Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com The Dark Window: October 2004

Prepare to be horrified...

Friday, October 29, 2004

Bay Area Bloggers Throw Down

Several famed Bay Area Bloggers and Readers (and me) gathered last evening in Oakland to prove to the world that Philadelphia no longer has a monopoly on drunken blogging. We'll profile some of the fine folks who showed up over the next several days but for now I leave you with a terrifying glimpse into the high-powered world of Bay Area Political Blogging:



The idiot on the right is me (yes, I always drink my beer through a straw). I'll let the guy on the left retain his secret identity (unless he chooses to reveal it). It's obvious to all but the most liberally-biased media that the girl in the background is overwhelmed by our importance and on her way to alert the paparazzi.

Generik has the rest of the story and several more photos. Note carefully the massive number of beer glasses in certain photos. We will refrain from naming the girl responsible for drinking all of them.


Update: The guy on the left can now safely be revealed. It's John, the Bay City legend behind Blogenlust.

|

Blame The Media!

You've all heard the familiar Wing Nut refrain about liberal media bias and how the mainstream media constantly suppresses facts to help liberal candidates and causes. So just what would those Wing Nuts have us read instead? How about this excellent piece of reporting from NewsMax. It's a story entitled Edwards Parrots New York Times' Fiction.

The novice legislator who wants to be one heartbeat from the presidency either is too stupid to understand the phoniness of the New York Times' latest fiction about Iraq or thinks the American people are too stupid to understand.

I can think of one other possibility involving stupidity that Carl Limbacher and the boys at NewsMax failed to mention.

Or perhaps Democrat airhead apparent John Edwards is just doing his handlers' bidding: the old Democrat trick of repeating a lie often enough until people believe it.

Yeah, that must be it.

Edwards claimed today in Wilmington, Ohio: "These are exactly the kind of explosives terrorists want. They're the dangerous weapons we wanted to keep from falling in the hands of terrorists. And now these explosives are out there, and we have no idea who's got them. Dick Cheney calls that a remarkable success."

He failed to mention that the pro-Democrat Times, whose recent endorsement of the Kerry-Edwards ticket was the nation's most obvious redundancy since the coining of the term "liberal media bias," refused to report reality, which even NBC reported: that the explosives were already missing from Al-Qaqaa when GIs got there a mere one day after Saddam Hussein's fall.

Ah, yes...Reality.

But back to good old liberal unreality for a moment:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - ABC News on Thursday showed video that appeared to confirm that explosives that went missing in Iraq (news - web sites) did not disappear until after the United States had taken control of the facility where they were stored.

ABC said the video was shot by an affiliate TV station embedded with the 101st Airborne Division when members of the division passed through the facility on April 18, nine days after the fall of Baghdad.

So how did our reality-dwelling leader respond to this report? He sent Rudy Giuliani out to say this (via Atrios):

The president was cautious the president was prudent the president did what a commander in chief should do. No matter how you try to blame it on the president the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?

So was Rudy right? Do we blame the troops? Or should we blame the President? Fortunately, one brave man is here to tell us so we don't have to think too hard about it. Take it away, Rush!

"The 3rd Infantry division, these are not slackers. These are heroes. They didn't see the stuff when they got to the Al Qaqaa dump on April the 6th. The 101st Airborne, they're not slackers either, and they didn't find it when we got there on April the 10th. So it continues to be a story largely made up, an old story, by the way. This is not new."

So here's what we have. The Wing Nuts tell us that this story is made up. ABC says it isn't made up so Rudy comes out and blames the troops. Rush says the troops can't be responsible and since that would kind of make it seem like the President was responsible, he blames the media. It's no wonder those on the Right like to think of themselves as the logical ones.

Just for context, here's another bit of Rush wisdom from yesterday's show:

"You know me. I'm a big moon guy, lunar moon, I mean. I like looking up at the moon in the sky, when it rises over the ocean. There are many other moons. I'm not interested in those."

I don't even know where to begin...


You might say he's interested in moons or you might say he's not but if you're the media and say either of those things, then you're probably wrong.

|

Thursday, October 28, 2004

A Message From God

As is our custom here at the Dark Window, we have a special message for you from God. It comes, naturally, via Hal Lindsey's Oracle - the place "where religion and politics mix." Look carefully:



Yes, ladies and gentlemen...God has chosen to speak through Hal Lindsey the prophet via John Rule the cartoonist and his message couldn't be more clear.

Think about it. Would God have you vote for a bad drag queen who wears lipstick, does things that cause him to hang his head in shame, has a two-inch crotch, and uses the Bible to wipe his feet?

The answer is clear. Vote with your heart.

More tomorrow on why Bay Area Bloggers will soon take over the world.

|

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Four Easy Pieces

Have you ever been to the Rant? It's one of those Wing Nut sites that is so bizarre, so wacky, that basically every article you read there is worthy of attention. To prove it, I've randomly clicked upon four Rant articles (with my eyes closed, no less) and shall distill each into its Nut Essence.

First off, we have the Managing Editor of the Rant, Frank Salvato, with a heartwarming piece entitled John Kerry: The Scott Peterson of Politics. Why is John Kerry like a man on trial for killing his wife? Frank never says. Instead, he tells us that Kerry lied (and the Swift Boat Vets proved it) and then gives us this helpful piece of advice:

To Kerry’s supporters who walk around, anger in hand and eyes wide shut, I say wake up! John Kerry has lied all of his life and is still lying today. He’s lying about the security and well being of this nation. If you still choose to support John Kerry after the exposure of all his lies then I beg you not to go to the polls in November. You are either filled with politically created hatred or you are too stupid to vote.

And this, of course, is how a smart voter would look:


Likes to expose things

Next up, we have Matt Grills telling us that Jimmy Carter is a smoking peanut. What does he mean by this? Who the hell knows. But he does make a persuasive argument that Jimmy Carter is terribly stupid by quoting reader comments posted on the Little Green Football blog (and others). Here's one of the most salient:

“Jimmy Carter, failure given human form, has now said that the Revolutionary War was unnecessary. Was this guy really elected president ... during the Cold War?! Far as I heard, his only real accomplishment of note was getting Ronald Reagan elected ... While we work on ways to honor Reagan’s legacy, we should also be working on ways to dishonor Carter. I say we strike him from the record books. His portrait and name should be removed from all lists of presidents, and, if he is ever to be referred to, he shall be called ‘the failed president who has no name.’”

And then Matt, being the legendary columnist that he is, brings it all home with this analysis of what might have been:

Just for a second, let’s live in Carter’s universe: the Revolutionary War didn’t happen because man’s goodness helped him realize war is not the answer. Empire-building continues around the world, slavery is still a respected practice and Jimmy Carter doesn’t become president of anything. He’s just another peanut farmer.

On second thought, maybe that’s not so bad.



The Informed Speculator

Next, we have Chris Adamo with a piece entitled John Kerry’s Real Regard for Religion. After calling John Kerry's comments about Mary Cheney "ham fisted" (I don't even want to know), he tells us this about the Democratic ticket:

If Kerry and Edwards possess so little understanding of the Judeo-Christian foundations upon which this great nation was forged, they cannot possibly comprehend the nature of militant Islam that now seeks to annihilate it.

Brilliant!


Knows about ham-fisting

And finally, we have a delightful piece about Teresa Heinz "(Kerry)" by a fellow named JB Williams. Take it away, JB!

It’s a toss up as to whether Teresa Heinz (Kerry) should be named the new poster child for mad cow disease, or turrets syndrome. But one thing is becoming glaringly obvious; she shouldn’t be First Lady…

And why does JB think that?

Ms. Heinz (Kerry) is like a bad morph of Hillary Clinton and Marge Schott. She has the irreversible nasty socialist temperament of Hillary, and the irresponsible tendency to say the worst possible thing, at the worst possible time, like Marge. In short, she’s a one woman wrecking ball…

But then it gets even better:

Can you imagine her sitting across the table from foreign dignitaries after a cocktail or two? Unfortunately, I can, and it’s frightening…

And who's this cultured man with such in-depth knowledge of cocktails and foreign dignitaries?


The Frightened Sophisticate

So there you have it. Four delightfully informative articles from the Rant. Kind of makes you realize that the Wing Nuts are everywhere. Well, they're certainly at the Rant anyway.

|

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

West Coast Reminder

If you've been reading this blog, Scaramouche, or Roger Ailes, you know that tomorrow evening (Wednesday, October 27th) is the first Bay Area Resident Blogger and Reader drinking/conversation night. We encourage everybody who writes, reads, or enjoys the blogs to come out for an evening of drinks and conversation. The inimitable Scaramouche has promised to liven things up by singing Ashlee Simpson songs until his voice goes.

We'll show up around 6:00 PM at Ben & Nick's Bar & Grill in Oakland's Rockridge district but people are welcome to come anytime (I'm guessing some of us will still be there until at least 9:00 or 10:00 - depending on Scaramouche's singing ability). The bar is located at 5612 College Avenue - just a half block from the Rockridge BART station and only a couple of short blocks from Freeway exits (Hwy 24).

More information tomorrow.

|

Monday, October 25, 2004

Sadly, Older!

It's our good friend Seb's birthday today and, in honor of this fact, we'd like to list our all-time favorite Sadly, No! entries (that were not written by us):







So make sure you head on over and wish Seb a happy birthday!

|

Shopping At The Wing Nut Clearance Rack

Just when you thought we'd exhausted our seemingly limitless supply of Wing Nut fashions, we show up with yet another round of hip new Christian t-shirts from our good friends at Christian Outfitters. You may remember them from some of our previous fashion reviews. As you can tell, though, we're beginning to scrape the bottom of the barrel with this lot. But as we thrive on mediocrity here at the Dark Window, let's jump right in.



Ancient Wing Nut Maxim: "If I'm going down, you're going with me."




Just take a corporate logo and slogan and make them even lamer. Your Savior will love you for it!




Is it just me or do the believers in turning the other cheek always seem to be looking for an excuse to beat the living crap out of somebody?




"Oh, man. You should have seen the Hindu guy's flag. We kicked his ass! Praise Jesus!"




Frankly, when you wear shirts by Christian Outfitters, it's kinda hell with Jesus, too.




Thomas never would have doubted if the Lord had just done an ollie kick-flip.




Wait a minute...USA Tour II?...That means there was a USA Tour I...That means that Joseph Smith was right. That means...Extra wives for everybody!

Tune in next time for more exciting trends in Right Wing fashions.

|

Friday, October 22, 2004

War Of The Worlds: Wing Nut Style

We at the Dark Window have long prided ourselves in bringing you the weirdest, kookiest, and craziest spokespeople the Right has to offer. But as we were looking for fresh material today, we stumbled across a conservative group that puts pretty much everybody else we've discussed so far to shame.

The good people over at BushCountry.org, the ones who bring us the informed and well-reasoned analyses of Glamour Shot Swank and Tammy Wilhite, the godly prophets who gave us one of our favorite warnings of impending doom, have been linking to an article about how the Mark of the Beast is coming soon to an implant near you.

That article came from a conservative news site called Raiders News Update. And while we thought that piece was pretty good, there was another one at RNU we liked even better. It's called Genesis Chapter Six... Again!?.

By Thomas Horn
RNU News Sr. Reporter


Remember that name. You'll see why in a bit.

The article starts off innocently enough, with a fairly straightforward story (from "The Daily Post") about a girl being visited by space aliens.

"Her horror increased after the discovery a month later that she was pregnant."

Now we know how Lucianne Goldberg must have felt.

The Post feature discusses the birth of the infant entity, gray skinned and frail, which was immediately scooped up and taken on board the extraterrestrial ship.

Whereas Jonah, certainly not frail, was scooped up and taken on board the National Review.



Okay, okay, I know what you're thinking. Just another boring story about space aliens and Jonah Goldberg. What's so special about that?

Well, read on, friends, because we're about to take a wonderful turn into the strange world of Wing Nut Landia.

Nonsense you say?

Who, me?

Writing for the conservative news service Raiders News Update, best selling author and researcher Thomas Horn reminds us that "A growing number of Bible scholars believe something unusual is transpiring during so-called alien abduction. They point to Genesis 6 where extraterrestrial visitations and genetic manipulation by supernatural beings may have occurred."

Remember how I told you to remember that name before? Now you see why. Failed blogger Pete M. of the Dark Window wants to point out that the guy writing the article just referenced himself as a source.

And what's in Genesis Chapter Six that "a growing number of Bible scholars" find so alarming? Well, fortunately for all you Scripturally-ignorant liberals out there, Thomas gives us a quote:

"When men began to increase on earth and daughters were born to them, the divine beings saw how beautiful the daughters of men were and they took wives from among those that pleased them....It was then, and later too, that the Nephilim appeared on earth - when the divine beings cohabited with the daughters of men, who bore them offspring. They were the heroes of old, the men of renown." (Genesis, Chapter 6, from the Jewish translation of the Torah.)

Personally, I've always preferred the Fields of the Nephilim, those men of renown who appeared upon the earth in 1984 and bore us great music.

One group, known as "the ancient astronaut school," hold that "divine beings" (B'nai Elohim in Hebrew) were super-intelligent geneticists from outer space that created Homo sapiens by tinkering with primate DNA.

Not surprisingly, the Wing Nuts are not fooled by such childishly ridiculous ideas and put forth their own, far-more believable scenario:

Another more conservative club points to a darker interpretation...Satan (as opposed to aliens) was trying to produce a race of mutant warriors by breeding fallen angels with women."

As Ms Brown's story illustrates, history may be repeating itself.


I think we can safely say that Ms Brown's story illustrates quite a lot of things, Tom.

Thomas goes on to discuss the Raelians (the cloning people Drudge kept linking to last year) and their belief that the ancient divine beings were space aliens who came to earth to perform genetic manipulation upon us. Then he quickly puts them in their place:

Not so fast, the second school of thought says. The aliens did come, and they conducted genetic manipulation that led to the Nephilim. But the visitors weren't galactic good neighbors. They were angels...of the fallen kind...on a quest to steal your soul.

Boy, that's tough. Used to be that the only people we had to worry about stealing our souls were the Democrats. Now we have to worry about fallen angels too.

The theory goes something like this: Very soon after the Fall of man, the protoevangelium (the promise that the seed of the woman would bring forth a child [Jesus] capable of destroying the serpent's [Satan's] power) was given in Genesis 3:15. In response to this promise, supernatural beings (fallen angels) appeared from the heavens and performed reproductive experiments on human women. Why? To pollute their offspring. By corrupting Hebrew DNA, they would cut off the birth line of the Messiah.

A pretty good plan when you think about it. But not good enough to thwart that most lovable of superheroes...God!

Stephen Quayle, in his excellent and highly recommended book, Aliens & Fallen Angels - The Sexual Corruption of the Human Race, suggests that Satan was interbreeding Nephilim to corrupt every living thing God had made - both human and animal.

What's more, Satan nearly succeeded in wiping out redemption. By the time Noah and his kids came along, they were the only humans left with DNA not corrupted by intermarriage with Nephilim and their offspring. This is what was meant by Noah being 'perfect' in his generation (a word commonly used in the Bible to refer to 'unblemished' sacrificial animals). His perfection was physical and DNA related, not moral.

This brings a whole new light to the Great Flood. In order to preserve the human race - and the lineage of the Messiah - God had to destroy all but Noah and his clean DNA.

So I'm thinking that verse in Hebrews that says God chose Noah because of his faith must be a misprint.

But don't celebrate yet.

I promise I won't.

The second school of thought says Satan and his alien-force are not done. They're planning a second wave. A coming invasion. One that's accompanied by "...fearful sights and great signs [read UFOs]...from heaven" (Lk 21:11).

Thank heavens we have such brave conservatives to warn us about this coming invasion! I've already begun constructing my own Cheney-inspired bunker.

Tom closes with one of my favorite (and if you read the Dark Window regularly, you already know, all too common) Wing Nut flourishes: He illuminates the infallible Word of God with a few choice additions:

"And then shall that wicked one be revealed....whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders [UFOs again]....And for this cause God shall send mankind strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [the kind as told by Rael]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Thessalonians 2:8-12).

Thank You, God, for sending us Bush Country to warn us against believing those strong delusions that will make you damn us!

|

Pat Robertson Redux

As is often the case, our friend Bartholomew has taken something we've written and added actual research and intelligent thought. He has an update on Pat Robertson and his strange conversation with President Bush in a piece called A Modest Disaster.

And after you read that, make sure you scroll down and read about the Religious Right's plan to saturate our airwaves in the days leading up to the election in a move that may dwarf Sinclair's airing of Stolen Honor.

|

Thursday, October 21, 2004

The NewsMax Path To Romantic Success

You've probably already read some of the stories about my pathetic dating life here at the Dark Window. Stories about being repeatedly turned down by the lovely S.Z. (with extreme prejudice, I might add). Or the restraining order (there's a reason why she stays anonymous). Or having my overtures rejected by those Holiness girls. So just imagine my relief when I read the following announcement over at NewsMax:

No more heartbreak, ever—a whole new approach to dating, women, and relationships...

Sounds exactly like what I need. Thank God for NewsMax! Reasoned political analysis and life-changing romantic advice!

Anyway, I clicked on the link and found this revolutionary new system developed by a guy named John Alanis. It's called Women Approach You.

Women approach me now but it's usually just to tell me that I'm standing in their way.

"Amazing Free Report, Available Instantly, Reveals Exactly How to Get Beautiful, Desirable Women to Approach YOU First for a Date, No Matter Your Looks, Age or Income!"

Hmmm...I hope this works because S.Z. said she'd only date me if I were 24, looked like Brad Pitt, and made at least $200,000/year.

Dear Friend,

You are seconds away from discovering remarkable, little-known secrets that literally compel desirable women to approach you first. This is not weird, far out magic, or stupid potions, lotions, or pills but simple, easy-to-follow steps that allow you to unlock the "natural attraction" every man possesses, but has never been taught how to "let out"... until now.

Whenever I read a piece at NewsMax that talks about something "every man possesses" being "let out," I get nervous. Really nervous.

Keep it in your pants, Limbacher.

I'm not kidding.

In addition to this Free Report #1 (entitled, "What If Everything You Ever Thought You Knew About Women, Dating and Relationships Was Dead Wrong?", when you enter your name and email I promise to send you an entertaining tip, story or secret about attracting women every single day! And, just to prove I'm "for real," I'll instantly send you these FIVE remarkable FREE "girl-getting" reports, plus one hilarious Bonus Report:

Well, at this point it's painfully obvious that everything I know about women, dating and relationships is dead wrong so I'd better keep reading.

FREE Report #2: How Even the Ugliest Man Can Date the Most Beautiful Women--Why Looks, Age, or Income Just Don't Matter

Are you thinking what I'm thinking? The perfect Christmas present for Seb!

FREE Report #3: Recently "Dumped?" Here's How to Get Her Back!

That one might be nice for Bill O'Reilly.

FREE Report #4: Secrets to Being a "Bar Star" -- How to Get Desirable Women to Pick YOU Up at a Bar

Hey...This is perfect for our Bay Area Blog Enthusiasts drinking night next week. With my luck, though, the only person who'll try to pick me up will be celebrity-blogger Roger Ailes.

Don't get me wrong...I like Roger...Just not like that.

FREE Report #5: Why You MUST Get Rid of All "Bad Investments" to Be Successful With Women

I have to ditch the Dark Window? Well, no real loss there.

FREE Report #6: Which of the Three Types of Women Should You Be Dating?

Given that this report is available for free at NewsMax, I'm thinking the answer to that question has to be (1) women looking for green cards, (2) mail-order brides, or (3) the type of woman you inflate. In other words, a weekend with Ted and Yosef.

Bonus Report: Why I Buy Soft Toilet Paper!

John, I'm going to be real honest with you, buddy. I don't want to know why you buy soft toilet paper.

I'll give you my uncensored, "Women Approach You Now" reports as well as my daily email that is literally read throughout the world. I'm known as the "King of Let 'Em Come to You" for a reason... tune in each day as I reveal hilarious secret after secret... you'll laugh, learn, and most of all say to yourself, "At last there's a guy who tells it like it really is!"

Literally read throughout the world? That can only mean one thing. Seb's already a subscriber.

WARNING: if you are easily offended, hyper-sensitive, or overly worried about what all the "politically correct masses" think about you, then this report and these emails may NOT be for you. If, however, you are a bright, fun, open minded guy who wants the "real scoop" on how to get beautiful women chasing you for a change, then you're in for a real treat.

That's easy...Steal their handbags. Then when they chase you down and tackle you, try to make out with them. That's been my strategy so far.

You should also know all my emails are discreet with no subject lines that even mention "dating" or "meeting women." No one except you will know what these emails are about, unless you let them. And let me be perfectly clear, this is NOT "porn" or "adult content" or anything sleazy like that.

Cool! I can read them at work!

Now all I need is a job.

Either way, I'm signed up now. Well, Seb is anyway (no need to thank me, friend). Now I can sit back, relax, and get ready to fight 'em off with a stick.

Thanks, John! And thanks, NewsMax!


-John Alanis
"King of Let 'em Come to You"


And to prove he's the king, here's his signature:



Just think...That'll soon be Seb's my signature tagline too!

|

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Pat Robertson Told Him So

CNN has a bizarre article up this evening about Pat Robertson and how he warned George W. Bush that going to war in Iraq would be disastrous.

NEW YORK (CNN) -- The founder of the U.S. Christian Coalition said Tuesday he told President George W. Bush before the invasion of Iraq that he should prepare Americans for the likelihood of casualties, but the president told him, "We're not going to have any casualties."

That sounds like our George.

Pat Robertson, an ardent Bush supporter, said he had that conversation with the president in Nashville, Tennessee, before the March 2003 invasion. He described Bush in the meeting as "the most self-assured man I've ever met in my life."

Self-assured, mulishly boneheaded...Tomayto, tomahto.

"You remember Mark Twain said, 'He looks like a contented Christian with four aces.' I mean he was just sitting there like, 'I'm on top of the world,' " Robertson said on the CNN show, "Paula Zahn Now."

That wasn't the world, Pat.

"And I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you had better prepare the American people for casualties.' "

Is it just me or does Pat sound like he's about eight years old?

Robertson said the president then told him, "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."

That's just the kind of steadfast, optimistic, non-reality-based leadership we need in the White House!

Robertson, the televangelist who sought the Republican presidential nomination in 1988, said he wishes Bush would admit to mistakes made.

"I mean, the Lord told me it was going to be A, a disaster, and B, messy," Robertson said. "I warned him about casualties."

The Lord's told Pat lots of interesting things. Looks like He finally got one right. Hooray for God!

Even as Robertson criticized Bush for downplaying the potential dangers of the Iraq war, he heaped praise on Bush, saying he believes the president will win the election and that "the blessing of heaven is on Bush."

Because, you know, God really loves guys who never admit they were wrong and who make disastrous decisions without thinking through the consequences.


God's Man for Our Time

|

BARBARians At The Trough

Have you ever wondered how we come up with the brilliant stuff we write here? Well, our secret is easy. We're always drunk when we write blog entries! (Seriously, have you ever actually read the stuff we write?)

And now we're inviting you to share in the fun and come join us for an evening of drinking and meeting other BARBARians (Bay Area Resident Bloggers And Readers). Don't say it...Scaramouche is the genius who came up with that acronym. I suggested BABES (Bay Area Blog EnthusiastS) but he worried that people who showed up to meet BABES might be disappointed to see the two of us instead.

Conspiracy-minded people among you might say that this is simply a shameless imitation of Atrios' Drinking Liberally.

It is.

So come join me, our legendary co-host Scaramouche, and several other celebrity Bay Area bloggers (TBA) and readers next Wednesday, October 27th.

We'll be meeting at 6:00 PM at Ben & Nick's Bar & Grill in Oakland's Rockridge district and hang around until we get sick of each other (or get kicked out - we are, after all, Puppeteers in Satan's Army). The bar is located at 5612 College Avenue - just a half block from the Rockridge BART station and only a couple of short blocks from Freeway exits (Hwy 24).

Jerry Rice had been planning to come until he got traded to Seattle yesterday so we'll have to try to line up other, better-known celebrities instead.

Scaramouche and I will provide more details later.

Hope to see you there!

|

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

The Mystique Of Barbara Stock

The latest round of columns over at GOP USA is up and they're off the hook. My personal favorite is the new one by one of the up-and-coming stars of the Right: Barbara Stock. It's called The Mystique of Osama Bin Laden.

How many times during these last weeks have Americans heard the words, "If President Bush had just not lost sight of Bin Laden and not let him escape from Tora Bora, this war on terror would be over."

Zero. But that's not going to stop Barbara!

What a foolish and ignorant statement.

We here at the Dark Window would tend to agree, Barb.

Anyway, let's watch our Queen of Mystique demolish her straw man with amazing valor.

Osama bin Laden is a figurehead who has been made far more important than he is in the world's war against terrorism. It is unknown at this time if Osama is alive or dead and it doesn't seem to matter to the terrorists. Terrorists don't need bin Laden to carry on their war. Alive Osama is a mystery and dead he is a martyr but either way the war will go on. Terrorists do not need some group called "al Qaeda" to carry on the killing.

How much you wanna bet that if Bush captures Osama, Barbara will be singing a different tune? Judging by her hairstyle, I'm thinking that tune will be by Ratt.


Barbara Stock: Queen of Mystique

Bin Laden's followers have indeed flooded into Iraq. They are also dying in large numbers in Iraq. Splinter terrorist groups have taken on their own names such as "The Iraqi Freedom Front." Al Qaeda is perhaps now seen as a failure instead of some great power.

Perhaps. And Barbara Stock is perhaps now seen as a brilliant woman.

Not surprisingly, her speculating isn't yet finished.

Does it really matter if Bin Laden is dead or alive, free, or in prison?

Not if your name is George W. Bush.

It may to us but it doesn't really matter to the terrorists of the world. I suspect if he were killed they would simply bury him and go on. The mystique of a man like Osama is far more important than the man himself. Perhaps the terrorists have themselves killed Osama because he has failed.

That last line pretty much mocks itself so we'll just leave it at that tonight.

|

Monday, October 18, 2004

Debbie Does David Hasselhoff

Remember our dear sweet friend Debbie Daniel? The one who told us that since George W. Bush has been ordained by God (it's in the Bible, people!), John Kerry is wrong to challenge the President?

Well, she's decided to expound upon those thoughts and has a groundbreaking new column out entitled O Ye of Little Faith.

It is so annoying to read all the carping and complaining by people in our self-proclaimed Christian nation, who have put their faith and trust in Jesus Christ for their salvation and promise of eternal life, but for the things of this world, they want to slap George Bush up-side-the-head, and say "God, you gave us the wrong man."

It's a pretty neat trick. Put your eternal faith and trust in Jesus' hands and your worldly faith and trust in George's and you don't really have to worry about anything ever again.

I read a column today in my hometown newspaper and was so disheartened by the commentary that seemed to take into account every single error George Bush has made, and I trembled at the thought of the columnist being so critical of every detail of Bush's performance as President and then questioned again his service in the Air National Guard.

What business does a newspaper columnist have criticizing a President's actions?

But it wasn't because of what the columnist said; it's because of who the columnist claims to be . . . a child of God.

And even the dimmest light knows that you cannot truly be a Christian if you criticize George W. Bush.

Friends, our God can use just about anyone He pleases to lead this nation, because HE IS GOD, and when God is in control, it doesn't matter who's driving the car.

I like this theology. God is kind of like K.I.T.T. from Knight Rider. That would make Satan (or maybe John Kerry) K.A.R.R. and George W. Bush is (obviously) David Hasselhoff. Doo doo doo doo...

The entire article was a slap in the face, not only to George Bush, but if we truly believe what the Bible says . . . our Heavenly Father just got a whack in the face, too.

Think about that one for a bit.

George Bush professes to be a man of God, and if you have a problem with that, I think you have more of an argument with your Maker than you do with your President.

The more I read Debbie's articles, the more I think her problem is with Maker's Mark.

George Bush has convinced me that he has sought guidance from His Lord since he put his hand on the Bible January 20, 2001. He made an oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and would to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help him God." Period.

Not, so help him, John Kerry. Not, so help him, Terry McAuliffe. And certainly, not so help him, Ted Kennedy.


Is Debbie saying that those guys don't seek guidance from Their Lord or that they haven't taken the oath of office to be President of the United States? Either way...



Many times people don't recognize greatness. "I have knocked on the door of this man's soul, and found someone home," said Democratic leader, Zell Miller, as he spoke of George W. Bush at the recent Republican convention.

I agree with Debbie that Zell Miller's statement is a good example of one of those times somebody doesn't recognize greatness.

Some will say to me, "Well, you act as if we shouldn't question anything the President does? No, I question whether or not you prayed for this President first before you started foaming at the mouth with criticism. This man certainly prays to God for you - I'll believe that to my dying day. I do not believe George Bush does anything out of the realm of prayer.

We strive to present you with the weirdest of the weird here at the Dark Window and that, ladies and gentlemen, may be the weirdest yet.

O "we" of little faith. I only ask that you get "Prayed-Up" before this election, and while you're down there on your knees, you might throw out a question to God and ask, "Is it really you, Lord, who has led George Bush?" And if you can come away from the quietness and seriousness of that moment and believe that George Bush has acted solely, without any regard to his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, then I will concede you are absolutely right.

Somehow I'm guessing you won't really concede that, Debbie.

The article's author accuses George Bush of being so identified with the Christian right that his character appears above suspicion. What about identifying him with our Heavenly Father and see what you come up with, Mr. Columnist? Why don't you make that association?

Yeah! What kind of commie columnist doesn't compare George W. Bush to Almighty God?

Do you not see that Satan has used you in a fight for what God has ordained all along? Go ahead and be a puppeteer for Satan's army . . . he has many volunteers, but it takes a brave man to stand alone; it takes a courageous warrior to look the enemy in the eye.

Wow. By Debbie's logic, pretty much everybody who reads the Dark Window is a puppeteer for Satan's army (PSA). Who, exactly, are we controlling, though? Ah, who cares. I'm already painting a PSA on the back of my jacket (right beneath the anarchy sign).

Then the writer went off on a comparison of George Bush to Gregory Peck's Atticus Finch or Gary Cooper's Sheriff in High Noon . . . that they wouldn't do this. (???) And the columnist ends the "screen actor to presidential" comparisons with: Pathetic.

Gee, how many times can Bush be called "pathetic?"


A lot, Debbie. A lot.

Oh, dear Lord in Heaven, please forgive us, for we know not what we do. We're going to pay a high price for this war . . . not the one on terrorism as much as the one we've waged against God.

I'm sorry, but we've slapped God in the face and I'm not sure we're worthy of having a man like George Bush to lead us.



But please know that if Mr. Kerry becomes President, don't think for a moment I won't be praying for him . . . probably more than you could imagine.

There are a lot of things you do, Debbie, that I have a really hard time imagining. So I'm just going to take you at your word here.

|

Win $2500 From Frederick!!!*

Our friend Frederick is having a contest and we encourage all of you to participate. Mainly because Frederick is offering major cash prizes. Here's the gist:

In George Orwell's 1984, the three fundamental tenets emblazoned on Oceania's Ministry of Truth were:

War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.

As thousands have noted, these principles guide the Bush administration. I've been looking for the best statements of these principles by Bush or other high-ranking members of his administration. Bush actually said the first one:

[W]hen we talk about war, we're really talking about peace.

George W. Bush, June 18, 2002


Frederick goes on to say:

So I'm throwing down the gauntlet. Can anyone come up with a statement from someone in the Bush administration more or less equivalent to (1) "Freedom is Slavery" and (2) "Ignorance is Strength"?

If he likes your answers, Frederick will award you with a cash prize (see his blog for details). So step right up and take your best shot.

* For the sake of brevity and sensationalism, we took the liberty of deleting the decimal point from our title.

|

Thursday, October 14, 2004

A Very Special Date With Bill O'Reilly

In case you haven't yet heard, a female news producer at Fox News has just filed a lawsuit against Bill O'Reilly, claiming that he sexually harrassed her. The lawsuit is filled with transcripts of conversations (evidently taped) O'Reilly had with the producer, a woman named Andrea Mackris. The conversations are incredibly explicit and, given O'Reilly's darling status with the religious conservatives, bound to be problematic. If you want all the lurid details, you can find them (including O'Reilly's talk of a sex show in Thailand, telling Mackris what he'd like to do to her in the shower, or describing a vibrator that he owned) here.

Obviously we have no way of knowing about the charges against O'Reilly but we think the conversations themselves are quite enlightening and decided to present a couple of excerpts in juxtaposition with glowing reviews of O'Reilly's book, The No Spin Zone, from TownHall.com.

Quotes from the review are in green and O'Reilly is in steamy red.

In The No Spin Zone, O'Reilly teaches what he believes are some of our great American values: common sense, decency, pride, self-respect, individual choice and compassion. He also illuminates some values that are not so great: lies, rationalizations, equivocation, perjury, spin, self-centeredness and not taking responsibility for one's actions or life.

During the course of Defendant BILL O'REILLY's sexual rant, it became clear that he was using a vibrator upon himself, and that he ejaculated. Plaintiff was repulsed.

Immediately after climaxing, Defendant BILL O'REILLY launched into a discussion concerning how good he was during a recent appearance on "The Tonight Show" with Jay Leno: "It was funny, they used a big clip of me...Right after Brokaw and Brokaw was absolutely the most unfunny guy in the world, and the audience got a big charge out of my...It was good."


Big charge out of his what, I wonder. But back to TownHall.

O'Reilly is against the lack of guilt, the lack of remorse, and the lack of outrage some individuals exhibit while stealing, cheating, spinning the truth, or blaming others for their shortcomings. He is disgusted with despicable public morality and the lack of responsibility for individual misbehavior. He is against the media's non-judgmental acceptance of uncivilized behavior; that is, the kind of "openness and tolerance" which lead to adults having sex with children and other bizarre behavior. These are not, he writes, psychologically healthy American values.

After climaxing, Defendant BILL O'REILLY again boasted that none of the women he'd engaged in sexual relations with would ever tell:

"Nobody'd believe 'em...they wouldn't [tell] anyway, I can't imagine any of them ever doing that 'cuz I always made friends with women before I bedded them down."



Makes friends with women before bedding them down?

Read this book and revive the values you've been suppressing. Your life will be energized and you can include yourself among those Americans who make a difference. Values, ethics and morals... it's what the non-material life is all about.

Defendant BILL O'REILLY concluded stating:

"You know, Mackris, in these days of your celibacy and your hibernation this is good for you to have a little fantasy outlet, you know, just to keep it tuned, keep that sensuality tuned until you know Mr. Right comes along and then you can put him in traction...I'm trying to tell you, this is good for your mental health."


In the immortal words once attributed to us, we can't add anything to that!

|

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

"The Best War-time Presidential Cabinet In The History Of Our Nation"

As I said yesterday, we're having some computer problems here at the Dark Window that preclude our doing in-depth searching for the wackiest of the Wing Nuts. So instead, we're pretty much just going to mock the first Wing Nut we come across for the next few days. Today's special guest comes courtesy of The Rant. His name is Robert Lanzotti and he's written a column entitled When Ruthlessness Is Synonymous With Righteousness.

Robert starts off with a heart-warming description of the atomic bomb being dropped on Hiroshima.

In an instant, an entire city and its population of people had been destroyed. Ultimately, 200,000 men, women, and children of Hiroshima would perish. More than 100,000 were instantly incinerated or killed by the wind and another 100,000 would die later as a result of injuries and radiation. Three days later, another atomic bomb would detonate over Nagasaki, killing an additional 70,000 Japanese people. Ruthless or Righteous?

This being The Rant, you can probably guess the answer to that one already. That's right...RIGHTEOUS!

This column, of course, isn't about World War II and after describing the arguments in favor of using the atomic bomb in Japan, Robert continues by discussing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the way Ronald Reagan defeated the nukes of the Soviet Union by spending more money. Unfortunately, other, less wholesome, countries (like Canada) got nuclear weapons and now everybody's trying to get in on the game.

We now have clear evidence that black marketing of nuclear weapon components, materials, and technological secrets have been delivered to rogue nations. For example, we are now aware that information and nuclear materiel had indeed been passed from Pakistan to Libya. North Korea exports only one commodity, weaponry, and that to rogue nations who harbor terrorists. Iran is clearly on a ‘go to hell, we’re building a bomb’ mission, and is there any doubt that radical Muslims are not ruthless enough to use nuclear weapons against Israel or America if an opportunity arises? Is it righteous to stop these dangerous initiatives? Is ruthlessness justified to prevent a catastrophic attack if intelligence determines an attack is immanent?

Well, if your name is George W. Bush, the best option is to put those problems on the back burner and go after countries without weapons of mass destruction.

Being in the midst of a presidential election is certainly an untimely event for a commander-in-chief who is leading his country in a war on terror. It is a necessary diversion, but still, an untimely one to be sure. Decisions to fight terrorism in the most effective way, for example…pursuing more ruthless offensive strategies while campaigning for reelection could very well be political suicide for President Bush.

Which is probably why our steadfast leader has decided to put off any major offensives until after the election. Next time you hear about how Bush is going to do whatever it takes to "defeat terrorism," whether it's popular or not, you may want to rememeber that.

It could likewise bring to an end to an experienced and likely the best war-time presidential cabinet in the history of our nation.

No need to worry about Iraq, folks. The best war-time cabinet in history has everything under control.

The commander-in-chief’s opponent and his party obviously abhor taking the offense to the enemy. They are the anti-war party that believes we are in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, a very strange notion since Iraq is the hotbed of radical Muslim terrorism. If we defeat them there, we defeat them everywhere.

That's really great logic. Spend all your resources invading a country with no weapons of mass destruction while ignoring two very dangerous nations working feverishly to develop them. No wonder people (well, Robert) are calling this the best war-time presidential cabinet ever!

I doubt if the word preemptive is even in a democrat’s dictionary. If it is, you can be sure that its meaning is presented in more sensitive manner with surrounding words like appeasement, negotiation, and coalition.

I just looked in my democrat's dictionary to see if Robert was right and found another fun word: Moron. It's also presented in a sensitive manner with surrounding words like "greatest war-time presidential cabinet in history" and "if we defeat them there, we defeat them everywhere."

Conversely, the word ruthless probably does exist in a democrat’s dictionary, but its definition: having no pity, showing no mercy nor compassion refers not to enemy combatants; rather, it defines the manner in which democrats attack republican ideologies and agendas. The truth is, if the liberal left could be as ruthless in their approach to our terrorists enemies as they are to their political opponents, we truly could be a “united” country.

Translation: John Kerry beat Bush in a debate and is such a pansy that he won't develop bunker-busting nukes.

Prosecution of our war against terrorism is a race against the inevitable. If we show resolve, backbone, and ruthlessness….we will inevitably win.

I wonder if Robert means this in the "Soviet Union showing resolve, backbone, and ruthlessness and winning in Afghanistan" kind of way. Or maybe in the "Germany showing resolve, backbone, and ruthlessness and winning in the Soviet Union" kind of way. Or maybe in the...okay, you get the picture.

If we take any other approach, we will inevitably lose.


Master of Historical Analysis
(By the way, I hate to ask...but what is Robert doing with his hands in that picture?)

Our enemies are patient and determined. Their timeline is not in terms of days and months; rather, they think in terms of decades. They are aware that our greatest vulnerability is our impatience as a people and the divisiveness that currently exists in our two party political system. Make no mistake about it, the only thing radical Muslims hate more than infidels is….determined and powerful infidels. And that’s why ruthlessness is synonymous with righteousness. That is why it is so important that our resolute war policy remain intact, and, in fact, become even more ruthless when our righteous presidential nominee wins the election and remains our commander-in-chief.

Righteousness through ruthlessness. That, ladies and gentlemen, is our Wing Nut slogan of the day.

|

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Rush Job

We're experiencing some fairly miserable computer problems here at the Dark Window and only have intermittent internet access at the moment. Since this makes scouring the earth for the craziest Wing Nuts impossible, we'll simply present a couple of Rush's "pearls of wisdom" (that's what he calls them) from Monday's radio show. Think of it as a shorter, sweeter Dark Window experience.

"We've got some lame brain who planted trees in Kenya who wins the Nobel Peace Prize, who then comes out and says that AIDS is manufactured to wipe out black people. Meanwhile, George W. Bush has liberated 50 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan, and doesn't even qualify for the Nobel Peace Prize. It's absolutely absurd."

Yeah, how they overlooked Bush in this year's Nobel contest is beyond me.

"Anybody that doesn't know by now that oil is the fuel of the engine of freedom and democracy around the world just doesn't want to get it."

And Halliburton's just the pipeline to spread it!

"You know where poverty is in this country? Immigrants. Illegal and legal. The vast majority of poverty is among the immigrant class in this country, not the middle class of the United States."

What do immigrants and poverty have in common in Wing Nut Landia? They're both un-American and should never be seen.

"Bush is the only one who's funded stem cell research, #1. Number 2, there's no evidence whatsoever that stem cell research is going to cure anything."

Talk about wanting to have it both ways. Hmmmm...That could probably describe Rush now that I think about it...

"Nobody had better make up their mind about anything based on a poll, which is what I think the objective of certain people who engage in polling. Most people a, are not people who make up their minds on their own. They always run their decisions by somebody else before they make them, even in a restaurant. You're all looking at the menus, and somebody sitting at the table says, 'What are you going to get?"

You know what that means...John Kerry's ahead!


Thank God for oil!

Okay, so that was short but not particularly sweet. Our next story, on the other hand, is sweet indeed. Read on.

|

My New Hero

I would like to introduce everybody to my new hero. This is just the kind of hare-brained stunt we have long contemplated here at the Dark Window.

EDMOND, Oklahoma (Reuters) -- An Oklahoma man desperate to save his marriage by appearing like a hero to his wife ended up in police custody on suspicion of staging a crime. He hired "burglars" and foiled their fake robbery attempt, police said on Friday.

I've actually thought about doing some variation of this to impress S.Z.. I could entice Reverend Swank or Pastor Giles over to her blog and then foil them. I'd be a hero!

Trent Spencer, 27, of Edmond, north of Oklahoma City, was charged this week with the misdemeanor crime of filing a false report, said police spokeswoman Glynda Chu.

His only real crime was that he loved too much.

According to police, Spencer, a high school teacher, paid two students $100 each to break into his house and try to make off with a stereo.

Hell, for that much money, I could probably get Mike Adams too!

The masked students tied his wife with duct tape and her husband was in the house just in time to foil the supposed crime, police said.

With my luck, my computer would act up again just as Doug Giles was about to wreak havoc.

Police said Spencer attacked the two in a choreographed fight, even hitting one with a board that he had cut to break in half. The plan was going well until his wife freed herself and called police, something Spencer did not anticipate, police said.

This man is brilliant, I'm telling you. You have no idea how many wheels this story has set in motion...

|

Sunday, October 10, 2004

Please Stand By

The Dark Window is currently experiencing some fairly severe technical difficulties. We are working to correct the problem and will be back with more Wing Nuts just as soon as we possibly can. Thank you.

- The Management

|

Thursday, October 07, 2004

Debbie Does Debates

Everybody's talking about the Vice Presidential debate and our dear sweet friend Debbie Daniel didn't want to be left out. But she's still so mad about last week's Presidential "debate" that she's written about that instead. Her towering treatise of the intellect is entitled The Attempted Lynching of a President.

I don't know who the masked man was that showed up at the Presidential debate last week, but even George Bush had the same look on his face that several million other people had . . . "Who is this guy?"

Hey, that's not a mask. Karl Rove's face really looks like that.

Well, that was John Kerry, the debater. Tomorrow . . . who knows who he will be? After rehearsing for hours on end, it was good that he could win the evening's Oscar for Best Performance Portraying a Professional Politician.

And the winner was . . . John F. Kerry.

Yes, turns out John Kerry's not a politician from Massachusetts at all. He's a stage actor from Des Moines, Iowa.

Someone asked me the next day what happened to "my guy" in the debate? I said, "Well I think he did exceptionally well considering he had been out all day tending to the needs of hurricane victims for the fourth time in Florida, and before his day got started, he was told of 38 children blown to pieces in Iraq."

The poor, poor dear. How could he be expected to do well when 38 little bastards had the nerve to get killed while he was trying to prep for the debate? And that after he'd administered first aid to three hurricane victims and rebuilt a damaged roof. I say we give him a do-over, everybody. Seriously. Cut the guy some slack. He did keep telling us his job was hard work, remember?

So realizing all "that" I'm not sure there's a human being alive that could have gone through such a day and then raced to a debate to have an imbecile stand with his hair perfectly coiffed, fingernails manicured and tell the world what a failure you are.

Evidently because you'd be standing there realizing that you're a, you know, a failure.

But George Bush would not use any of this as an excuse, yet John Kerry had the nerve to tell us just days before that he was extremely "tired" on that late night when he "misspoke" about "voting for the $87 billion before he voted against it."

Yeah, George would never use that as an excuse. Good thing Debbie's there to do it for him. You'd think that somebody as well-informed as our Debbie would have seen this bit from Matt Drudge, though. The one that reads "Bush inner circle suggests Bush visit with Hurricane victims earlier in day was emotionally draining, contributed to "tired" appearance in debate..."

All the man has had to do is show up at campaign stumps all over the country and at least try to get his stories straight. He hasn't shown up for his real job as a Senator all year, and then has the audacity to stand before the President of the United States and "slap him in the face" by accusing him of doing such a poor job as our leader.

How dare that French-like traitor try to debate our leader during a nationally televised debate! That's beyond the pale!

"Ladies and Gentleman," I ask you, "is that 'style?'" I was mortified to have my President on television in front of the entire world talked to and lectured as a child. Do we not have any shame that we would present ourselves like that before entire nations that look to us for leadership and guidance? I'm sorry, that's not style . . . that's a very small person.

All of Debbie's pent-up anger makes me wonder if she isn't frustrated by another "very small person" as well.

Mr. Kerry, to use that particular forum to disgrace a President during a time of war certainly does not give you points for "style." Give me a break, the only thing styled that night was your hair.

Don't worry, ladies and gentlemen! A quick look at Debbie's hair shows that she's not being hypocritical here:


Debbie Daniel: Unstyled, Unleashed

I'm sure it would have been easy for George Bush to respond in kind, but he didn't. After such a somber day, I'm sure his heart wasn't into "ripping you apart" or taking you to the woodshed, as we know he can do.

Right. I'm glad he recognized that a debate is no place to respond to things your opponent is saying about you.

But he bit his lip, clenched his jaws, and oh, yes, pursed his lips - probably outraged at your presentation as a man seeking the highest office in the land.

On this point, Debbie, you and I are in complete agreement!

Even with all the pundits calling it a victory "on style" for John Kerry, and "substance" for George Bush, I am learning that "style" is a nice way of saying, "Kerry has mastered the art of deceit." I won't be so nice . . . he's mastered the art of lying.

Last time I checked, "all the pundits" weren't actually saying that.

It was obvious that Mr. Kerry and Jim Lehrer had colluded to hold their own "mock trial" in front of the world and were taking great pride in their effort to bring the President to his knees.

This seems to be a new meaning of the word "obvious" that I haven't seen before.

That was no debate; it was a presidential lynching. Jim Lehrer of PBS played the lawyer, and John Kerry, the "camouflaged chameleon," acted as both judge and jury. And if you saw the "pleasured" look on Kerry's face, he was out for the kill . . . and wanted to be the one to do it.

I certainly wouldn't want to speculate about Ms. Daniel's private life but her use of the word "pleasured" in this context is somewhat disturbing.

At first I told myself, "No, this couldn't happen in America," but my fellow citizens, you witnessed a "court trial and sentencing" of your own President.

"Judge" Kerry had already made up his mind about the verdict, so it was just a matter of enjoying himself for at least 90 minutes before he and Mr. Lehrer put the rope around the President's neck, and both took the reins to slowly pull the horse out from under the President, delightfully awaiting the "hanging."

Let us analyze what Debbie has just told us. According to her advanced wisdom, it was wrong for John Kerry to believe he was right about the issues and that the President was wrong about them – and it was especially wrong for him to believe this during a debate.

Let that one sink in for a while because it's earned Debbie an automatic nomination to our Wing Nut of the Year contest finals.

I understand that on the stage after the "farce" was over, that both Messieurs Lehrer and Kerry gave each other a nod and wink of "job well done."

I'm wondering if Debbie knows what that wink of "job well done" actually looks like.

"There's trouble I say . . . trouble in River City," and none of us seemed to "get it" at the time.

We found ourselves wondering what happened to the President; why the grimaces, the biting of the lip, the tightness of the jaw. He was being "snookered" and we didn't even know it.

How was George to know there'd be a guy asking questions and another guy answering them in a manner that questioned George's record? How could anybody have known that?

Once again we showed our ugly side to the world; and for those who want us dead, we gave them great joy in watching our great leader belittled. We let our soldiers see their commander-in-chief reprimanded by a low grade Senator.

Hopefully we've learned our lesson and won't let the soldiers watch any more of these so-called debates. Better yet, why don't we make sure the debates aren't televised at all?

What causes me to tremble is the behavior of a man who has shown disdain for a position God ordained. It is perilous to his own well-being . . . not to speak of what he's done to bring the country down. Mr. Kerry . . . if you had an ounce of decency in your heart, you would change your course of action immediately.

Yes, Mr. Kerry! Stop trying to win the Presidency because God has already ordained that our George is the only man for the job.

You may win the vote . . . but, sir, you will certainly lose your soul.

Run against Dubya and you're going straight to hell. The choice is yours, Senator.

There's a scripture in Romans 13:1-5 that sums it up best. And please note: these are not the words of this columnist; check out the author yourself.

"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrong doer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment, but also because of conscience."


I think Debbie's saying President Bush should act as an agent of God's wrath and strike Kerry down for daring to challenge him. Nothing crazy about that.

I don't know how much longer God is going to put up with our foolishness. For anyone who truly believes George W. Bush was selected by the Supreme Court . . . think again. You just read . . . "for there is no authority except that which God has established."

But...But...But...Debbie...That means if Kerry wins, then he has also been established by God and you'll have to repeat your argument all over again four years from now to make sure no Republicans run against him.

Think on these things.

Because apparently Debbie hasn't had a chance to do that yet.

|

Say Uncle!

First it was Seb, then it was Vox, and then even Retardo decided to try it. Yes, dear readers, it seems that people just can't get enough of using their blogs to take practically unprovoked shots at your innocent and very humble host of the Dark Window.

Well, there's a new gnat in town and it's our friend Brad from Uncle Horn Head. After winning a sucker bet (it was rigged) for a 6-pack of his favorite beer (Coors), he decided that he wanted to try to get a second round out of me. I decided to go easy on him (I mean have you seen his blog?) and agreed that I'll buy him another six Silver Bullets if my Raiders end their season before his Eagles (the way Kerry Collins is throwing, Golden, CO has already recorded the new sale in their ledgers). But somehow the self-proclaimed good Uncle, that tiresome Manchester man, wants more. He wants a tie-breaker in the event that we, well, tie.

If any of you have any suggestions, I'd love to hear them. If not, I'm going to suggest we decide the winner by which of us can convince Michelle Malkin to intern the other first.

|

Hands

I always hate to support those big faceless blogs when I could be supporting little faceless ones but this piece about Ann Coulter is one of the funniest, meanest things I've read in a long time.

|

Wednesday, October 06, 2004

Thank You!

I would like to offer my most heartfelt thanks to everybody who dropped by to offer birthday wishes and kind words about the Dark Window yesterday. I was greatly touched by all the fantastic comments and encouraging words. Rest assured that in spite of the fact that you read the Dark Window, you're the coolest, smartest, and wittiest blog readers out there.

While we're on the subject of birthdays, today is Bartholomew's so make sure you drop by and wish him well. He writes one of my very favorite blogs in which he presents fascinating (and often truly bizarre) stories about religion that you won't find anyplace else. If you don't read him regularly, you should.

And now back to the business at hand...Mocking Wing Nuts!

|

A Vote For Kerry Is A Vote For The Draft

Whether you're talking about last night's Vice Presidential debate or the dive bar down the street, there's one topic on everybody's lips: What the hell is going to happen with American involvement in Iraq? Well, not surprisingly, our good friend Joseph Farah has an entirely new take on the issue with a piece called Like the draft? Vote Kerry.

John Kerry muttered something about President Bush bringing about a backdoor draft through the use of National Guardsmen in Iraq.

Nice choice of words already. I'm picturing Kerry and Farah sitting on red glitter barstools in a greasy diner when John turns to Joe and grumbles about the poor excuse for coleslaw they're eating and oh, by the way, that jerk Bush is planning to bring back the draft.

I've got news for you.

You always do, Joe. You always do. That's why we love World Net Daily so much.

If you want to see the draft reinstated, vote for John Kerry.

To be honest with you, I've always figured the draft would be something Farah would support. Kind of like he'd spin his barstool towards you, leer menacingly for a moment while he finished a French fry, and then mutter, "Damn kids today. 'Bout time somebody taught them some responsibility."

But now I'm putting words in his mouth and since I'm not Fox News, I'd better just let him continue.

"Why do you say that?" you ask.

Because if John Kerry is elected president, there is going to be a mass exodus from the U.S. military services.


Who needs evidence? Not Dick Cheney, not George W. Bush, and certainly not Joseph Farah!

Anyone who can get out will get out.

Uh huh.

Re-enlistment levels will reach all-time lows – at least since the Clinton administration.

That's one of the greatest statements I've ever read. Let me translate for Joe. All-time = 3.5 years.

Nothing would be more demoralizing to U.S. servicemen than a Kerry victory. After all, this is the man who tells them they are fighting "the wrong war at the wrong time." This is the man who has opposed nearly every defense expenditure that has come before him in the last 20 years he has served in the U.S. Senate. This is the man who made a national name for himself by condemning troops on the battlefield in Vietnam as war criminals.

Yet Kerry will not be free to cut and run from Iraq as many of his supporters hope. He will have to play tough – at least for awhile.

This is a little confusing to me. According to Joe, everybody (including his supporters) thinks Kerry will be weak and "cut and run" from Iraq but in reality, he will do the opposite. Does this mean the U.S. servicemen (Farah's term) would rather he didn't play it tough? Or is Farah saying that the loyalty of our soldiers lies not with protecting their country but with a particular political leader? Maybe I'm a little slow here but that seems to come awfully close to maligning our troops.

Listen very carefully to what he's saying. Our troops do not support our country or our way of life. They support a Republican President and will leave if he's not reelected.

You tell me how he's going to do that with military men leaving the first chance they get?

That's right. He will be forced to push for conscription.


Because in Wing Nut Land, there's only one thing to do once you make a ridiculous assertion. Make an even more ridiculous assertion based on the first. I'm a little surprised Farah didn't go on to say that our nation would undergo a new sexual revolution after being torn apart by domestic strife caused by John Kerry's draft.

So what would Kerry do? Could he afford to surrender in the face of massive defections by the troops? Would he forbid soldiers from leaving when their time was up? Would he force troops to stay on against their will?

Hmmmmm...Remember THIS, Joe?

Now comes the part of the article I enjoyed most. Farah starts up with the compulsive gambling.

I will bet you that better than 90 percent of U.S. troops oppose Kerry. I will bet you they tell jokes about him during quiet times in the barracks in Iraq. I will bet you that he is disliked by soldiers in the field as much as he was by those still on the field in Vietnam in 1971.

Does our betting friend have any evidence for this 90% number? Evidently not.


Joseph Farah: Knows When To Hold 'Em

They will be leaving as soon as they can in the event of a Kerry victory. There will be no stopping them. It will create something of a national emergency – a crisis.

Right. Certainly no sense of duty or honor would stop them because they're all Right Wing opportunists who care more about politics than our national security and way of life. That's what Farah's telling us.

And John Kerry, with the support of his party in Congress, will do the only thing he can do – reinstitute the draft.

Is Joseph predicting a Democratic takeover of both House and Senate?

So, once again, the political conventional wisdom is all wrong.

Or Farah is. There's always the tiny outside possibility of that.

There is little or no threat of the draft being reinstituted in a second Bush administration. But I would give you better than even odds on it if Kerry wins.

Remember where you heard it.


Don't worry, Joe. I promise I will!

Unfortunately, I'm guessing this didn't help my chances of getting my own World Net Daily column, though.

|

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

Seeking Some Blogging Advice From The Big Guy

So it's my birthday today and that can only mean one thing...Existential Crisis!

Yes, you may have noticed a certain lethargy in our recent entries here at the Dark Window, a certain je ne sais quoi. Okay, actually I do know quoi. I originally started this blog as a way to procrastinate from writing my poorly-planned novel that nobody will ever read and so far it's worked brilliantly. But the question now occurs to me...How long should we continue this madness? How long should the Dark Window remain open?

Thinking along those lines, I've been asking myself several questions. Is the blog still fresh (was it ever?) or have we fallen into a rut? Is it funny? As funny as Jamie at least? Or have we become that dreaded blog that people simply read to fill time between new posts at Sadly, No! and World O'Crap?

Perhaps more importantly, do we serve any purpose? Do we respond to any higher calling? Fortunately, our last post about Judge Roy Moore solicited the following helpful comment from our new friend Pablo:

Hmmm, and yet more people listen to this guy than they do to you.

This is undoubtedly true. But there's more to Pablo's wisdom.

He's achieved more than you ever will, and his talents, views and abilities will make a difference in the future, unlike yours.
How do you feel about that?


Surprisingly indifferent. But maybe Pablo has a point. Given my lack of "talents, views and abilities," what would my higher caller have me do instead?

Should I follow in Roy Moore's footsteps and become one of Vox Day's dreaded media whores? Should I devote more time to putting giant rocks in public buildings so as to amass a sizeable following of doting Wing Nuts? Should I stop mocking Christ-like figures like Pat Robertson, Doug Giles, and Karl Rove and instead throw myself into the work of the kingdom (i.e. re-installing George W. Bush)? Should I disappear into the wilds of Mexico like Ambrose Bierce?

I needed to see what God thought about all this so, already fairly certain that the Almighty would vote for me to vanish with Pancho Villa, I headed over to Pat Robertson's site. Thankfully, there was a very helpful article entitled My Job, My Calling: Can They Be the Same?

I eagerly clicked upon the link, hoping to find some answers for my rapidly-dwindling future.

The article starts with a "quote" from the Living Bible (if you know anything about the Living Bible, you know why I put "quote" in quotes):

“God has given each of you some special abilities; be sure to use them to help each other, passing on to other’s God’s many kinds of blessings.”

Since one of my gifts is mocking poor Wing Nut grammar, I think I'm on the right track already. But while we're on the topic, who besides Jan Crouch reads the Living Bible anymore?


Jan enjoying a passage from the old LB

Can you tell me what success means for you this year?

My own World Net Daily column.

Are you where you thought you’d be at this stage of your life?

Frankly, I always figured I'd have tried jumping my X-1 Skycycle over the Snake River Canyon by this point so I guess the answer would have to be no.

Have you ever had a sense of “calling” in your life? How did you hear that calling?

My mom always calls me at 5:00 AM since she lives on the East Coast and doesn't understand time changes. I wonder if that counts.

Is your work a fulfillment of your “calling?”

I can't imagine the Dark Window being a fulfillment of anything. Well, maybe a prophecy gone bad.

Do you go home at night with a sense of meaning, purpose and accomplishment?

I think "reeks of failure" might be a more accurate description.

God established work before the fall. God placed the first humans in the garden to “tend and keep it.” This work assignment was given before sin entered the world and God pronounced the curse.

Yes, but I have to point out that Adam had a naked chick hanging around while he did his work. That's bound to make a difference.

God blesses work even after the fall. If work were evil, God would never encourage people to engage in it. In Colossians 3:23 we are told to “work hard and cheerfully at all you do, just as though you were working for the Lord and not merely for your masters (bosses).” (LB)

I usually just see work as a way to drown out those incessant voices in my head.

God is saving the greatest rewards for eternity – and work will be among them. Surprise! The saved will “build houses”, “plant vineyards”, and shall “long enjoy the work of their hands.” (Isaiah 65:17-25)

Surprise indeed. I was kind of hoping the afterlife might be a good time to take a bit of a vacation. Instead I'm going to be stuck with a bunch of Jimmy Carters.

There are 3 components that must be blended in our work in order for it to be an expression of our calling.

I'm all ears.

The most common mistake people make in choosing a career is to do something simply because they are good at it. Remembering the happiest times in your life and the times when you felt most fulfilled are better indicators of your calling than just knowing what you have the ability to do. You must have the ability, but that’s only one component.

I certainly didn't start the Dark Window because I was good at it so maybe I'm on the right path after all.

How do you relate to other people, projects, and ideas? Are you analytical and logical, or expressive and outgoing? Are you nurturing, supportive and encouraging or do you thrive when you are working on a project in isolation? There is no “right” or “wrong” here, but understanding your uniqueness will help identify the best environment.

I'm glad there's no "right" or "wrong" here because I'd have to say acerbic, shrill, and mean-spirited.

Are you motivated by the constant search for new knowledge?

More like the constant search for new Wing Nuts.

What are you drawn to even when money is not an issue?

If you've ever read the Dark Window, you'd know that money is certainly not an issue.

What is it that when you are doing it, time just flies by?

Making fun of people.

What God calls us to do does not stamp out who we are.

Score one for the smart-ass.

Here’s a worthy goal:

“The master in the art of living makes little distinction between his work and his play, his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his information and his recreation, his love and his religion. He hardly knows which is which. He simply pursues his vision of excellence at whatever he does, leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing. To him he is always doing both.” James Michener


I guess this means I should continue the Dark Window for now because it's still kind of fun and, well, I don't really even know what a vision of excellence would look like. We'll re-evaluate once the election is over. But until then, the Window remains open and a steady stream of rocks shall proceed to be hurled from it.

|

Monday, October 04, 2004

Judge Roy Moore - Patriot, Poet, American

Remember Judge Roy Moore? (If you've read S.Z.'s blog for any length of time, you probably know him as Rob Moore) He's the guy who put that giant Ten Commandments rock in the rotunda of the Alabama state courthouse. Well, he's back and has just written a stirring new poem entitled America The Beautiful?

America the beautiful,
or so you used to be.
Land of the pilgrims' pride;
I'm glad they'll never see.


Why does Judge Roy Moore hate America?

Babies piled in dumpsters,
Abortion on demand,
Oh, sweet land of liberty,
your house is on the sand.


Yay! I've always wanted beachfront property!

Our children wander aimlessly
poisoned by cocaine,
Choosing to indulge their lusts,
when God has said abstain.


Sounds like somebody's been reading Kitty Kelley's book.

From sea to shining sea,
our nation turns away
From the teaching of God's love
and a need to always pray.


Yes, instead of doing those things we've resorted to cheap publicity stunts involving big rocks in rotundas.

We've kept God in our temples,
how callous we have grown.
When earth is but His footstool,
and Heaven is His throne.


Would that make the sun his TV and the moon his remote?

We've voted in a government
that's rotting at the core,
Appointing Godless judges
who throw reason out the door.


Sounds like Roy's angling for a Supreme Court appointment...

You think that God's not angry,
that our land's a moral slum?
How much longer will He wait
before His judgment comes?


Wait...Wouldn't that make God a slumlord?

If we who are His children,
will humbly turn and pray;
Seek His holy face
and mend our evil way:


Then God will hear from Heaven
and forgive us of our sins,
He'll heal our sickly land
and those who live within.


It sounds to me like God wants us to vote for Kerry.

But, America the beautiful,
if you don't, then you will see,
A sad but Holy God
withdraw His hand from Thee.


Who wants to see God sad? Vote Kerry/Edwards this November! You heard it at Bush Country first.

Bush Country also included this little blurb about Moore:

Judge Moore was recently sued by the ACLU for displaying the Ten Commandments in his courtroom foyer. He has been stripped of his judgeship and now the ACLU is trying to strip his right to practice law in the state of Alabama.

Join us next week for the cage match between Judge Roy "Rob" Moore and the ACLU. Wooooooo!

|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?