Katherine Harris has released a new book on her experiences in the Florida election fiasco and will probably be elected to Congress this November. Good for her, because she took a lot of abuse at the hands of supposedly sensitive and caring liberals. They made fun of Harris because she wore a lot of make up. In the same vein, they hated Linda Tripp because she was overweight. Conservatives called this childish and immature, but how is that any different from conservatives making fun of liberals because they’re a bunch of stupid, evil hippies who are complete retards have no sense of morality and whine a lot and are wrong about everything and in a just world would be locked in cages and studied using random shocks to try and see how their thinking went so perverse and then finally force them to work in coal mines so we are protected from their idiotic ideas plus have more coal? It’s no different what so ever, and I think we all have some personal reflection to do on this subject.

Apropos to nut’n, were the can and the can opener invented simultaneously? I figure someone didn’t invent the can opener first and then said, “Hey, we’ve got this great opener, now let’s invent something it can open.” If that didn’t happen, and they were not both made at the same time, that means that, after the first man successful sealed food inside a can, he stood a long while just staring at it wondering, “Now how the hell do I get it out of there? Now this seems like such a dumb idea, because I’m hungry.” I know that if someone had taken my food, sealed it inside a can, and didn’t have a way of getting it out, I’d be pretty pissed.

I just checked my map of the Middle East this morning… Iraq is still there! What gives! Congress is actually still debating an attack! What the hell are we paying them for! Each day Saddam lives, it is a profanity to you, to your family, to your neighbors, to that snot-nosed kid who lives down the street, and to baby Jesus. But all they can do is talk talk talk, when they should be letting our trigger fingers do the talking. At this rate, when we finally cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war, the dogs are going to be old and have hip problems and just want to nap. And, then we’ll have to explain to little Timmy that we need to put them down, and little Timmy will not understand. Little Timmy will start crying, “Please, mister, don’t kill my war dogs!” and it will be a mess. But Democrats, who laugh at little Timmy’s tears, are still dragging their feet. They’re afraid the resolution is too broad and then Bush will use it to go attack Portugal or something. Who cares? And then some, like Sen. Carl Levin, want us to wait for U.N. Security Council approval before we do anything. That’s right; before we can defend our national security and keep Timmy’s war dogs fetching sticks, Levin wants us to get the approval of the frogs! Why doesn’t the guy just come out and admit he hates the sovereignty of the U.S. and never cared for apple pie? Why does he even act like he cares about the security of the American people when its so obvious he doesn’t? Who elects these loons?
Man, now they’ve drawn me into the debate. Okay, no more talking, unless its orders on where to drop the bombs.

I watched Bush’s speech last night, and, though it was good and straight to the point, it was all stuff we already knew. I thought it would have been awesome if he ended with some huge surprise.
“So, with everything I have outlined, it seems that Iraq is our biggest threat… but then I looked further into the issue. Where was Iraq getting all its funding? Where were they getting their intelligence data? Who was behind Saddam and his push for evil?” Bush then pointed to Gerhard Schroeder who sat among them in the audience. “It was Germany behind this all along! That’s why I use this opportunity not to declare war on Iraq, but on Germany!”
“This is absurd!” Schroeder exclaimed, trying to look shocked, “You unilateralist Americans have finally gone insane.”
“Germany never gave up their evil Nazi ways,” Bush continued, staring at the evil Schroeder, “They just hid them, using Iraq as their patsy as they pretended all they were interested in were making quality automobiles. But, the truth is, Schroeder is the son of Hitler and Saddam is his illegitimate half brother!”
“Lies! Lies!” Schroeder yelled, rising to his feet. He could then see that no one else believed him, his Hitler evil too obvious. He then began to laugh, a laugh of pure evil that curdled one’s blood. “We’ll bury you America! We’ll bury you all!” He then was propelled skyward by a jetpack hidden under his coat, crashing through the skylight for his escape.
I’m not saying the speech was bad; I’m just saying it should have had a bit more theatrics if it’s going to play in a prime time slot.

The Palestinians don’t seem to have much going for them. They live under an oppressive dictator and make things worse with violence, so they don’t ever seem to achieve much. There is one thing, though, they seem to excel at: getting killed by Israelis. Think about it; how many Irishmen have you heard been killed by Israelis? How many Eskimos? How many Brazilians? Pretty much none. Even the innovative Japanese can’t seem to get themselves killed by Israelis. And Americans, who usually excel at everything, are so far behind the Palestinians on getting killed by Israelis that they don’t even register. Even today, Palestinians were able to get thirteen of themselves killed by trying to harbor terrorists. Of course, harboring terrorists is just one way Palestinians get themselves killed by Israelis. Here are some of their other creative ways:
*Charging a bunch of Israeli troops with on AK-47.
*Trying to blow one’s self up.
*Trying to run blockades.
*Camping out in other places in Arafat’s compound than where Arafat himself is.
And finally, my favorite:
*Throwing rocks at people with automatic rifles in their hands.
The last one really is especially good. Usually, throwing a rock at someone with an automatic rifle is not a great idea (think: what’s the best possible outcome of that situation), but, when trying to get oneself killed by Israelis, it uses very little resources. Admittedly, they probably adapted that technique from that one tribe who was especially adept at getting killed by tigers. What they would do is carefully approach a sleeping tiger and then poke him with a small sharp stick. I forget the name of that tribe, though; I believe they died out a long long time ago.

I finally saw that flash movie from the Democrats that’s been causing quite a stir. It starts off with some hippy who I guess is supposed to be some cool young adult like in those “Truth” ads that always stir me to violent thoughts. Bush promptly kills him. This reminds me why I voted for Bush: he’ll kill hippies without even a moment’s thought. Bush then kills an old person. Is this supposed to be an ad against killing hippies and old people? No, it’s about social security. That’s where the Democrats steal our money for supposedly our own good and do God knows what with it – though I’m sure Satan does his best to keep even God from finding out about it (Satan is a left-of-center Democrat). In the good old days, people who stole our money like that would be hung next to horse thieves, but today they are elected by dumb people. And we get pretty much no return on this stolen money, or, for a young’n like me, I’ll probably never see it again.
Bye bye, money. I miss you.
Sorry, I got emotional for a second. So Bush has proposed giving people the choice… no, I hate that word now… the option of investing some of their money. According to the flash ad, Democrats equate having some control in the investment of your stolen money with killing old people. Is this because Democrats are:
A. Stupid
B. Evil
C. Stupid, evil, and goddamn dirty Communists.
The answer, of course, is C. This is why, for the sake of our country, we must chase away all Democrats until the two major parties are just the Republicans and the Libertarians (who can easily be identified by their blue skin; I always thought Smurfs were Communists, but I guess I was wrong). Then we’ll attack whatever country the Democrats fled to (probably France) and force them to pay tribute to us. We’ll use this money for Americans’ retirement. Now, there’s a social security plan I’ll buy into.

A U.S. envoy had a “frank” discussion with North Korea, which probably means we just told them how bad we think they are and that we hope they change. That’s diplomacy, but I guess I’m too simple for that. North Korea is doing evil things now. It’s oppressing people now. It’s planning to make WMD’s now. Plus, they’re a big threat to South Korea who animate all the Simpsons episodes, which, in my opinion, is a more important resource than oil. So I wouldn’t just tell North Korea I think they’re bad and hope they change in the future. Here’s how a “Frank” discussion would go with North Korea:
Our envoy meets with some North Korean diplomats for talks. Our people then, without saying a word, kick the crap out of the North Koreans. The president soon after calls up to apologize as sincerely as possible, saying he didn’t know who those envoys were that attacked the Korean diplomats and offers to meet with Kim Jong Il himself. Then, at that meeting, the president will thmen kick the crap out of him and promptly leave. He then calls Kim Jong II again the next day, apologizing once more claiming he was drunk and then offer to meet with hi again. He will probably say no at this point. The president should act really pissed, saying how he once smacked around Schroeder and he was cool about it afterwards. When Jong still refuses, we then tell the world that talks with the North Koreans are going no where and that their leader is funny looking so we need to attack them now before… uh… before we forget about it (we’re America, the only superpower; why the hell do we need to give other countries cogent excuses for our actions?). We then quickly take out their government using our super-modern weapons against their stupid commie weapons, give food to the people and become heroes, and set yet another example to China that communism doesn’t pay.
I guess the plan might work without the severe beating of North Korean diplomats, but that’s one of those “why not” sort of things.

Did I miss something, or are we still not bombing Iraq? I was thinking I just missed it in the news, because it sure as hell doesn’t make any sense to me those guys aren’t toast yet. I mean, what are my tax dollars paying for? And don’t tell me it’s poor people.

What I hear the U.S. is doing is dropping leaflets to scare the bajeebus out of the Iraqis so they won’t even try fighting back. They explain how, if they try anything, we’ll kill them just like we killed their friends. It’s a timeless message, but I think we could do better. These guys are pretty ignorant, so we might as well just make stuff up too so we’ll be even scarier to them. Here’s what my leaflet would say:

“Do not lock your radar on our planes or fire at them. We can easily tell when someone does this, and thus you will be instantly killed. Our planes are top secret, so do not look at them. We have sophisticated technology to tell if someone is looking at our planes, and you will be instantly killed. Do not listen to the sounds our planes make when we fly by – that is also top secret. Make sure to cover your ears when we fly by, or your head will explode. Our new policy is that every time we fly by Iraqis, we will fire one of our anti-anti-American missiles. It can tell when someone is thinking bad things about America and seek them out and kill them. So, if you think a plane is coming towards you or you see something in the air – even if you’re sure it’s just a bird – always immediately drop straight to the ground, curl up in a ball, close your eyes, cover your ears, and start thinking about how great America is or you will be instantly killed.”

My other idea is to make the leaflet look like one of those humorous Hallmark cards. On the outside it would say, “We wanted to tell you how great America is and convince you that Saddam is evil and that you should turn against him…” and then on the inside it would say, “but we decided it was easier to just lace this card with deadly poison.”

Gore now gave another tirade on the economy, and you can almost hear all the top Democrats cringing. The guy is such dead weight and completely unelectable now, but he’ll probably win the primary in 2004 because the Democrats’ base is total firck’n idiots. Hey, the Democrats dug their own grave when they decided that was the kind of people they were going to court. Sure drooling morons are great for mobilizing in the general election (even thought a good number of them disenfranchise themselves by going at a punch ballot like a hyperactive monkey), but the Democrats could really use open primaries so that Republicans can save them from themselves like they did with McKinney. The other option is the Torricelli bait and switch, but you have to get the candidate to take himself off the ballot, and Gore is so much a loon that he could be 80 percentage point behind and he’ll still be convinced he’ll win. So what options are left for the Democrats? Simple, discredit Gore in a way even the stupid can understand. Next time Gore gives a speech, one of the other Democratic hopefuls should walk up to him right in the middle of it and bitch slap him. Who’s going to vote for Gore after he’s been bitch slapped in front of everyone? And the Democrat who does it will look like a real leader. Hell, I’ll switch party registration myself and vote for him. Yeah, you heard me right, and I’ll honor that even if it’s Daschle who does the deed. Not Hillary, though; I assume she’s already done it before, anyway.

So, if Democrats succeed in replacing Torricelli with Lautenberg on the New Jersey ballot, will this totally destroy our political system leading to complete chaos, the forests burning, the oceans boiling, and the end of life as we know it? Yes, but here’s what will happen before then. Immediately, primaries will be shelved since now political parties can switch candidates at will. There will be no reason to do positive ad campaigns, since the candidate being built up could suddenly be swapped at any moment; thus, all ads will be negative. Of course, as soon as a negative ad comes out, the subject of it will be immediately swapped with someone else thus nullifying the ad. Instead, ads will just attack random members of the other party, just in case anyone of them may end up as the actual candidate. Parties will then start switching the candidates to random people registered to their party, and then you shouldn’t be surprised if you see a negative ad against yourself. “Bob Johnson doesn’t mow his lawn often enough and looks funny, so don’t vote Republican or you might be voting for Bob Johnson.” As the election nears, candidates will be switched at even faster rates so as to really throw off the other party. Probably some advanced computer algorithm will be used such that candidates will be changed at a rate of one billion times a second. The actual ballot will just say “Unnamed Republican” and “Unnamed Democrat”, and it will be near random chance who will actually be the candidate when the election ends. Of course, we’ll probably never reach the election end, as neighbor will turn against neighbor, brother against brother, son against father, dog against cat, as, at any moment, they could be candidates running against each other. Violence will erupt, families will collapse, and soon American society itself will be destroyed. And, when America is gone, you know it will only be hours before the rest of the world destroys itself from lack of America’s kind guidance. The damn, dirty apes will then take their chance to conquer the humans and make us their slaves, forcing us to toil day and night in their underground banana mines, with the only thing for any human to look forward being their sweet, sweet death. And all of this so New Jersey voters can have a “choice” this election. God, I’m beginning to hate that word.

The president has reached an agreement with the House on an Iraq attack, though Senate Democrats are still opposed since the current wording shows interest in the security of the American people, something of which they are vehemently against. Right now, all it says is that before starting a war Bush has to certify that he had no other option than force (like anyone really cares), and then every couple months he has to give a report to Congress saying something like, “Still kill’n Iraqis.”

In the dog and pony show that some people call the U.N., France and Russia still need some convincing. China says they’ll abstain from the vote since they’re evil and there government is illegitimate. Good for them. Of course, the vote doesn’t matter since we’re going to go attack Iraq anyway, but, if they don’t want to come along, more cheap oil for us (this war is all about oil, if you didn’t know; don’t let anyone outside of the right-wing conspiracy find that out, though).

There were some protestors outside the front gate of the White House, and, giving further evidence that protestors of the war with Iraq have thought processes similar to monkeys, one climbed to the top of the gate. She was arrested, but, because she came back down on the outside of the fence, she avoided a felony charge. Good to know. Next time I’m in D.C., if I see a protestor climbing the fence, I’ll have to remember to throw a rock at him to knock him down on the other side. I’ll just tell the police, “I thought a monkey was going to attack the president.” We’ll all have a good laugh and then the guy will be sent to prison for a long long time, which is also funny.

Yeah, that’s what I’m talking about. Ari Fleischer mentioned in a press conference how things would be cheaper and easier if Saddam were just assassinated. Now that’s good policy to me: We don’t like someone, we kill the mo’fo’. Why go into some full scale war when its just one bastard we don’t like? It’s so simple, of course the Euro-weenies will throw a hissy-fit if we do it; I’m almost convinced they like things complicated with lots of people dying. You’re probably now saying, “Well, then let’s assassinate the whole lot of them. That will teach them to be European.” Yes, but, when you assassinate lots of people, it kinda loses its charm. The more compassionate idea is to just freak the hell out of them. When we want to assassinate some evil dictator, we wait until inevitably a European leader goes to appease him, and blow the dictators brains out just as they’re shaking hands. That will put the fear of God in them, and, more to the point, the fear of America.

Anyway, when the U.S. government gets serious on this assassinate Saddam thing, they have my e-mail. My rates for heads of state are a bit higher, but I will give a patriotic discount. Frank’s gots to eat, though, and he likes the prime rib.

Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski has threatened to boycott Guinness if Ireland doesn’t join the EU (thanks to Amish Tech Support for the Link). This seems like a hollow threat, because I can’t imagine a EUnik drinking Guinness on account of it being a man’s beer. That dark, black liquid would be too scary for the average whiny European; a Frenchman would probably surrender if a pint were placed in front of him. And what does Ireland need from the EU anyway when they already have Guinness? Just ask yourself what would you rather have…

…close association with all European countries or a pint of Guinness?
…a stable, widely accepted currency or a pint of Guinness?
…national security or a pint of Guinness?
…the respect and admiration of France or a half ounce of Guinness?

I think the answer to each of those is pretty obvious, and it’s not alcoholism – it’s national pride!

God do I hate globalization protestors. Yesterday they caused a bunch of trouble, and today we all know they’ll cause more. So why can’t we preemptively strike these idiots? I know, I know, people have a right to free speech and protest, so we can’t hurt them before they actually do something. But we all know they’re going to do something, so why can’t the police go to a judge, show him the past history of these dumbass protestors, and get a beating permit. Next we trick the protestors into thinking the World Bank and IMF meetings are down some dark alleyway. Then the police surround them and beat them like red-headed stepchildren. Now, don’t take me out of context; I don’t mean they should be beat within an inch of their lives. They should just be each given a few whomps to the head to knock the bad thinking out. Of course, as happens with anything effective America may do, other world leaders may protest what we’ve done. We then tell them we’re really sorry and we’ve decided to have a big meeting with other countries to discuss it. Next we trick them into thinking the meeting is down some dark alleyway and then – POW! – we knock the European sensibilities out of them. We do this enough times, we’ll have world peace!

Kennedy has come out against going to war with Iraq. He outlines a number of reasons to which I respond by pointing out how large his head is. It’s HUGE! He has to be obese to lower his center of gravity and keep from toppling over. Now, the size of his head probably has nothing to do with the value of his arguments, but I would then point out that Rep. Nadler has a very large head as well. Anyway, depite his enourmous head and the fact that he talks funny, Kennedy still has some pull in the Senate, due probably to the fear from other Senators that he might eat them, offer them a ride home, or, worst of all, headbutt them. Hopefully he won’t slow down America’s momentum for action the way he would slow down a bus by boarding it, as many Democrats may listen to him and a few may then understand what he is saying. So, this begs the question: who is the largest Republican Senator? I think we should settle this issue the way they settle all disputes in Japan – by battle of sumo.