misconception not on the idiots who never bothered to do any research on what they were writing about in the first place but upon John Kerry for not personally calling every one of them and telling them about his sordid background. Thankfully, though, Dale is kind enough to share this background with us so Kerry won't have to.

If you missed the media revelations earlier this year about Kerry's newly discovered French roots, and you still assumed he was Irish, you are not alone. The senator, who is actually half-Jewish and half-English with a lot of French relatives, is accused of being less than forthcoming about his heritage.

Who's accusing him of that? Dale's not really saying so I'm going to offer my own bit of senior news reporting. Dale Hurd is accused of being a freakin' MORON.

We discovered that the mayor of Saint Briac, Brice Lalonde, did not want to talk to us about his famous American cousin. Apparently, the Kerry campaign is nervous about the 'French connection,' as well as news photos showing Lalonde's obvious pride in Kerry.

So Dale discovered that people don't really want to talk to him about something as vital as the fact that some of John Kerry's relatives are French. Don't they know that Dale represents God and Pat Robertson? They really must be evil surrender monkeys. But in true CBN fashion, Dale draws an even more explosive conclusion. If Kerry's cousin doesn't want to talk to Dale then "apparently" it's because Kerry's campaign is nervous about him being French. And who wouldn't be? Everybody knows how much God hates the French.

The two cousins are said to remain in regular contact, so we asked the Kerry campaign if it or the senator asked Lalonde to stop talking to reporters. They did not respond.

Just what are those weasely French and the traitors at the Kerry campaign trying to hide?

Lalonde once ran for president in France as well, in 1993, on the Ecology ticket, and he served as the environmental minister in the cabinet of Socialist President Francois Mitterand. Lalonde is known as a committed environmentalist, but apparently not committed enough for some.

That is pretty damning stuff. I mean Kerry's related to a guy who's French, a socialsist, AND an enviornmentalist. But in case you might be sympathetic to the environmental part, the relative probably isn't REALLY an environmentalist. He's only "known as" one.

When Kerry got into the race in 2003, the automatic assumption in the pundit class and among anyone who hadn't studied his background thoroughly, was that the man is Irish.

The CBN editors must have really liked this point because this is the second time it shows up. But then why wouldn't they want to showcase the talents of their "Senior News Reporter?"

Newspapers often described him that way, and media-digging has not turned up a single letter to the editor from Kerry explaining that he was Austrian-Jewish on his father's side. The Jewish name was Kohn, later changed to Kerry, and English-French, the Forbes, on his mother's side.

And of course it really is beyond the pale that Kerry isn't out writing letters to editors everywhere telling that his father is of Jewish descent. To be fair, media-digging has also not turned up a single letter to the editor from Dale explaining that he's not a psychopathic Nazi.

"Politically speaking, in a presidential sense, it pays to be Irish," says CBN News Political Editor John Waage. "There are undecided, independent, blue-collar, ethnic Reagan Democrat voters to be had, in vote-rich electoral states. Now, if your ancestry is French, where you gonna go? Quebec doesn't have electoral votes to offer."

So Dale's principle source of analysis in this article is another CBN "News" guy. Well, at least he's keeping costs down. It certainly cuts down on long-distance tolls when all you have to do is ask the guy sitting in the next cubicle over what he thinks. No wonder Dale is their ace reporter.

If Kerry were running against Bush in France, he would win, hands down. The French love his style, and the fact that he speaks French fluently.

If Dale Hurd were running for "Idiot of the Week" in Virginia Beach, he would win, hands down. The Wing Nuts love his style, and the fact that he works tirelessly to paint Kerry in any negative light he can dream up. Not that Dale actually is running for that. But if he were, you know?

Most French hate George W. Bush. But the French won't be voting in this election. And with some Americans viewing France as an adversary these days, it is support that Monsieur Kerry doesn't need, and the reason his campaign would like to change the subject.

Kind of a powerful statement about "most French" hating the Bushman. Especially since "some Americans" view France as an adversary. And since this is the kind of support that "Monsieur Kerry" doesn't need, Dale and the fine folks at CBN are going to make certain they put it right up at the top of their ministry's website.

Thus concludes another fine message from the ministry that is CBN. So send a little love offering to God (via Pat, of course) so He can continue to spread the Good News that John Kerry is a French Jew.

I'm away visiting my family during this extended holiday weekend and one of the highlights of the trip has been attending my little brother's high school graduation. Sitting there watching all those impressionable young men and women of tomorrow walking across the stage to accept their diplomas, I started thinking a lot about how liberals are trying to destroy our children through textbooks. Fortunately, the good folks over at CBN News (Pat Robertson's organization) have a very timely story about the subject.

You see, it turns out that not all textbooks, especially those in the evil land of Calipornia, reflect conservative thinking. (Thankfully, those in the other state examined, Texas, are much better). CBN Congressional Correspondent (obviously eminently qualified to write about textbooks) David Brody tells us what's going on:

When you send your children off to public school in the morning, you may think they are getting a good education. And indeed, many schools in the country have fine academic principles. But beneath the surface, there is something else going on.

Per David, the "something else going on" is a serious ideological struggle. I'm guessing it must be a struggle between good and evil because he tells us it involves "religious conservatives" and "secular liberals." When you put it in those terms it's not very hard to figure out which side God is on. (Hooray for God and David!) Brody masterfully describes this struggle by interviewing David Barton, the president of a Christian group called Wallbuilders.

Political correctness seems to be the problem. In an effort to not offend any one group, especially when it comes to history, what happens is that the full story is not being told. Barton says key information is ignored or left out. Like with the Native American Indians.

Says Barton, "There were just some Native American tribes that were cannibalistic and that's just the way they were, and you just can't make them look good."

It really is true when you think about it: The vast majority of our problems today can be traced back to the time when American children stopped learning that some Native American tribes were cannibalistic. So many godly children were lost to the voracious appetites of hungry Hopi or starving Sioux that they really deserve to have their own monument in Washington DC - and nobody even learns that anymore. God, it makes me happy to know that somebody's finally standing up to these ravenous oppressors! Next thing you know they'll be trying to take our land and giving us blankets with small pox. What a bunch of savages.

And you can't say "old man" or "old lady" because it is demeaning to older people. And in some books, it is not Adam and Eve. It is Eve and Adam, so it can be shown that males don't take priority over females.

What textbooks is he talking about, exactly, that mention Adam and Eve? I'm beginning to agree that perhaps there really is a problem with the books being used in our schools.

Fortunately, there are brave people who are standing up against this attack of menacing textbooks. The article continues by telling us about the Gablers, a brave Christian family in Texas that reviews school textbooks for accuracy.

Because of the Gablers and others down here in the South, the conservative viewpoint wins out quite a bit. But if we leave the South and we head west, it's a much different story.

The California standards for evaluating social content say, "When ethnic or cultural groups are portrayed, portrayals must not depict differences in customs or lifestyles as undesirable, and must not reflect adversely on such differences."

This is indeed outrageous! If I had kids I'd be furious to know that they weren't allowed to learn that French Canadians live undesirable lifestyles. (Of course I could just introduce them to Dr. No to teach them that but I'm getting off topic.)

So for example, when it comes to learning about Islam, the mistreatment of women is not highlighted. Instead, you will see numerous mentions of Muhammad's name as well as verses from the Koran.

Right. It should read: "There is a religion called Islam that was started by 'some guy' and it uses 'a book.' Practitioners of this religion mistreat their wives." You know, if only Jack Chick wrote our textbooks, we wouldn't have these problems.

And lest you think this article is biased, David, in true CBN fashion, gives the liberals a chance to tell their side of the story. He briefly interviews a history professor from UCLA named Gary Nash. Mentioning that Gary has written textbooks, David feels it important to tell his readers that "Some of his critics say he is distorting history and in the process getting the history of our country all wrong." I feel it important to tell my readers that "some of David's critics say he is a complete moron." But back to the article:

Nash says his books don't bash America.

"I don't know of any historians who want to be historians in order to trash America," he says. "No. I would say they want to be historians to improve America."

But his critics say his books spout a philosophy of multiculturalism, that America was formed from a blending of Indian, West African and European cultures. One of his books says, "In time, this cultural exchange would form the foundation for a new nation, the United States of America."

Good God! Is this Nash guy really saying that some good things might once have happened in this country that didn't involve white Christians? He probably even thinks the cannibalistic Injuns played some sort of meaningful role. No wonder his critics are so upset.

Don't worry, though. Lest you think his article is all doom and gloom, Mr. Brody leaves us with a formula to rethink the way we write textbooks in order to make them more accurate. And for once, I'm going to let him have the last word.

Barton says when writing history, those writing these textbooks might want to look at how the Bible does it.


[ed. note: Barring major tragedy, I'll be back home late Tuesday night and able to resume my normal blogging duties on Wednesday so hopefully you'll check back then. I just pray Mr. Chick hasn't thrown any wild parties in my apartment while I've been away. I'm beginning to second-guess my choice of cat-sitters.]