ROAD RULES

Here's the introduction to an article on President Bush's Palestinian-Israeli peace proposal by the AP's Dan Perry:

International mediators presented Israeli and Palestinian leaders Wednesday with a new Middle East "road map," an ambitious blueprint for ending 31 months of violence and establishing a Palestinian state. The U.S.-backed plan is supported by a unique consensus of world leaders and comes at a time when U.S. clout is at a high point in the wake of Saddam Hussein's ouster in Iraq.

Remember all those fears that the war in Iraq would lead to the United States' ostracism and severe decline in stature? Neither do I.

CHRIS LEHANE RIDES AGAIN

Today Slate's William Saletan and Mickey Kaus both smack John Kerry for his recent smack at Howard Dean. Both point out -- Saletan's article is here and Kaus' blog post here -- that Kerry did not personally take the shot at Dean, but rather it was Kerry's hired gun, Chris Lehane.

Saletan describes Dean's initial statement like this:

Time's Karen Tumulty reports that two weeks ago in New Hampshire, Dean "suggested that America should be planning for a time when it is not the world's greatest superpower." Dean's exact words were, "We won't always have the strongest military."

Lehane, Kerry's communications director, retorted that Dean's statementraises serious questions about his capacity to serve as Commander-in-Chief. No serious candidate for the Presidency has ever before suggested that he would compromise or tolerate an erosion of America's military supremacy. A President Kerry, who will bring the perspective of having served on the frontlines … will guarantee that America has the strongest, best trained, most well-quipped military in history.Both writers point out that Kerry is more than a little hypocritical (surprise) in this debate, because he himself has said similar things. Then again, Slate Fray poster RufRuf cuts to the heart of the silliness with this observation:

But the real argument is that Dean made a statement that opened himself up to relentless attacks ads by Bush/Rove in 2004 if he wins the nomination. While Kerry may share the sentiment behind the statement, he didn't give a the Republicans a sound bite which if quoted in an attack ad would horrify the key middle of the road undecided voters.

Right. No one is innocent here, it's just that Kerry didn't put his foot in his mouth (this time). Armed Prophet, who won't be voting for a Democrat in 2004, doesn't have to think about this much. However, it was only a matter of time before Lehane got his name back in the news, and for a petty attack at that.

“Master of Disaster” Lehane (self-proclaimed, of course) has in the past decade enjoyed a career of high-profile jobs with some of the Democratic Party’s most dubious figures. In addition to working on Al Gore's 2000 campaign, he's worked for Andrew Cuomo, Gray Davis and Bill Clinton -- two losers and two ... losers.

At times he certainly has been effective. Lehane and business partner Mark Fabiani were instrumental in making the Clinton scandals as much about his accusers and critics as the president’s wrongdoing. And most suspect him of involvement in the 11th hour revelation of George W. Bush’s 1976 DUI arrest. Lehane is from Kennebunkport, Maine, where the incident took place, and still has plenty of contacts there.

Too often, Lehane has been part of the story, instead of just spinning it. And here we are again.

After Lehane called then-Florida Secretary of State now-Rep. Katherine Harris as “Commissar Harris,” -- for which he is best remembered) -- the New York Times, Gore rebuked Lehane’s behavior, supposedly telling an aide, “This wasn’t the communications strategy we planned on.”

Will Lehane get such an upbraiding from Kerry? Not for this incident, surely. But sometime before Kerry is mathematically eliminated from the race -- whether the units of measure be Democratic convention delegates and superdelegates or Electoral College delegates -- he'll do something to earn it. Just wait.

CLEVELAND ROCKS

The New York Observer's Sridhar Pappu hit NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg's post-White House Correspondents Dinner party in DC, and in today's Off The Record column, shares a number of anecdotes. One of the best has former CNN exec Walter Isaacson wailing to current CNN commentator Jonah Goldberg that he never wanted to be in charge of the damn network in the first place.

But that's not what Armed Prophet is getting at. What is Armed Prophet getting at? What Armed Prophet always gets at: War, politics and media.

Here's actor/author Richard Belzer, supposedly to Pappu, taking up the idiotarian cause:

The press has become an arm of the state. The whole mind-set of the mainstream press seems to be strangely muted and cowardly. I was watching the BBC yesterday, and someone asked the question, 'What will the Iraqis say when people in America can’t speak out without being criticized?'

I wonder how Belzer defines "speak out" and "criticize." Just a thought. Even though Armed Prophet might like to agree that the old media press is too deferential to the government, it's a little difficult when you're quoting BBC war commentators at face value. In any case, I needn't say anything, because here's Drew Carey, one of the few (and brave) open Republicans in Hollywood. He's talking about the Dixie Chicks, but on the matter of dissent, he answers Belzer perfectly:

What the Dixie Chicks did doesn’t bother me. But … they shouldn’t be surprised people are mad at them. You’re not allowed to say what you want and not have anybody call you on it. They were like, ‘We were only speaking our minds.’ Yeah, so were all the people saying they hate you.

Exactly.

I'VE HAD A GOOD RUN

Armed Prophet bought a plane ticket to Toronto, Ontario -- T.O. or Tee Dot, the natives apparently call it -- well in advance of the SARS panic. If only I'd known better, I could have bought it last week, when prices dropped almost $50 from what I thought was a good deal.

Then, a building just a few blocks from my friend's apartment blows sky high.

Now, I read this column by Joe Sciacca in The Boston Herald (op-ed columns require subscription, infuriatingly) on Toronto Mayor Mel Lastman:

When SARS rolled into town, the Toronto mayor got his 15 minutes of fame - except that he was pretty much finished after just five minutes, long enough to be humiliated by CNN's Aaron Brown, which is not easy.

Ouch.

Among the mayor's gems: He said he had "never heard of" the World Health Organization. A city councilor suggested that maybe Lastman should be quarantined.

Double ouch.

It appears the mayor is taking that advice. "I'm the best you're going to get," said Lastman's spokesman Scot Magnish, who candidly acknowledges that the mayor has pretty much gone underground when it comes to talking SARS. "He's not the best guy to do be doing that," Magnish said.

If Armed Prophet doesn't return to posting after Memorial Day weekend, you may not know exactly what happened to me, but at least you'll know where.

ALL I'M GOOD FOR

You may already heard about Norman Mailer's Times of London rant about how the Iraq war was President Bush's solution to the great national dilemma of white male malaise. The adventurous can read it here, but Armed Prophet quotes what is arguably the most insane explanation for why this war was fought:

For better or worse, the women’s movement had had its breakthrough successes and the old, easy white male ego had withered in the glare. Even the mighty consolations of rooting for your team on TV had been skewed. There was now less reward in watching sports than there used to be, a clear and declarable loss. The great white stars of yesteryear were for the most part gone, gone in football, in basketball, in boxing, and half-gone in baseball. Black genius now prevailed in all these sports (and the Hispanics were coming up fast; even the Asians were beginning to make their mark). We white men were now left with half of tennis (at least its male half), and might also point to ice-hockey, skiing, soccer, golf, (with the notable exception of the Tiger) as well as lacrosse, swimming, and the World-Wide Wrestling Federation — remnants and orts of a once-great and glorious centrality. On the other hand, the good white American male still had the Armed Forces.

Now, others have already made better comments on this than what I could say. Rather than discuss the psychotheraputic notion of "projection," I will answer with a Simpsons quote:

Bart: Pop quiz, hotshot. I'm supposed to be doing my homework, but you find me upstairs reading a Playdude. What do you do? What do you do?
Shary Bobbins: I make you read every article in that magazine, including Norman Mailer's latest clap-trap about his waning libido.
Homer: Ooh. She is tough.

That's all I can offer. Lucky for me, that's about all Mailer deserves.

MUST HAVE

Like Moxie Girl, whence I found this, Armed Prophet must have this shirt.

A PRESIDENT IN FULL

Saw the most amazing thing on C-SPAN last night. George W. Bush speaking before a crowd of American Muslims, including Iraqis, in Dearborn, Michigan yesterday. He certainly got applause and standing ovations, but at one point the crowd started shouting "USA! USA! USA!" like the crowd during the 1980 US-Soviet Olympic hockey game -- or the firefighters at Ground Zero in September, 2001. A few highlights:

Whether you're Sunni or Shia or Kurd or Chaldean or Assyrian or Turkoman or Christian or Jew or Muslim -- no matter what your faith, freedom is God's gift to every person in every nation. As freedom takes hold in Iraq, the Iraqi people will choose their own leaders and their own government. America has no intention of imposing our form of government or our culture. Yet, we will ensure that all Iraqis have a voice in the new government and all citizens have their rights protected.

Great, inspiring stuff. And it's long past being remarkable to note that no one is concerned how he will perform anymore. He has filled the role of president almost entirely, and looks as strong going into the fourth year of his administration as a president can. But perhaps this is more important:

Iraqi citizens are now working closely with our troops to restore order to their cities, and improve the life of their nation. In Basra, hundreds of police volunteers have joined with coalition forces to patrol the streets. In Baghdad, more than a thousand citizens are doing joint patrols with coalition troops. And residents are also working with coalition troops to collect unexploded munitions from neighborhoods, and repair the telephone system. People are working to improve the lives of the average citizens in Iraq.

The angry protests and occasional violence make for good TV, but they're only part of the picture. Work is underway, and though less exciting and more difficult than winning the war part of it, Bush is prepared for the long haul.

Considering re-election, it almost doesn't matter if the economy doesn't get a great deal better -- polls have shown for months that the public doesn't hold him responsible for the slow-growing economy. Seven months after the midterm elections of '03, the Democrats still haven't found a saleable charge to level at him.

Somebody recently wrote -- whom I cannot remember -- that Bush couldn't have scheduled April 9 of this year any better. While Saddam Hussein was losing control of Baghdad live on television worldwide, the Democratic presidential candidates -- from the front to the fringe -- were at a liberal constituency event (so much for suspending the campaign). It was labor, abortion, something like that (I said, I didn't remember this very well). Point being: Talk about a difference in stature. It's almost impossible to see how one of them could match Bush between now and November '04. Nothing is a sure thing, but George W. Bush is about as close to it as possible right now.

P.S. You can watch and read the Bush speech here.

LETTERS FROM GEORGE GALLOWAY

The story of George Galloway, a Labour MP apparently on the take from Saddam Hussein, and very possibly facing criminal charges similar to treason, hasn't made much news stateside, but Mark Steyn seems to have found some correspondence that his colleagues at the Telegraph missed:

From: info@dictatormarketing.org.uk
To: assad@baath.sy; bigcigar@fidel.cu; rmugabe@yahoo.com; pressoffice@ayatollahcentral.ir; mlepresident@elysee.fr

...this 85per cent reduction for instant enrolment is a time-limited offer that won't last forever - unlike your regime! As soon as we receive your cheque, we'll launch a Stop The Next War campaign personally tailored to your...

Sounds authentic to me. Robert Mugabe probably would use Yahoo...

GERALDO IS CRAZY

Don't believe me? Check out this, from Geraldo's website, Rough Point, on the criticism leveled against him following his little map-drawing episode in southern Iraq:

THE COMMENTS OF SOME WERE SO RECKLESS AND BADLY REPORTED THE ONLY CONCLUSION CAN BE THAT MSNBC, FOR EXAMPLE, MALICIOUSLY CONDUCTED A 'GET-GERALDO' CAMPAIGN. USING A NEO-NAZI EX-CONGRESSMAN AND A PSYCHO EX-SPORTSCASTER AS THEIR HATCHET MEN THEY LOBBED ACCUSATIONS AND INNUENDO AIMED AT USING MY SAND DRAWING TO DESTROY A 33 YEAR CAREER FAR MORE DISTINGUISHED THAN ANYTHING TO WHICH EITHER OF THAT HAPLESS PAIR CAN ASPIRE.

Whoa. Geraldo refers to Joe Scarborough (whom I like), and Keith Olbermann (whom I don't), if you don't know. Careful, guys. Geraldo does carry a gun, and could go Wayne Gale at any moment.

SHE WUZ ROBBED!

Armed Prophet acquaintance and occasional Slate writer Holly Bailey claims on Jive Diatribe a Newsweek/MSNBC.com piece she wrote was picked up -- sans attribution -- by the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times. She's right, particularly about the Times -- they added a quote from a spokesman and called it a new story. As for the Post, well, she should probably take a look at the chain of ownership between that newspaper and the magazine... but Armed Prophet is sure she alredy knew that.

HEY, I'M JUST ASKING

But doesn't Bill Kristol have something better to do than hang around the Fox News studios all day? Now he's sitting around talking SARS with Shepard Smith, in what must be his fifth appearance since Fox & Friends this morning. Hey Bill, don't you have a government to be running?

NOOOOOOOOOO!!!

Introducing Armed Prophet's "NO + (O x n)" system.

Sometimes Armed Prophet will be surfing the internet and will come across a story that grabs me, shocks me, or makes me cringe, usually while snorting with laughter. (You should hear it sometime -- Armed Prophet can snort.) Oftentimes I'd like to post the link, but I have no comment to make. Sometimes I can't think of anything, some are just too dumb to warrant a response. It's the kind of thing that just makes me want to shout (and then type) NOOOOOO!! I think you know what Armed Prophet means.

Just today I saw such a story, and I will indeed bring it to you. And with it, I will impose a system that I plan to use for some time to come.

But first, some fun with Google: What follows is a list of every variation on the "Noooo!" "word" that returned over 1,000 hits on the current leading search engine.

NO -- 400,000,000+
NOO -- 202,000
NOOO -- 113,000
NOOOO -- 104,000
NOOOOO -- 73,200
NOOOOOO -- 48,700
NOOOOOOO -- 31,900
NOOOOOOOO -- 26,400
NOOOOOOOOO -- 19,700
NOOOOOOOOOO -- 14,100
NOOOOOOOOOOO -- 10,800
NOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 9,350
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 7,080

Google, ever helpful, politely asks:

Did you mean: "NOOOOOOOOOOO"?

No, I didn't Google. But thanks for being so helpful!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 5,890
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 4,930
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 4,290
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 3,610
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 2,950
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 2,640
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 2,140
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 1,980
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 1,690
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 1,440
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 1,310
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO -- 1,160

As you can see, it's a popular expression, in all its many forms. But 25 O's is just a bit too many, isn't it? Armed Prophet thinks so, but I do like to use the system -- and if it isn't already obvious, I'm laying down some personal ground rules. No one else need follow them (but I wouldn't object if you did).

Hereafter, Armed Prophet will use a standard system wherein the O's following the N will number 1 to 10. Simple objection will be registered with "No!"; "Nooooo!" shall be deployed in case of offensive but inconsequential things like this; and a full-scale "Noooooooooo!" will be reserved only for the most blood-curdling of horrors.

Further complicating matters is the number of superlative exclamation points following the "NO." Armed Prophet rarely uses more than three total, and generally allots them according to the same way as above. Therefore, you are much more likely to get "NO!" and "NOOOOOOOOOO!!!" than "NO!!!" and "NOOOOOOOOOO!"

Just so we're clear. When Armed Prophet gets around to commissioning a redesign and adds a FAQ, some form of this post will ultimately go there.

Now, as I promised: NOOOOO!!

FUN WITH SARS

Ziboy, a photoblogger living in Beijing, shows that despite the SARS epidemic, some people still know how to have fun.

DON'T ACT LIKE YOU'VE NEVER SEEN A DICTATOR BEFORE

If you haven't already, take a look at this Flash video -- Saddam Hussein's version of Eminem's "The Real Slim Shady." As an amateur job, the video itself isn't much, but the lyrics are pretty good, and the production almost as good as Dre's.

THANKS FOR PLAYING

Today isn't so good a day for Saddam Hussein -- it is his 66th birthday, and (assuming he is still alive) it is the first one he will celebrate without a lavish, public ceremony. Today it's really got to hit home: he is no longer in charge of Iraq. Instead, we have Iraqi Kurd, Sunni, Shia and even Communist groups agreeing to get together and put together a transitional government.

We've come a long way in a very short period of time. No thanks, of course, to some.

Take, for example, doctor, ex-governor and presidential candidate Howard Dean. He owes much of his current popularity to being out front early against the war in Iowa and New Hampshire, but with the war over, where does he have to go? Down seems more likely than up. Dean initially planned to campaign on health care and similar social issues -- but he let Dick Gephardt steal health care while he was out saying things like:

We need to contain Saddam, we should have contained Saddam. We got rid of him. I suppose that's a good thing.

Some polls are also showing Dean down several points in New Hampshire, from his mid-war highs. Now John Kerry has sicced (the loathsome) Chris Lehane on Dean for saying that the US should consider a future where we no longer have military superiority over the world. And of course, Dean deserves such attacks. By warning against a bloody war that never came, by doubting the worthiness of removing Saddam and by imagining a diminished US military force, he's fair game for anyone to his right on the use of force. Of course, Kerry did everything he could not to have a position during the war, and he's made a few inopportune comments of his own. Armed Prophet supposes that the lesson here is simply that sometimes it pays to be Clintonian.

One thing that will be true in November 2004: It will not pay to be anti-war.

OUT OF ARABIA

Fox News' Major Garrett reports that with Saddam Hussein gone, the Pentagon plans to move most of its troops out of Saudi Arabia. Armed Prophet sure hopes this happens sooner rather than later. Even if no bases are put in Iraq, Eritrea -- as Robert Kaplan's April Atlantic article explained -- is very much an option. Without the "infidels" in the holy land, can Osama bin Laden (or tape recordings attributed to him) effectively demonize the United States? For awhile, sure. But things are already moving in the right direction, for the Iraqis, for the Middle East and for global peace (or something like it).

LOCKED INTO A BAD IDEA

Armed Prophet seems to write about nothing but war, terrorism and ... er, war these days. Surely I can write about something else? I'll try.

To start with, it's not my wish to deny people the means to get ahead in life, but Armed Prophet draws the line well before Washington's Governor Gary Locke. Right now the gub -- remember? He was the one inexplicably chosen by Daschle & Co. to deliver the rebuttal to President Bush's SOTU address this year -- is fighting with his own state Senate over a difficult issue involving the emotional issues of immigration and education:

Locke has promised to veto a Senate attempt to continue denying illegal immigrants the right to pay resident tuition at state colleges and universities. "We should not be putting up obstacles, so that they can actually realize the American dream of a college education," Locke said. The House passed a bill in February to allow migrant children to pay resident tuition if they had attended at least three years of high school in Washington, graduated or earned a diploma equivalent, and agreed to file an application for permanent residency leading to citizenship at the earliest opportunity.

So a US citizen and Oregon resident would pay more to attend the University of Puget Sound than a non-US citizen whose parents had illegally moved the family from Mexico to the US? This isn't an easy call for a lot of people. A Democrat like Locke is much more willing to change the rules to achieve what appears to be a compassionate end. But an end run around the rule of law is a mistake; a change in work visa laws, among a few other carefully-instated reforms, is the proper way to handle this.

Immigration reform is sometimes lost to hysterics like Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, blowhards like Bill O'Reilly (and I use the term "blowhard" affectionately) and paleo-con Lincoln-haters like the folks who crowd around Lew Rockwell.

As perhaps can be expected, Governor Locke goes in the opposite direction. It is probably true that Locke has neither the office, clout nor vision to address the problems that lead to an sizable population of non-resident high school graduates. Therefore, he's doing what he perceives to be politically popular. Wonders never cease.

Armed Prophet doesn't have all the answers to this, but Locke hasn't even tried.

INDYMEDIA -- THE NEW ONION?

Via LGF I find a link to this bizarre "article" on IndyMedia's San Francisco page, provocatively titled "9/11 Was A Hoax." LGF proprietor Charles Johnson observes:

These people’s brains are wired very, very differently from those of normal humans. Oh, but excuse me; according to one of the commenters, I have just launched an ad hominem attack, instead of rebutting this puddle of rancid effluvia.

Rancid effluvia? That's what Armed Prophet rebuts best! Here are a couple of my favorites:

The hole in the Pentagon was not made by a jumbo jet. ... No airplane debris (except what was planted on the lawn) nor remains of passengers were ever found.

Right. No evidence, none at all! Except for what they planted, of course!

Why did so many people, from San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to many employees of companies in the World Trade Center who failed to come to work that day, know in advance that something bad was going to happen on Sept. 11, 2001?

Aha! It wasn't just the Jews who stayed home from work in New York that day ... it was African-Americans in San Francisco as well! Now it's all starting to come toget -- wait a minute, no it isn't.

Cell phone calls cannot be made from airliners in flight that are not close to the ground. As research by Professor A. K. Dewdney has shown, the emotional conversations between hijacked passengers and others would not have been possible under conditions that existed at that moment.

Depends on what you mean by "close to the ground" -- William Langewiesche's "American Ground" series in The Atlantic last year described the planes as flying much of their routes to New York and Washington thousands of feet below other planes. And even if there were stages of the flight that did indeed fly too high for regular cell service, it depends on what you mean by "cell phones" -- I'm sure many people used those phones that have been standard in airplane seat backs for years. A. K. Dewdney? He seems to have once had a modestly respectable writing career, publishing columns in Scientific American. But as of late, he's been publishing anti-government 9/11 conspiracies in something called the Feral News. And did I mention -- he's Canadian? (Ha! My Canadian friends probably won't like that much.)

The president has admitted that he continued to read a story to schoolchildren in a Florida school for 30 minutes after being informed that two planes had struck New York and that the nation was under attack. He has never explained this puzzling behavior, nor how he saw the first plane hit. It was never televised, only recorded by a French crew filming firemen in New York. In that film, the plane in question does not appear to be a passenger airliner.

Ignoring, for the moment, the fact that the above passage makes no sense, one also wonders how or why that film -- which contains a higher-resolution frame of this image -- wouldn't reveal that plane to be ... a passenger plane? Could it be? For real?!

There's more, of course. Lots more:

These are merely a few of the deliberately false statements made by U.S. officials about 9/11. They provide crystal clear evidence that our president, his staff, and many legislators should be indicted on charges of treason, obstruction of justice and mass murder.

Have a look and have an uneasy laugh, if you can bother. Armed Prophet needs to go lie down for awhile. Choose a passage and debunk it yourself! Fun for kids aged 7-77.

P.S. Further down the page of the IndyMedia story you can see comments posted in reply -- it's pretty clear the LGFers have taken over the page...

IN THE HISTORY OF GREAT COMEBACKS...

This weekend Washington witnessed the White House Correspondents' Dinner, a black tie affair where the president gets to joke around with the likes of Ozzy Osbourne (last year) and the secretary of state gets to meet ABC's The Bachelor (this year). Armed Prophet would have attended, but something must have happened to my invitation. Yes, something.

Salon.com -- whose DC office either closed or relocated from its the trendy Dupont Circle digs just down the street from my old apartment -- apparently had a fly on the wall who overheard the following exchange:

Comic writer and unrepentant Clinton booster Al Franken: Clinton's military did pretty well in Iraq, huh?
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz: Fuck you.

Armed Prophet approves.

GREAT SCOTT!

Armed Prophet's favorite movie is Back to the Future. That in mind, I quote James Lileks -- three times the man and nine times the writer that fellow Minnesotan Garrison Keillor is -- writes today that he saw

a DeLorean on the street today. And it made me wonder if there's an aftermarket vendor who'd install a flux capacitor in the back seat - I mean, how can you own a DeLorean and NOT have a flux capacitor? Does anyone see those cars and not wonder if a VW bus loaded with Libyan terrorists is far behind?

Armed Prophet approves.

I TOOK THE WEEKEND OFF, BY THE WAY...

But you already knew that. More to come.

BEST STORY EVER

The post below may be the story of the week, but I think you'll soon realize why I gave this post the above title:

[Toledo] Mayor Jack Ford has delayed approving new welcome signs with "ToledOH!" after learning about the potential for Toledo to be equated with the television cartoon character...

Homer Simpson. I.e., "D'oh!"

Toledo ordered the signs, which you can see here along with the full Toledo Blade article, without ever considering one of Mr. Burns' fork and spoon operators in sector 7-G. Armed Prophet has to concede that the people in charge of Toledo and its promotional campaign aren't the types who watch the show, and so it isn't really fair to laugh at them. But how can you not laugh at Toledo Councilwoman Ellen Grachek, who said:

‘D’oh’ is what Homer says when he has messed something up, when he’s disappointed in himself. I don’t know if that’s the image we want to portray.

Or City Councilman Rob Ludeman:

There have been too many instances when people have had an opportunity to make fun of Toledo, and I hope this doesn’t provide another opportunity.

Ha! Too late!

LES ENFANTS TERRIBLES

Reuters headline:

Toddler Twins Go on Rampage, Shed Clothes

Rumors that John Hughes has already optioned the story cannot be confirmed as of this time...

(Hat tip: Maxim Basa)

FIVE MINUTES PONDERING, AND STILL NO IDEAS FOR A PUN ON "TEN-PERCENTERS"

If Christopher Hitchens hasn't gotten enough mentions on this blog as of late, then here is Armed Prophet pushing it over the line, with a second Hitch-related post following the one from below. He's got an interesting piece defending Ahmad Chalabi, slapping Maureen Dowd, and contemplating Iraqi domestic politics. Read it here. But this bit from the end underscores a point Armed Prophet has made in the past, about just how behind the times the still-extant anti-war movement is:

What if one-tenth of the energy of the anti-war movement was now diverted to helping the secular and democratic forces in Iraq and Kurdistan? To giving assistance to a free press, helping to sponsor political prisoners and searches for the missing, providing money and materials for human rights and women's groups? Maybe a few of the human shields and witnesses for peace could return and pitch in with the reconstruction? I know a few such volunteers, chiefly medical ones, but not many when compared to the amazing expenditure of time and effort that went on postponing the liberation. It's just a thought. Maybe something will come of it.

Hitch knows better than to think this will happen, but you can't say he didn't suggest nicely. If the left actually cared more about promoting liberal values, they might take advice. Instead, they're content to amuse themselves by marching around city parks wearing costumes.

HITCHENS REDUX

Armed Prophet so far has received more email about my posted reaction to The Onion's dreadfully inadequate lampoon of Christopher Hitchens. One of my emailers is off to Coachella, another is currently deployed with the US Army (almost deployed to Iraq, but thankfully, not) so it'll be days before I find out if they object to my posting their comments. So read fast! Let's get started:

You have to admit that the piece was more clever (cleverer) than the typical Onion fare, if only because it merited a reading and subsequent posting. Most of the time I just skim headlines and move on to the infographic, statshot and AV Club.

True enough on that last point. Armed Prophet can't remember the last time I read every story, but I'm guessing 1998. Will I admit that it was clever enough to read and comment upon? No. The only reason I bothered to mention it is because of Hitch. Let's say it was P.J. O'Rourke or Pauly Shore. Would I care? Doubt it. It wasn't the story itself; just its subject. Here's more:

If you're going to criticize The Onion for selling-out, then you might go back and rework your previous Simpsons' praise. The Simpsons jumped the shark when Maude died. Critics are fond are saying that even a bad episode of the Simpsons is better than anything else on the networks. (I don't necessarily agree, but...)

I don't think I've discussed The Simpsons and its recent season on this blog in any great depth, but it's true that I've said something akin to "bad Simpsons is like bad pizza or bad sex -- still pretty good." I suppose he's got me here -- I still tune in at 8PM every Sunday night. Likewise, I still have The Onion in my bookmarks and still click on it at least once a week. Indeed, I allowed in the previous post that it can still be pretty funny, but the hit-to-miss ratio is much lower than it was a year or two ago. (Same with The Simpsons.) And these days, a bad episode of The Sopranos is better than a good episode of The Simpsons.

And now, my second correspondent, remarking upon Hitchens' public fallings-out with Alex "I'm Still a Stalinist?" Cockburn and Studs "I'm Still Alive?" Terkel, among others:

I suspect the writer of that Onion article, rather than failing to appreciate this theater, was referencing it directly. Of course it's silly to think of Hitch in a trailer park; it's incongruous with what we understand about him, which is part of why it's funny. But these public disputes have a sort of what-the-fuck quality which, just maybe, was highlighted by an article that asked, "hey... isn't this high-minded Brit acting toward his former colleagues just a little the way some trailer-park dude acts toward his long-term 'old lady', airing the whole thing out in the press in the way that a trailer-park dude might air his domestic greivances in the local police reports?" And I suspect they mentioned the alcohol aspect for the same reason: it's something that Terkel and others have harped upon in the actual exchanges that have been made public. Unjustifiably harped upon, in my opinion, but I guess they took whatever shots they could.

Ah, but they didn't take what shots they could. That's what gets me (with this piece, anyway). Although I may be a Hitchens partisan (especially, obviously, in his arguments with the aforementioned has-beens), my beef with the Onion piece is not at all that they treated him unfairly or zinged him too harshly -- it's that they didn't really treat him at all, and entirely failed (indeed, didn't even seem to try) at lobbying zings in his direction.

Unless: There may a good point in this -- what if this was the author's attempt to parody Hitchens' war of words with these prime specimens of leftage by putting him in a bitch-fight with a common trailer ho? Might that be a clever way of reducing the erudite, international Hitchens to a provincial half-wit battling with another? Well, it's possible. But Armed Prophet thinks that would be giving the author too much credit. After all, if it was supposed to be a lampoon of Hitchens' public squabbles, then why didn't his "common-law wife" represent any of Hitch's enemies? The Onion calls her Noreen Bodell, his

common-law wife of 14 years

but otherwise, she is a cipher:

Little is known about Bodell, a heavy-set blonde who has been known to use several different surnames.

Obviously, the supposed wife is incidental. (I wonder what Hitchens' real-life wife, Carol Blue, has to say about this.)

If the author did want to make light of their differences, then it might have been useful to at least mention, Hitchens' evolving politics. Instead, The Onion merely calls him a "leftist intellectual" -- but Hitchens wouldn't call himself a leftist. What Hitchens is today still remains to be seen. How he will judge the aftermath of the war in Iraq is something Hitchens alone can determine. Whether he does indeed vote for George W. Bush in 2004 as he's indicated that he might remains to be seen.

I guess it remains allowable, though not likely, that the author intended this to be a clever commentary upon Hitchens as of late. But if so, then the author just isn't familiar with Hitchens as of late -- if, indeed, he or she ever was very familiar with him.

The last point I have to make is one I should have mentioned at the very beginning: To explicate a joke is to kill it. To examine why it is funny is to render it un-funny. Now, what does this do to an already-unfunny joke? Armed Prophet finds it interesting to explicate, but that might just be me. If you, reading this now, did think it was funny, then I've surely ruined the whole thing for you, if you've bothered to read it to this point. Many jokes are just there to make one laugh; examined further they are revealed to be less than the sum of their parts. Perhaps that is the case here. But if that is the case, then Armed Prophet still found not just the whole, but also the parts, to be very disappointing. I say this as a Hitchens fan, who would have liked to see a good send-up of the "modern day Orwell." In the end, I guess I would still like to see that.

DISCARD THE EIGHT OF SPADES...

...because the Pentagon is confirming that the Iraqi government's first television star -- Tariq Aziz -- has been captured by US forces. Armed Prophet's question: Why was he only the eight of spades? Number 43 on the list. True, he wasn't as front-and-center in this war as in 1991 -- Comical Ali was the primary spokesman this time -- but in the Baathist video releases, he was still there at the desk with Saddam and sons. Maybe he got busted down after all those rumors that he was about to defect? I wonder...

CNN also says the Pentagon thinks Saddam may still be in Baghdad, hiding in a friendly Sunni neighborhood. I wonder where that comes from -- and if that's true, can he the Butcher himself be far behind?

SENATOR STUPID

Armed Prophet had planned to weigh in on the controversy over Pennysylvania Republican Rick Santorum's comments regarding homosexuality, but James Lileks already pretty much nailed down what I was thinking:

It reinforces the idea that people who hold a certain set of ideas about taxation, government involvement in the economy, and the necessity of a strong defense are also consumed by the idea that somehow, somewhere, Tab A may not be going into Slot B. This is not the same thing as having a religious belief that frowns on homosexuality; if that's what your doctrine believes, and you choose to believe it, that's your right and your choice. But it's no more a matter of public policy than the Catholic prohibitions against divorce are a basis for civil law.

Yes, and yes. Santorum by no means speaks for a majority of Republicans, and probably not even for a majority of conservative Republicans -- yet there are those who hear Santorum and Trent Lott (who was making a "joke," rather than at least explaining his approach to a legal issue) and take that as proof enough that Republicans are mean, bad people. What about Rep. Jim Moran (D), Al Sharpton (D) and the '02 campaign of Sen. Max Baucus (D)? Those people would probably think to themselves: Obviously those are isolated incidents -- with the GOP it's a pattern. Armed Prophet doesn't think so -- all available evidence is that the world's jerks have been pretty evenly dispersed throughout both parties.

Beyond that, however, this one has more 'gee whiz' moments than did the Lott affair. Consider this passage from Santorum's originial interview with Lara Jakes Jordan, the Associated Press reporter (and, as Fox News would like you to remember, wife of Sen. John Kerry's campaign manager, Jim Jordan):

SANTORUM: ...It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality...

AP: I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about "man on dog" with a United States senator, it's sort of freaking me out.

Ha! What's the context? Who cares? And besides, Jordan has nothing to complain about. Her immediate preceding question was:

Okay, without being too gory or graphic, so if somebody is homosexual, you would argue that they should not have sex?

How delicate is Jordan that she can't handle a non-specific reference to "man on dog" ... er, relations? After all, she asked that he not get too "gory" when talking about homosexuality. So ... wait a minute -- is she a freaking homophobe?! I leave that to you. But can this get any better? Yes, yes it can. I'll even cite the Congressional Record. Here is Santorum on the Senate floor on October 1 of 2001:

I rise today to introduce the Puppy Protection Act of 2001. Introduction of this legislation comes as a continuation of my interest in the protection and humane treatment of animals, specifically, dogs and puppies.

I could make this up, but it's funnier because I didn't have to. (By the way, wasn't there a war he should have been more concerned about?)

What about Santorum's comments themselves? Oh yeah ... that. As it so happens when debates about homosexuality flare up, I tend side with Andrew Sullivan (start here, then scroll down) over Ramesh Ponnuru (start here, then scroll up), but their dialogue is interesting regardless. Sullivan definitely gets it right about how crazy Santorum's beliefs are, if taken to their logical conclusion. However, methinks the letter Sullivan prints today (the post I linked to) protests too much. If only liberals did as much soul-searching as conservatives do when their intellectual brethren shoot their mouths off. Also, Glenn Reynolds asks a good question: did Santorum even have a logical conclusion?

Unless he actually steps down from his leadership post, or starts talking about inter-bestial trisexuality, I've given this one my all. Pretty much everybody's already said what I think first, and probably better than I would have. So ... why am I blogging again?

P.S. Okay, when 89-year-old Mormon polygamists are criticizing Santorum, you know this story has jumped the shark.

LIGHT POSTING DAY

Armed Prophet, who keeps an early schedule, one unthinkable to all but a few, must take a nap before basketball, which starts in just a few hours. In the meantime, here's what Saddam Hussein might look like if he shaved his mustache.

PROLIFIC • pro·lif·ic • adj. • Producing abundant works or results

That was fast.

ON KAGAN'S OF PARADISE AND POWER (#1)

In late February, Armed Prophet mentioned that I'd soon be reading Robert Kagan's Of Paradise and Power -- America and Europe in the New World Order. I finished it a few weeks ago, and tagged a few parts of it to go back and review when I had the chance.

So: starting with this post, I will blog something of a book review, or more like a series of somewhat-connected ruminations on various aspects of the book and the subjects it covers. Here goes nothing:

The first thing about this short essay -- it's only 103 pages in a compact hardcover binding -- is that my initial blog description didn't quite explain it correctly. At the time I wasn't aware that Kagan assesses the worldview and long-term goals of both the US and Europe in more or less equal proportion. That sets the framework for examing the disagreement over Iraq that was ongoing when the book was published in March. (The book originated with a Policy Review essay Kagan wrote last summer -- it's available here.) It isn't just the United States that wants to bring the world in line with its own worldview; Europe very much aims to do the same thing. This isn't something we think much about; most Americans probably see Europe as merely trying to avoid conflict, placate dictators, ignore threats. This is largely true, but it's a mistake not to take into account the fact that the Europeanists also have a vision of what the world should look like. And that vision is just as dearly held as America's.

Kagan is fond of simple analogies and memorable phrases that sum up a full argument. Perhaps the most frequently quoted part of the book comes on the first page (gee, what a surprise), where he writes that

...on major strategic and international questions today, Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus.

Heh. The gender roles each culture supposedly lines up with is a point surely not missed. There's a similar connotation with another phrase, found on page 23. Considering the allied military interventions of the last decade, America has done most of the fighting, while European forces have mostly waited until the Americans were done, then stepped in to perform peacekeeping and nation-building services:

As some Europeans put it, the real division of labor consisted of the United States "making the dinner" and the Europeans "doing the dishes."

Heh. Not unlike a parent-child relationship, no? Both analogies only illustrate certain aspects of their worldviews and behaviors and relationship, but they are useful in crystallizing single, simple points. (Both also appear in the original Policy Review essay.) And it isn't as if Kagan leaves these points be, as justified by his own cleverness; throughout he is consistently methodical in reasoning out his arguments.

The last observation I'll make is that Kagan uses Thomas Hobbes and Immanuel Kant to illustrate the vastly dissimilar ideas animating the two power centers. America lives in an anarchic, Hobbesian world without a Leviathan to maintain order among nations (clearly, the UN is not able to do that) and so when threatened sees it necessary to enforce order on its own, unilaterally if necessary. (See Iraq.) Europe by contrast lives in a time of Kant's "perpetual peace," a post-historical world where rules and agreements ensure peace and encourage trade. Thus power in the military sense is unnecessary, even dangerous. (I.e., Iraq.) Like the catch phrases, Armed Prophet would be skeptical of arguments dependent upon philosophical concepts -- I'm more of a practicalist, less of an idealist that way. But Kagan merely uses them to illustrate, not to argue. Therefore, his ideas are that much more accessible, and his arguments the more persuasive.

Okay, that's a start. Not much in the way of actual commentary or criticism yet, but I'm just warming up.

I DON'T GET IT

Armed Prophet has long threatened to write a brutal takedown of The Onion, charting its long, sad slide from a hip, funny, little-known humor rag to a hip, not-so-funny, overexposed humor rag. Such a screed is probably long overdue, but in the meantime I have a few things to say about today's edition. The top story -- New Fox Reality Show To Determine Ruler Of Iraq -- is actually pretty funny, as the Wisconsin-to-New York transplant still can be. But I'm still scratching my head over another of the full-length articles contained within: Christopher Hitchens Forcibly Removed From Trailer Park After Drunken Confrontation With Common-Law Wife.

Now, where to start? It seems pretty clear that the author doesn't know the first thing about Hitchens, what he writes about or the way he talks, except maybe from five minutes clicking around Amazon.com to note that he's written books about Mother Teresa and Henry Kissinger. The story has Hitchens being carried away from his trailer home, berating his arresting officers as "effete liberal apologists for the atrocities of late-stage capitalism." Um, yeah ... the man who says he "no longer find[s]s it useful to call [him]self a socialist," whose primary focus is persecuting Islamo-fascism, is upset about "the atrocities of late-stage capitalism"?

Also, Armed Prophet isn't sure what's so funny about Christopher Hitchens living in a trailer park, except for the "living in a trailer park" part. Hell, why not replace Hitch with Noam Chomsky? Now there's a leftist their readership would be familiar with, and who actually does despise "late-stage capitalism." (Really, has anybody used that phrase with any sincerity since 1989?) The reason why not -- meaning, the most likely inspiration for the article -- is Hitchens' reknown as a connoisseur of booze. But if the author knew anything about the man beyond that, they'd know that while Hitchens is indeed as much anti-teetotaler as he is anti-theist, its his love-hate relationship with smoking that's a greater trademark. The man is rarely photographed without a lit cigarette, is the only person Bill Maher ever let smoke on Politically Incorrect. Yet no mention; so much for even a mere chuckle of recognition.

One more thing -- and if I'm not reading too much into this already, then I certainly am now -- is that the Hitchens face Photoshopped onto the trailer park image is a little too goofy. Hair mussed, yes, but otherwise not disheveled enough. Just more proof that they don't understand their target.

So why Hitchens, why now? Some might note The Onion's anti-war slant and presume it's because he's been so forcefully pro-war against Saddam for a long while. But this is a little suspect; the author either isn't aware of Hitchens' falling-out with the left or found it inconvenient and so left it out. Hair-pulling fights with a fictional trailer trash wife? A little too esoteric. Barroom brawls with Eric Alterman and Alexander Cockburn? Now that's got comedic potential. Rather, Armed Prophet thinks it's merely Hitch's raised profile in the past few years, plus the drunk thing, and maybe, just a little teeny-weeny bit, the pro-war thing.

But at the end of it all, the worst sin it commits is the only sin that matters: It's just not funny. Therein lies a large part of The Onion's overall problems -- but that will wait for another post.

THE GREAT SASUKE WILL BE TRIUMPHANT!

For us Iwate Prefecture Assembly watchers here in the States, today brings good news: pro-wrestler-turned-assemblyman The Great Sasuke will be allowed to wear his mask on the legislative floor:

"I think he understood my message that he should reveal (more of) his face to voters," [Iwate Gov. Hiroya] Masuda said, lauding the new assembly member's move. Later in the day, Sasuke welcomed Masuda's remarks. "Frankly, I am happy and feel grateful," he said. "I think my sincerity has reached him."

Regular Armed Prophet readers will remember some of the details below, but here's the whole situation more or less, along with details on the compromise:

The day after his election, Masuda told reporters the wrestler-cum-politician should take off the mask because voters would be unable to see his expressions as he carries out his duties in the legislature. But over the past week, the prefectural government said it received about 230 e-mails, a majority of which said Sasuke should be allowed to keep his mask on. ... Sasuke said the new mask will respect the assembly's internal code, which stipulates that members "must honor the dignity of the legislature." ... Sasuke said the new mask will show more of his face around the mouth area, thus helping the public gauge his emotions more clearly. He added that the mask will feature an official Iwate Prefecture emblem on its sides.

Well, that makes Armed Prophet's day. But wait a minute... here's another political controversy in Japan ... though apparently averted. Good -- that's too much for me to tackle right now. But The Great Sasuke's first day in the Assembly is May 6, and if I can, I'll let you know how it goes.

SIZING UP THE COMPETITION

If you're following the 2004 presidential race already, then the New York Times' Adam Nagourney and Richard Stevenson article today about the White House re-election plan is a must-read. Even if you're waiting until the primaries (or after) to give a damn, here's the best part of the story:

In assessing Mr. Bush's potential opponents, Mr. Bush's advisers said Mr. Kerry could be presented as ideologically and culturally out of step, both because of his liberal positions on some issues as well as his Boston lineage and what some Bush advisers described as his haughty air. Marc Racicot, the Republican national chairman, said recently that Mr. Kerry "is going to have a hard time translating out of New England." Another Bush adviser said of Mr. Kerry, "He looks French."

Ha! You know, he does look kinda French. But then, here's the paragraph immediately following:

Several said that another leading Democratic contender, Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, could be the one Democrat who could compete with Mr. Bush in the South. But they argued that Mr. Edwards was open to attack both for his close ties with trial lawyers and for his lack of experience in government. Mr. Racicot said Mr. Edwards could be portrayed as "slick and shallow," while another Bush associate described Mr. Edwards as the Breck Girl of politics, a reference to the shiny-hair model for a popular shampoo in the 1960's.

The who? The whatzit? Breck Girl? Careful who you call out of touch there. [Private memo to Karl Rove: I think Mehlman's trying a little too hard to convince the NYT writers that he's older than 20. Just have him tone it down a little.]

DOG BITES MAN

This isn't really news, is it?

GOOD TITLE -- BUT NOT ENOUGH

Header for Nick Kristof's column this morning:

I Said That?

Kristof is just one of the New York Times' several Pollyanna op-ed writers, bur this morning he (almost) admirably takes (almost) everything back that he said during the past seven months. Now, Kristof prefers Cassandra -- as he calls himself in the column -- to Pollyanna, but, er, aren't Cassandras' visions supposed to be true but not heeded? In any case, it's nice to see some honesty about where he got it wrong:

It's too early to be sure, but my guess is that doves cried wolf in terms of the risks of upheavals in Pakistan and Jordan. Indeed, that alarm has been raised repeatedly — at the time of the first gulf war, again with the Afghanistan war and now with the Iraq war — and the worries proved exaggerated each time. True, radicals came to power in parts of Pakistan, but on the whole the Muslim Street has not been as scary as we expected. Maybe it's time to retire that bogeyman.

Kristof has been way, way off on the war since the very beginning. Very little resembling his dire warnings have come to pass, so when goes back to issuing dire warnings by the end, one glances at the previous several hundred words and wonders why he even bothers. Kristof is more useful on things he knows a lot about -- China -- but far, far less so on things he apparently doesn't know so much about -- the Middle East.

A VISION OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS TO COME?

Armed Prophet has seen early signs of a post-November electoral analysis that is now on the cusp of becoming conventional wisdom. Here are a few examples of what I've seen. Here's more "Hollywood" Sabato -- see previous post -- on war and peace:

Communism's demise made it safe for a Democrat to be elected president again, especially a "New Democrat" who said the right things about foreign policy. Not only has September 11th taken the country forward to a fearful future, but also back to an insecure past. As in the age of communism, the war and peace factor in the age of terrorism is not concerned solely with a specific conflict -- and how close it may be to an election, how popular or unpopular the conflict is, etc. Instead, war and peace has once again become a permanent part of our modern electoral landscape, a life-or-death fundamental that may be the equal of the economy, or at least the equal of an economy not mired in a deep recession.

Interesting. One can certainly see how this was probably the case during the November midterms -- President Bush ran on his foreign policy leadership while Democrats ran like it was a non-issue. Either it really was an issue, or they couldn't neutralize it with their domestic agenda (what agenda?), and Sabato is one among a few now arguing the primacy of the former. Consider what Michael Barone wrote for National Journal in February:

Life, liberty, and property have all been changed by September 11 and by other recent developments, in ways that have reshaped our political alignment and produced the results of the election of 2002. ... A nation in peril expects the leaders of its government to confront the danger and defeat its enemies. It does not expect instant deliverance, nor does it flinch at heavy casualties if it is clear that progress is being made against its enemies. Americans sustained the Cold War effort for 42 years, from 1947 to 1989, even though the end was never clearly in sight, and despite opposition to that effort from 1967 to 1989 by large and articulate segments of academia, the media, and the Democratic Party. ... From 1968 to 1988, Democrats won only one presidential election-and that by only a narrow margin-in part because Republicans convinced voters that they were better able to protect and advance America in time of peril. Democrats won in 1992 and 1996 and nearly won in 2000, when the nation seemed to be safe.

Now all this needs is a catchy phrase. September 12 America? Something like "Post-9/11 Era" will probably win, indeed pretty much has. Of course, all of this remains to be tested -- and in 2004 it will be. Armed Prophet agrees that if foreign policy issues dominate the election, George Bush will be virtually unbeatable. Sabato and Barone are among the most-respected crystal ball-gazers in American politics. While one should always take a crystal ball reading with a grain of salt, this analysis is still one of the things to look at as the war setttles down and the presidential campaigns are brought up to speed.

FRONTRUNNER WATCH

So John Kerry's going to win the Democratic nomination, right? Right? Probably yes. Many observers (i.e. people that I drink with) think that the "Massachusetts liberal" now has the nomination to lose, and barring major scandal, don't see him losing that. Armed Prophet mostly agrees, but also doesn't think Kerry is doing himself any favors right now in trying to out-Dean Dean. For example, Kerry said in New Hampshire on April 2:

What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States.

Remember that? Hardly anybody does. If you follow Washington, you might -- but even then you may be unaware that he'd said the same thing in California just days before. Once the NH comments got in the press, Tom DeLay and Denny Hastert came out swinging, but that was about the extent of the outrage. When there was actual regime change in Iraq less than a week later, it got lost amidst the Iraqis' pent-up post-war hoe-down.

So here's "Hollywood" Larry Sabato, in his Center for Politics Crystal Ball (or rather in the press release that landed in my inbox) on Kerry's situation:

It's ... possible that John Kerry will reap the benefits of being Clintonian, of voting to authorize the Iraq war while speaking up against aspects of it and calling for "regime change" in the U.S., not just Iraq. (Principle of Democratic Politics: Anything said by a Democratic candidate that angers House GOP Majority Leader Tom DeLay will benefit, not hurt, that Democratic candidate.)

That last point does seem to be true. To be sure, it didn't hurt Tom Daschle for his criticisms of George W. Bush's diplomacy because Daschle wasn't running for president at that time, and for Kerry, the presidential campaigns were (more or less) on hiatus, subsumed by the war, which hadn't quite started when Daschle spoke.

The Weekly Standard's Noemie Emery recently wrote an article positing that these statements could come back to haunt Kerry come time for the general elections. And it's true, it might -- but how John Kerry would be beating George Bush otherwise (see post above, if you haven't already) is another good question.

NBA ACTION ... A FEW DAYS LATER

So I probably should have posted something about the rest of Sunday's games -- but then, does anybody actually come to Armed Prophet for basketball analysis? It's highly doubtful. But as part of my campaign to succeed The New Republic's Gregg Easterbrook in the TMQ column at ESPN.com, let's give it a shot.

Armed Prophet fired off that bit of NBA "analysis" just as the Suns-Spurs game was getting underway, but how could I know then that it would be the game of the week? It's those events like Stephon Marbury's frantic recovery and last-moments drive across the time line and up to the key for his Hail Mary game-winning three that make this sport so damn exciting. Let's have more of this and fewer arrests.

As for Armed Prophet's loved/hated Trail Blazers, well, as a team we played better, but couldn't overcome the relentless determination of Dirk Nowitzki's cold German efficiency. (Ha! I could have made that joke much worse, if I wanted.) But this (probably) quick end won't surprise us Portlanders -- when the Blazers aren't valiantly fighting to represent the West, they're getting tossed in the first round instead.

Immediately afterward, the Kings slowly wore down the Jazz, in a solid if boring win. The core of Utah's team hasn't changed in over a decade -- it's been Stockton-Malone-Sloan since before the end of the Cold War, it seems. Meantime, the Blazers have built and lost two entirely separate title-contending teams, and two other teams (Bulls and Lakers) have built actual title-winning dynasties. Yet there the Jazz go, replacing their supporting players every few years, but keeping the never-gonna-get-it nucleus together. Meanwhile, Armed Prophet is "looking forward" to the Kings' inevitable seven games against LA for the Western Conference title.

Other games, quickly: Lakers vs. Timberwolves? Eh. Sixers vs. Hornets? Good for Iverson, but he can't win it all for them. Orlando vs. Detroit? Well I'll be damned -- another upset.

Now both #1 seeds have lost (although the Spurs have already evened the series -- and there were other games last night, but Armed Prophet had to sleep). Granted, this isn't quite as big a deal, now that they're playing first round best of sevens, no longer just best-of-fives -- but it's an odd start. Not to mention an ominous one. Since the Lakers started to rise up through the Pacific Division during mid-season, it's become clearer that they probably could make the playoffs, and if they could make the playoffs... Now that's looking like that's all the more the likely, and it's damned frustrating. Before Al Gore dropped out of the '04 presidential race, there was an "anybody but Gore" faction -- now there's an "anybody but LA" faction, including pretty much everyone except LA. (This is one thing I have no quarrel with the native East Coasters about.) If the Finals become Los Angeles vs. Unlucky Eastern Team, you can count Armed Prophet out.

WHAT'S THE DAMN POINT?

Given the kind of news coverage Armed Prophet is partial to, nobody could be more surprised than I that this morning I am writing about -- yes, the Laci Peterson case. So they found the bodies of her and her (unborn?) son in nearby bays on the Pacific, guilty(-until-presumed-innocent)-acting husband Scott Peterson has been arrested, and he's about to be arraigned on double-murder charges. Sounds like everything is well in hand, right? Not if you're Morris County, New Jersey NOW President Mavra Stark. Stark opposes the second murder charge on the pro-choice-regarding-abortion grounds that one cannot "murder" an unborn child (though Stark prefers the cold, clinical term "fetus." Here she is in the Morris County Daily Record:

"There's something about this that bothers me a little bit," Stark said. "Was it born, or was it unborn? If it was unborn, then I can't see charging (Peterson) with a double-murder."

Yeah, Armed Prophet is a little bit bothered too, but not for the same reason. If it was unborn, how did the child end up in another part of the ocean? Knowing virtually nothing about what happens to pregnancies in the postmortem (and not caring to speculate too much) it makes one wonder just what happened -- and how can she be too sure yet.

"He was wanted and expected, and (Laci Peterson) had a name for him, but if he wasn't born, he wasn't born. It sets a kind of precedent," Stark said, adding that the issue was "just something I've been ruminating on."

Just something you're ruminating, hmmm? Whether, even if everyone involved seems to agree that there was a third person involved, NOW can win an abstract technical victory by getting Scott Peterson (if he is in fact guilty) off for one of two murders?

Given the legality of abortion under most circumstances, some aspects of this are open to debate. But as Armed Prophet has more or less put himself on the record as opposing late-term abortions -- the timing of Laci Peterson's pregnancy would definitely be cause for a second murder charge.

Okay, here's one last quote:

Stark said that despite her opposition to the double-murder charge, she is not sympathetic to Scott Peterson. "I'd like to see them string him up," Stark said, "any way they can."

This NOW chapter is in favor of captial punishment? Doubtful. In fact, this last quote sort of encapsulates my final judgment on this issue: this story was worth its posting on the Drudge Report -- it puts NOW back under the media spotlight, if only to remind everyone that they are there. Was that Ms. Stark's intent? I doubt it, but I doubt the reporter had any illusions about how it would play. But could Ms. Stark have any illusions that this would actually influence the trial? I can't see how she would -- after all, she's in New Jersey; the whole Peterson situation is in California. Chalk one up for my evolving belief that most news is not actionable...

P.S. I see the Oregon Commentator has already beat me to this one -- and meanwhile makes a rather frank admission...

MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE

The Sacramento Kings, a front group for the Decepticon Transformers?

KISSINGER MAY NOT BE A NEOCON...

...but the "next Kissinger" is. Fareed Zakaria, foreign policy "rock star," is the subject of this glowing feature in New York Magazine, where even Kissinger himself is more or less talking up Zakaria for his old job:

“I would be amazed if he doesn’t wind up in government,” says Kissinger. “But I have found in my life that if you plan too precisely, it never works. He’s adopting the right course—writing thoughtful foreign-policy pieces. In time, he’ll be a candidate for any number of positions.”

Interesting. The secretary of state ruminations throughout the article sounds mostly like a creation of Zakaria's friends, David Frum, who are quoted throughout. And half the rationale seems to stem from his pedigree -- "Indian-born, educated at Harvard, conservative" -- charm "rock star ... sex symbol" -- rather than his credentials. But hey, he's young -- if he gets coverage like this a decade from now and lands a Cabinet position, this article may turn out prophetic. Also, I thought this interesting -- Zakaria on his conservatism:

Zakaria became a conservative, he says, from observing the Indian state. “People often say, ‘How could you, living in India, end up a Reaganite?’ Well, the answer is, live in India. There are two things that people don’t understand. One is the degree to which a highly regulated economy produces masses of corruption because it empowers bureaucrats. It just has to be seen to be believed. “The second,” he continues, “is that you are very quickly inured to the charms of pre-industrial village life. Whenever someone says the word community, I want to reach for an oxygen mask.”

Worth a look, even if your name is Tim Dreier. (Via Patrick Ruffini.)

UHHHH...

Virgil Hu is a character in the new movie Better Luck Tomorrow, and this is supposed to be from his website.

This honey may be a little raw and past due, but she got sass.

No comment.

NBA ACTION IS FANTASTIC!

Remember that old tagline? Well, it's usually true for at least a few minutes in the fourth quarter -- that is, unless it gets too close in the last minute, and the losing team just starts fouling.

I can't think of much that was fantastic about the Nets-Bucks game, except maybe New Jersey's first quarter field goal percentage. The Pacers-Celtics game was much better -- not just an upset, but Paul Pierce made an astonishing 21 of 21 free throws. So there was some fantasticness on display there.

The Blazers play tonight, of course -- against the Mavs, the opponent we thought the Lakers would have to face. Meanwhile, the Lakers have the one team Portland is never afraid of -- the Minnesota Timberpuppies. Does this mean the Blazers will go out in the first round? Probably. Is this a big deal? Not really. I'll just pin all my hopes on the Kings, again.

OLEAGINOUS, INDEED

This week in Slate, Christopher Hitchens writes about Iraq, oil, and Halliburton's contract to put out the fires and cap the wells. After pointing out that there are very few companies who have proved their ability to complete such a difficult task (and one is French), Hitch gets to the real reason some are so upset with the contract:

Halliburton ... was once headed by—cue mood music of sinister corporate skyscraper as the camera pans up in the pretitle sequence—Vice President Dick Cheney. Well, if that doesn't give away the true motive for the war, I don't know what does. But unless the anti-war forces believe Saddam's fires should be allowed to burn out of control indefinitely, they must presumably have an idea of which outfit should have got the contract instead of [Halliburton subcontractor] Boots and Coots. I think we can be sure that the contract would not have gone to some windmill-power concern run by Naomi Klein or the anti-Starbucks Seattle coalition, in the hope of just blowing out the flames or of extinguishing them with Buddhist mantras.

There's much more to it than that, of course, but Armed Prophet laughed out loud at that passage. Read the whole thing.

IF I'M NOT TOO LATE WITH THIS ONE...

Waaaaaaay back last Friday (not the one yesterday), C-SPAN's Washington Journal held a "roundtable" debate between Amy Goodman, host of Pacifica Radio's "Democracy Now!" and New York Post columnist John Podhoretz. I'll let you guess the subject. (Hint: It's an anagram for "raw".) Well, I just got around to watching it on C-SPAN's video archive this morning. Fairly pedestrian, through much of it. But then in the last ten minutes, Goodman responded to a question about what comes after Iraq with this highly questionable analogy:

Where next? I think that is a very important question. I always go back to the snipers in Washington and Maryland that so terrified millions of us -- people, hunkered down in their homes, not knowing who would be struck next. If you look at the perspective of the rest of the world, that was one powerful rifle, and we never knew who would be taken out next. The US has the most powerful arsenal on Earth. The US attacked Afghanistan, then dropped a missile on Yemen, now it is Iraq. In a sense, if you look from the perspective from the rest of the world, Bush is engaged in a kind of global sniper politics. It is terrifying, and it creates terror.

She said what? Compared what to whom? Unbelievable. The left doesn't want to be pigeonholed as anti-American or unpatriotiic -- indeed, they'll yelp at the slightest insinuation -- but fairly prominent leftist critics like Ms. Goodman feel perfectly comfortable making outlandish assertions like the one above. When they cut back to Podhoretz, he was incredulous, but collected himself together, and laughing in disbelief at times, said:

I think you should be proud of yourself, because you've just come up with an entirely inventive form of anti-Americanism ... to compare George Bush and the United States to the Washington snipers is so disgusting that I can hardly believe that my ears just heard what my ears just heard.

Whoa! Stop the presses! Did he just call her anti-American? Now what ever gave him an idea like that?

WHOOPS!

Yesterday a North Korean website announced that it was to begin reprocessing its precious fuel rods -- a sure sign that they were pressing on with the devlopment of nuclear weapons. But then they changed their mind, as the Gray Lady reports,

amid confusion over the accuracy of the translation. The original announcement ... had stated unequivocally that "we are successfully reprocessing more than 8,000 spent fuel rods at the final phase." However, the White House and the State Department cited another translation in which the North Koreans said, "We are successfully completing the final phase, to the point of the reprocessing operation, for some 8,000 spent fuel rods."

Flaky. Very flaky. But still, too close to comfort. For political reasons, it's probably best the US doesn't launch an immediate tactical strike against Yongbyon. But I sure hope somebody's been trying to get Beijing to do it.

UPDATE: THE GREAT SASUKE

More on the Japanese Jesse Ventura, from the Japan Times:

The Great Sasuke, a wrestler-turned-politician who triggered a row over his refusal to remove his mask while serving in the Iwate Prefectural Assembly, said Thursday he will redesign his mask.

He said the new mask will respect the assembly's internal code, which stipulates that members "must honor the dignity of the legislature."

The new look will show more of his face, he said, referring to remarks by Iwate Gov. Hiroya Masuda earlier in the week that voters have the right "to see politicians' facial expressions."

Sounds like a fair compromise. But wait -- is he trangulating? Armed Prophet sure hopes so!

Lead on, Great Sasuke! Show us the future we know can be true!

WHAT KIND OF DICTIONARIES DO THEY USE IN FOGGY BOTTOM?

The United Nations rejected an American-sponsored amendment to a censure of Cuba for the recent imprisonment (and worse) of political dissidents, yet Richard Boucher is claiming "victory." Huh? Even the New York Times knows better:

The United Nations Human Rights Commission passed a mild rebuke to Cuba today, but it said nothing about the recent crackdown on dissidents that has set off international outrage.

That's the NYT's standard condescension in about second gear, the kind usually reserved for Republican administrations (I know, I know -- but Foggy Bottom can never really be said to be under any Republican's control). And more:

A statement read on Cuban television today called the final vote "a new moral victory for Cuba" and said that the United States had suffered "a hard setback in its obsessive anti-Cuban campaign," by the exclusion of any strong sanctions. A State Department spokesman, Richard A. Boucher, said the vote was a "victory" nonetheless. "It's passing a resolution that says the world is concerned about the human rights situation in Cuba," Mr. Boucher said at a briefing. "That's what we wanted; that's what we got."

So now the State Department has us in a pissing match with Fidel Castro? That's just great. It's enough to make you wonder if they learned anything at all about the UN during the last six months.

WHY THEY HATE US

French journalist Michel Gurfinkiel records this excellent insight about his countrymen's anti-Americanism -- and his government's keen interest in propagating it -- in latest Weekly Standard:

Anti-Americanism [is] a very convenient tool that brings together right-wing nationalists, in the Gaullist or Vichy tradition, with left-wing, post-Marxist nationalists.

And that's just one line out of a similarly smart essay. This simple statement bears further examination and analysis. It certainly appears to be true, but in order to determine to what extent it is consciously reinforced, someone who knows more about the French than Armed Prophet.

What I need is an "Assignment Desk" à la Mickey Kaus...

ÉL ES UN PERDEDOR

Michael Lind, one of the few genuine ex-conservatives out there, inadvertantly reminds us why so few conservatives travel leftward over time, compared with the number of leftists who gravitate right: because many left-wing arguments are merely rhetorical devices and unsupported slanders against the "far right," and it takes some difficult contortions to make oneself actually believe them. Take this spectactularly unspectacular display of disingenuousness in this Salon.com piece. It's about those nefarious neocons, and was coincidentally published on the very day Baghdad fell:

The core group now in charge consists of neoconservative defense intellectuals. (They are called "neoconservatives" because many of them started off as anti-Stalinist leftists or liberals before moving to the far right.) Inside the government, the chief defense intellectuals include Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense. He is the defense mastermind of the Bush administration; Donald Rumsfeld is an elderly figurehead who holds the position of defense secretary only because Wolfowitz himself is too controversial.

Oh, really? And the Linds of America didn't consider John Ashcroft too controversial a figure to be in the cabinet? Perhaps a better explanation is that the Bush administration went looking for White House experience to counterbalance the relatively inexperienced president; Wolfowitz might have made (and could still make) a perfectly good Defense Secretary, but Rumsfeld had logged many more hours in the Oval Office. (Rumsfeld, a meaningless figurehead?) But then again, Armed Prophet doesn't need to offer a better explanation, because Lind doesn't actually offer any explanation for why he believes his above-quoted statement is true. So why should anyone bother take him seriously?

IT'S NOT UNUSUAL

Glancing up at the bank of television monitors above my fluorescent-bathed noggin earlier this morning, I saw most non-amazing thing on the cable television networks: A staged propaganda video of a man purporting to be ex-Iraq dictator Saddam Hussein standing amongst an "adoring" crowd of Iraqis. (Armed Prophet gets a shiver up his spine -- a good one -- every time he gets to write "ex-dictator" next to Saddam's name these days.) Also not totally incredible, the Abu Dhabi-broadcast video claimed the video was shot on April 9, the day Comical Ali didn't bother to show up for his daily denials that American tanks were criscrossing Saddam's fortress, Baghdad.

In fact, the only thing that surprised me was that all of the cable networks were running it, re-running it and re-re-running it. It's almost the top of the morning, and they're still showing it every few minutes. Saddam may or may not have still been still breathing on April 9, but I know one thing he was not doing: standing in the middle of a big crowd of Iraqi citizens -- at least, not without falling face-forward to the ground.

Meanwhile, another Baathist official captured. If Saddam's out there (which Armed Prophet somewhat doubts), we'll catch him.

P.S. A key Saddam adviser says the Butcher of Baghdad is dead. Well, one would say that to shelter the Great Leader from the embarrassment of capture, right? But as it is, we're clearly going to round up a significant number of the faces on the Army's Saddam Inner Circle cards. Can you say "Judgment at Baghdad"?

P.P.S. What's the bigger stroke of genius: The war itself or those cards? At eBay, the prices are already going down -- with the current, inexplicable exception of one particular deck. Advantage: Armed Prophet!

A VACANCY IN THE AXIS OF EVIL

There's a David Horowitz interview in Right Wing News this week (via LGF) -- another good John Hawkins "get," and worth the read, regardless of whether or not you entirely agree with the "left’s most hated right wing icon." (Armed Prophet does more often than not, but I still have a somewhat different take on his tactics and character.) Horowitz's favored next target in the war on terrorism? Syria.

John Hawkins: Speaking of the war on terrorism, what do you think the next step we need to take is?

David Horowitz: Syria. They have got to stop supporting Hamas and Hezbollah and that probably means there needs to be a regime change in Syria, but one doesn't know until one tests it. We have to do the same with Iran and of course, we have to deal with the little menace in North Korea. He already seems to be responding. The "shock and awe" of the three-week defeat of a country the size of France has had a sobering effect on rogue regimes throughout the world.

For awhile now, it's seemed like it's only the George Bush-will-invade-anybody left that's been fidgeting about Syria. But in the last week and a half now, some on the right are warming to the idea (to the left's extreme distress), though the Bush administration is saying there are no plans to attack the country. Surely such a full-scale regime change-and-rebuild argument has not been comprehensively made on the right, though along with Libya and Saudi Arabia, it certainly has been mentioned as something like the Fourth Beatle of our most-despised rogue states.

Like the US Supreme Court, there's no required number of members or points to an "Axis," but three is a good, round number: Now that Saddam Hussein is gone, there's a vacancy in the Axis of Evil. Armed Prophet's suggestion: Elevate Syria. Like North Korea and Iran, a military campaign is not so widely seen as feasible in the near term the way was always true of Iraq after 9/11. But like the leaders of the other two, Bashir "Baby" Assad (a dictator more in the model of Kim Jong-Il than Saddam) should be pushed to "voluntarily" reform their states. Regime change, yes -- but by invasion and reconstruction? We're not there yet.

So the protesters can put down their signs, at least until we start massing troops along the Syrian border. And even then, I wouldn't mind if they didn't bother picking them back up.

P.S. Would Bush ever announce an Axis of Evil lineup change? It's unlikely. Though the phrase is probably already in the galley proofs for the next edition of Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, Bush himself hasn't uttered it since early 2002. Nevertheless, somebody like Donald Rumsfeld could make a similar splash, so long as Bush appeared to give his say-so, and have a similar effect.

DOUBLE-TAKE

Coastal Weather Statement National Weather Service Baltimore MD/Washington DC 445 AM EDT Fri Apr 18 2003

...Minor Tidal Flooding Friday Night And Saturday...

Persistent East Winds Combined With Astronomical High Tides Will Likely Result In Minor Flooding At The Times Of High Tides Late Friday And Saturday.

Are you like Armed Prophet? Did you have to go back and change the meaning of "Astronomical" in your head? If so, your undergraduate degree is probably a Bachelor of Arts.

BREAKING NEWS

"@ WAR" certainly will stay up a little longer: Fox's Bret Baier at the Pentagon says the US now believes that "senior Iraqi leadership" are in Northwestern Iraq. Armed Prophet predicts a 100% chance of shooting before the weekend is over.

Also: I beat the Command Post!

P.S. W/r/t "@ WAR": With the great majority of fighting in Iraq now over, the Command Post has actually expanded -- partly by broadening its focus. Interesting.

P.P.S. Via the Command Post itself, I find a link to Robert Fisk's own Independent, which reports 2,000 unmarked graves outside Kirkuk. It hasn't been completely verified -- as with so many other stories in recent weeks -- but I wouldn't be surprised, would you?

HENRY KISSINGER, NEOCON?

Surely not. But under the uniquely withering interrogation of Fox News sensation Alan Colmes, Kissinger said he believed US military power should be used to both prevent and end atrocities like those in Iraq and Rwanda.

It's the kind of thing Paul Wolfowitz might say if he wasn't currently obliged to be careful about what policies he advocates.

Has Kissinger said such a thing before? And with any regularity? If so, Armed Prophet isn't aware of it. During the excruciating "rush to war," the New York Times mischaracterized him (what? no!) as an anti-war Republican, figuring him as a "traditionalist" whose top considerations were America's "blood and treasure". He's usually referred to as a "realist" and a "pragmatist," a practitioner of "realpolitik," often mentioned in the same sentences as Lawrence Eagleburger types (who along with Not-So-Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf, was considerably more skeptical about the war).

Of course, Kissinger served at top levels in the executive branch during an earlier generation (indeed, generations): as a foreign policy advisor to Kennedy and Johnson, and Secretary of State for both Nixon and Ford. Three out of those four presidents are no longer even alive, and CNN has already prepared an obituary for the last.) Given such a long career, influencing and commenting upon a half-century's worth of international affairs, one can't just affix a label like "neocon" to the notorious Dr. K. (Although Pat Buchanan would point out that he is a Jew.) One thing you can't accuse him of is being an "idealist."

Even if his own past actions suggest this statement is less than purely ingenuous, then he at least wants to be seen this way -- but what's this? Christopher Hitchens and Henry Kissinger on the same side of an issue?

P.S. What about Turkmenistan?

RE: TAKING DOWN THE "@ WAR"

Armed Prophet has been deluged with emails from all corners of the Internet (er, yeah...) with questions about when and/or whether the "@ WAR" part of this blog's title would be removed. Some believe the war is basically over, and it's time to let it go. Others argue that because the war on terror continues, one might as well leave it -- it was long overdue as it was. But the other side snipes back, pointing out: that's obviously stupid, because there was never the intention of having such a suffix in the first place.

So what to do with the superfluous four characters (added in a fit of pique on or about March 19) at the end of this blog's title? Delete them. Or maybe not...

Other possibilities include some combination of retaining the "@" but changing "WAR" to something else. Current frontrunners include ... well, I guess there aren't any. Email me if you've got any ideas: armedprophet -at- usa -dot- com. If you make a good argument, I may do just that.

P.S. Matt Drudge points Armed Prophet in the direction of this Gallup report showing that only 31% of Americans believe the war in Iraq is over, compared with 49% who see minor fighting still ahead. It may be a mistake to live by the polls, but I know the current title won't kill me.

SETTLED

I guess this answers that question.

MUST BE A REGIONALISM

Paul Wolfowitz, being interviewed by John Gibson, about whether he thinks Saddam Hussein is dead or alive, on Fox News, just a few moments ago:

My boss has taught me not to have an opinion on such issues, and he's a man from Missouri on that kind of thing.

Hmmm... I think that's supposed to be a Harry Truman reference, but I'm not sure. For what it's worth, Don Rumsfeld is from Chicago. And Wolfowitz is from New York. Surely this couldn't be a Rex Whitton thing?

LIKE THE AMISH

You can make fun of them in here as much as you'd like, and they'd never know the difference.

A HOAX? A NON-HOAX? A HOAXED NON-HOAX?

This morning The Smoking Gun (via Fark) published what purport to be CNN.com's prepared obituaries -- or rather the introductory page for the full special reports -- for a number of elderly personages: Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, Pope John Paul II and even Dick Cheney. Armed Prophet, media savvy political observer that I pretend to be online, is skeptical for a couple of reasons. Now on one hand, I'm pretty sure it's SOP to have obits ready to go in case of the inevitable, and it's also not impossible that such a thing could be inadvertently posted. So if those aren't the real ones, then Armed Prophet would wager that the real ones are out there somewhere, possibly in a hard drive located in an Atlanta high-rise.

But what about this? First read the text for the Reagan obit. Sounds about like what you'd expect, right? Now read the Fidel Castro obituary. Now that doesn't sound right, does it? Seems like the CNN graphic designers were getting a little lazy, or maybe they're just dirty Commies (which can't be ruled out, you know). Another thing to consider: These obit intro pages also appear to be as much as two years old -- more sloppiness, methinks.

Okay, but how about this: Fark is heavily trafficked by some very talented Photoshop mavens. See here, for instance, their suggestions for a new Georgia flag (the state has been arguing about the flag and Confederate symbols since about the time that George McFly cleaned Biff Tannen's clock in the Hill Valley High high school parking lot). Most of those are far more difficult than the CNN layouts. So fakery cannot be ruled out. In fact, Fark has already been taking submissions for parodies of the CNN obits. The first one for Mohammed "Baghdad Bob" Saeed al-Sahhaf (AKA Comical Ali) one is the best, and most timely -- but if you scroll down further, "Recursive Obituary" is also pretty clever. Here's the original thread where all the Farkers discuss the revelations -- apparently the graphics themselves were found by/came from a Farker, which makes this all the more suspicious. And yet nobody has raised the possibility of a hoax? CNN.com is reportedly "very angry," but to look at their page, you wouldn't know it (naturally).

Then again, this may in fact be true. There's a lot of links out there, and perhaps a more tech-savvy blogger than I (see preceding post) can figure this out. But if it's not legit, then somebody named Peter Rentz (the CNN designer supposedly responsible for these images) is getting screwed big time. Here is the currently-defunct link (for your edification, I guess) wherefrom these images apparently originated. And here's a blogger who claims to have corresponded with Rentz about the matter.

Who knows? This could all go the way of Steven Den Beste's Salam Pax theory -- which is to say, those of us outside of certain circles may never know for certain. Damn! There's nothing us information-agers hate more than a lack of information.

P.S. Did I really finish that whole thing before Glenn Reynolds got around to it? I'm still waiting...

P.P.S. So that's it, huh? Well, I suppose maybe half of my observations are still relevant.