Right Wing Nut House

Lt. General James Mattis got himself into some hot water the other day by…well, acting like a Marine.

“Actually it’s quite fun to fight ‘em, you know. It’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right up front with you, I like brawling,” said Mattis.

It probably wouldn’t have gotten much attention except General Mattis didn’t stop there:

“You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil,” Mattis said during a panel discussion. “You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them.”

In what could only be termed “damage control,” the Pentagon scolded General Mattis for…what? Being Honest? Doing his job?

On Thursday, Gen. Michael W. Hagee, commandant of the Marine Corps, issued a statement saying, “I have counseled him concerning his remarks, and he agrees he should have chosen his words more carefully.” General Hagee added, “While I understand that some people may take issue with the comments made by him, I also know he intended to reflect the unfortunate and harsh realities of war.”

Reactions from moonbats and the MSM were predictable.

“We do not need generals who treat the grim business of war as a sporting event,” said Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “These disturbing remarks are indicative of an apparent indifference to the value of human life.”

Awad urged that “appropriate disciplinary action” be taken against Mattis.

Okay, so the terrorist supporters (CAIR) don’t like it when an American General says he likes killing terrorists. But what about this “indifference to human life?”

Last year, on his second tour in Iraq, Mattis said he embraced a “hearts and minds” posture, lecturing troops to make friends with Iraqis. He laid down strict rules for when troops could fire and required commanders to seek his permission before using artillery.

He also led an overhaul of procedures for handling prisoners to avoid mistreatment.

What all this boils down to is something we civilians are very uncomfortable in trying to deal with. And that is, very simply, we need whole bunches of people like General Mattis if we’re going to win.

Every society needs warriors. These are the people who, during peacetime are abject failures, or worse, menaces to the society that needs them during combat.

When war breaks out, they’re suddenly transformed into great leaders of men who, through acts of personal courage, earn the respect and admiration of the peoples they protect.

A couple of examples that come to mind are “Lighthorse” Harry Lee and Ulysses Grant.

A daring, hell-for-leather- calvalryman, Lee was George Washington’s favorite Calvary officer during the Revolutionary War. Known for his lightening guerilla strikes on British positions, he once captured a British Garrison, took 150 prisoners, while losing only a single man. He did this by threatening that he would kill any man who made a sound while approaching the enemy.

Washington also chose Lee to confront one of the gravest threats to the new Republic, the Whiskey Rebellion. Frontier farmers, who both grew grain and turned their crop into the easily transportable commodity of whiskey, refused to pay a tax on their distilled beverages. The farmers attacked a few tax collectors and took over some courts. Washington responded by sending Harry Lee with 12,000 hardened regulars to confront the farmers.

One look at Lee and the farmers knew he meant business. The “rebellion” died then and there.

During peacetime however, Lee was a total failure. He met and married two rich women and went through both their estates in less than 15 years (his first wife died of fever). He gambled, he speculated in land, he ran up huge debts, and would have died in debtors prison if not bailed out by friends. He deserted his family (including his young son Robert who would go on to his own spectacular military career) and died penniless in Jamaica still looking for his fortune.

Grant was a different story. After being asked to resign his commission in the army for drunkenness, Grant lived in Illinois and worked at his fathers store. Not able to hold that job, he moved to St. Louis where he tried his hand at a variety of trades, failing miserably in all of them.

Then came the civil war and within a year of being commissioned, he was a general leading troops against the south. After several tremendous victories, he was made General in Chief where he subsequently led the North to victory.

After the war, he dabbled in stocks and became wealthy. When the call came from Republicans to run for President in 1868, he accepted and won in a landslide.

Grant’s Presidency will be remembered for being the most corrupt in American history. Although Grant himself was never tainted with wrongdoing, most of his cabinet was taking payoffs in one form or another.

When he left the Presidency, Grant had the misfortune of waking up one day and finding his fortune gone. His trusted partner had bilked Grant and hundreds of others out of their life savings. Penniless and sick from cancer, Grant then wrote what is considered one the finest autobiographies in American letters

He died shortly after completion of the book, a broken man.

The point is the chances are pretty good that the United States would not be what it is today if not for the efforts of both Lee and Grant. And while General Mattis may be a blunt, outspoken man, he represents quite simply the finest force of shock troops this planet has ever seen.

Today’s Marine Corps defines lethality. They are trained killers. They are also, to a man, the finest group of US citizens that I know of. They serve selflessly and with tremendous pride in their professionalism. They have a code of honor that should make us civilians cringe in shame for the lack of one.

We couldn’t survive as a nation without them. So to General Mattis, I say thanks. And don’t listen to the moonbats barking. They’ll “move on” to something else soon enough.

This being Friday, it’s time for my neighbor Marvin Moonbat to give his take on the events of the last week.

HEARING WHAT ISN’T SAID (By Marvin Moonbat)

When listening to Bushitler, it’s extremely important to ignore the words our Chimp-in-Chief is saying and instead listen to what you know in your heart of hearts he really means.

Admittedly, this takes a little practice. And a little imagination. And a little reefer mixed with my own concoction of special K and ground up XTC. (Note: Don’t try this combination if, within 48 hours you have to A) See your parents. B) Take a test; or C) Perform any task that requires manual dexterity, mental acuity, or color differentiation).

Let me give you an example. Anytime the Smirking Chimp says “Freedom,” what he really means is “Neo-cons.” So when the Liar-in-Chief says “Freedom is on the march” what he’s really saying is “Neo-cons, in their efforts to undermine the constitution, impose a Nazi-like state on America, and conquer the world, are getting ready to invade Iran.”

See how simple that is?

Another example is “Social Security Reform.” Whenever your hear the Chimp mention social security, think “dog food.” As in “I want to destroy social security and impoverish old people so that they’re reduced to eating dog food and sleeping in garbage cans.”

Getting the hang of it?

Try this one…”Iraq.” Give up? This one’s easy. When shrub says “Iraq” he really means “Vote Rigging in Ohio.” As in “We went to war in Iraq to create a false climate of fear so that no one would notice that we rigged the voting machines in Ohio to steal the election.”

That one was too easy.

This one’s a little tougher…”The War on Terror.” What F**kface really means is “Kill all the Homos.” As in “The sham war on terror is a political ploy to garner support for the construction of concentration camps so that we can round up and eventually kill all the homos, blacks, progressives, and environmentalists.”

Don’t believe me? Haliburton got the contracts to build the camps. I read it at the Democratic Underground.

My favorite has to be “God.” Whenever Bushie talks about “God” what he really means is “I’m a lying sack of Sh*t.” As in, “Whenever I talk about God, I’m really talking about me, which makes me a smirking, walking, talking, nazi douchebag, lying sack of sh*t.”

It’s easy once you get the hang of it.

Well, I gotta go to bed now. Hope the XTC wears off before the test tomorrow in my “America’s Evil Influence on the Rest of the World” class. Guess I’ll have to bone up by reading the DU forums for a while.

.

We’ve linked to John Hawkins excellent site Right Wing News many a time here at the House. And for good reason. John’s posts on topics from the looniness of the Democratic Underground to his legendary Q & A Friday which is both informative and hilarious make RWN a daily stop for me and thousands of other loyal readers.

That’s why it’s going to be particularly painful for me to fisk Mr. Hawkins right smartly.

In a move designed to challenge Star Trek Fans worldwide, Mr. Hawkins has made the incredible blunder of actually ranking “The Ten Greatest Star Trek Characters of all Time.”

What folly! What hubris! WTF John? Bad enough that you include that simpering, swishy, sorry excuse for a Captain Jonathan Archer in your top ten but then you had to go and diss Captain Janeway by calling her “the Worst. Captain. Ever. Ever.” (one “ever” would have been enough…it was the second one that set me off.)

Here’s Mr. Hawkins Top Ten:

1. James Kirk
2. Spock
3. Jean Luc Picard
4. Data
5. Jonathan Archer
6. Worf
7. 7 of 9
8. T’Pol
9. Odo
10. Deanna Troi

This list is a travesty. Odo? Aforementioned namby-pamby Archer? T’Pol?

First, its obvious Mr. Hawkins has a bias against Star Trek Voyager. By only including 7 of 9 from that excellent show, as well as his dismissal of Janeway, Mr. Hawkins has demonstrated an unwarranted animus towards what is, in my opinion, the second best Star Trek series bested only by Nextgen . Before I rank the various Star Trek series, here are my Top Ten Star Trek Characters:

1. Picard.
2. Spock
3. Data
4. Kirk
5. Janeway
6. Troi
7. 7 of 9
8. Tuvak
9. Worf
10. Leonard McCoy

I ranked Kirk farther down because, frankly, I always thought him pretty much of a one dimensional character (although a brave and clever Captain).

I always liked the humanity of Janeway as well as her iron will.

Tuvak is probably the closest to what Gene Roddenbery had in mind when he invented the Vulcans; dispassionate, truly unemotional (T’Pol is hot, John, but sometimes she looks like she’s about ready to explode) and a total slave to logic.

And McCoy, who not only was the most complete character in the original series but along with Kirk and Spock gave the show a special chemistry that carried over very well into the feature films.

Honorable Mentions:

Odo
Scotty
T’Pol
Guinan

If you’ve read John’s “Bonuses,” you’ll notice in my Honorable Mentions I have two characters that Mr. Hawkins listed as his most “annoying.” The only reason I included Odo was that someone had to represent the excerable Deep Space Nine. Scotty will probably be on many top ten lists. To me, he barely missed because he, like Ohura, seemed to be outside the circle of major characters on the series. As for T’Pol…John is right, she’s HOT! And Guinan’s relationship with Picard was IMO the most fascinating part of Nextgen .

Now, to carry this “Best of” theme a little further, how about ranking the series?

1. Next Generation
2. Voyager
3. Star Trek (original)
4. Enterprise
5. DS9

I know it’s considered heresy by some to not list the original series as one’s favorite and maybe it’s because I’ve seen every episode 500 times, but I just don’t think the show has worn very well down through the years. Cheesy sets, overly simplistic plots, and cardboard characters make the series dated and sometimes unwatchable. Yes there are several classic episodes-”Trouble with Tribbles” comes to mind-written by some first class sci-fi authors, but not enough to compensate for the rest.

While we’re on a roll here, why not rank the movies?

1. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
3. Star Trek: First Contact
4. Star Trek: The Movie
5. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
6. Star Trek: Generations
7. Star Trek: Nemesis
8: Star Trek: Insurrection
9. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
10. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

I actually enjoyed watching all of the more recent ones with the Nextgen cast but I believe the first four were better made, with incredible production values and better plots.

One last word on Mr. Hawkins’ brave but foolish effort. In the words of Mr. Spock:

“Fascinating is a word I use for the unexpected. In this case, I should think ‘interesting’ would suffice.”
The Squire of Gothos

Media reaction to President Bush’s State of the Union Speech was surprisingly mild. The afterglow from the Iraqi elections may have had something to do with that. More than that, it was the President’s use of one of Ronald Reagan’s favorite SOTUS ploys; draw broad pictures and let Congress fill in the details. That way, something gets done about the issue, Congress gets some credit, and the President doesn’t make too many enemies; win, win, win all the way around.

In the case of social security, however, that dog ain’t gonna hunt. Bush’s primary job will be to convince Republican lawmakers to get on board the reform bandwagon. Democrats have made clear (and in no uncertain terms) that their job will be to obstruct the President’s proposals, even to the point of a Senate filibuster. The Dems think they have a club to beat the president over the head with come midterms in 2006. If they stay united and play their cards right, they’re absolutely correct.

The fact is, there’s no easy way to get from here to there on social security. Any reform will mean soaring deficits and, for people like me, cutting benefits. Over the next few months you’re going to hear a lot of numbers bandied about by both sides. No matter what anybody says, a transition to private accounts will cost the government at least $1 trillion dollars. There’s no getting around it and both Bush and the Democrats know this.

Everyone also knows something must be done. The Democrats will content themselves with being naysayers, sitting on the sidelines allowing Republicans to do the heavy political lifting, and garnering the political windfall when it becomes clear that there’s real pain involved in the transition.

Good strategy. Irresponsible governance.

Here’s some media reaction to the President’s speech.

The New York Times was less vitriolic than usual:

The State of the Union speech has come in recent years to be a laundry list of everything the president would do if he had the power to do everything. Bill Clinton was a particular fan of that approach, and polls have always shown that Americans like it. Last night, George W. Bush delivered a modified version, with a raft of initiatives that included some things new but a great deal that was very familiar. We were pleased to hear the call for better defense in death-penalty cases and more community health centers in poor areas, and the mention of $350 million in aid for Palestinians to promote the peace process with Israel. But we were disheartened by the renewed call for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and the failure to mention development aid to Africa or virtually any other country that is not identified as a prime source of terrorism.

The Times was also “heartened” by the Iraqi elections but dubious of SS reform.

The Washington Post was encouraged by the President’s SS proposals but sees the devil in the numbers ($754 billion) put out recently by the Bush White House:

The personal accounts Mr. Bush advocated are intelligently structured in many ways. The requirement that workers, on retirement, use at least part of their money to buy annuities to keep them above the poverty level; the prohibition on workers withdrawing money before retiring; the default investment plan of a “lifestyle account” that would shift workers, as they age, into less risky investment blends — all of these are sensible approaches.

Because the accounts would be phased in beginning in 2009, that number is misleading. And Mr. Bush made private accounts look like a no-lose proposition, saying, “Your money will grow, over time, at a greater rate than anything the current system can deliver.” That may be true for many account holders, but Mr. Bush didn’t address what would happen to those who do not fare as well.

David Frum of NRO Online was predictably ebullient:

The speech was long, but not wordy: Its power came not from poetic flourishes, but from the clarity of its message and the firmness of its purpose. And yet the speech was not uncompromising or harsh. Without trimming his conservative principles, the president reaffirmed his commitment to a compassionate approach to AIDS, poverty, and gang violence, and he affirmed a renewed national commitment to defendants in death penalty cases.

The Los Angeles Times, one of the President’s most persistent and vocal critics, was impressed…up to a point:

It was a triumphant moment for Bush, but also a reminder that the rationale for the war has changed. If the Iraqi people’s freedom was once seen as merely a bonus from an unavoidable war, that freedom has moved to center stage as the war’s primary justification. That’s because contrary to what Bush said in a previous State of the Union speech, we now know the threat posed by Hussein was not imminent.

Given that history, Bush was wise in Wednesday’s address to restrain himself in discussing Iran and North Korea, nations he memorably described as part of a three-country “axis of evil” three years ago.

The Nation seems a little miffed:

He did not shy away from the freedom-is-our-mission rhetoric of his inaugural speech, which was widely criticized for being cynically unrealistic. Bush declared, “America will stand with the allies of freedom to support democratic movements in the Middle East and beyond, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.” And he named names, calling upon Saudi Arabia and Egypt, two autocracies long supported by Washington, to move toward democracy. Certainly, he–or Condoleezza Rice–might be on the phone tomorrow to Cairo and Riyadh, explaining that Bush does not expect immediate action. Nevertheless, such words probably will provide encouragement to democracy activists in those countries and in others. These people, though, should keep in mind that Bush’s father–who clearly is no role model for his son–egged on the Shiites in Iraq at the end of the Gulf War and then did not come to their rescue when they were slaughtered.

And here’s a laughable bit from the BBC Online:

But one of the moments that many will take away was of a mother whose son was killed in Iraq emotionally embracing an Iraqi human-rights campaigner.

Janet Norwood’s marine son, Sgt Byron Norwood, was killed in the assault on Falluja, and Mr Bush acknowledged her and in doing so, publicly acknowledged that troops are dying in Iraq.

I took a chance and googled up “Bush acknowledges deaths Iraq” and got 557 pages. The fact is, every time the President speaks of Iraq he speaks of the sacrifices of the soldiers and their families. Everyone with half a brain (excluding, I guess the BBC reporter) knows what he’s talking about when he says “sacrifices.” Only the deliberately myopic would say otherwise.

NO WORDS NECESSARY
Originally uploaded by elvenstar522.

The brave die never, though they sleep in dust:
Their courage nerves a thousand living men.
~Minot J. Savage

One of the things I love about the internet is the huge number of wildly creative people. It boggles the mind to see what someone can do with a little imagination and access to photoshop.

That said, this toy soldier hostage story has hit the blogosphere like a firestorm with both sides of the political spectrum having an enormous amount of fun.

Here’s Ace with the “Top Ten other Terrorist Threats”

10. “If the UN does not immediately withdraw support for the US occupation of Iraq, the Jihad Brotherhood will cut off one of Papa Smurf’s three fingers”

2. “Deliver Donald Rumsfeld to us as a war criminal for trial or we will take our collection of Muppets and pose them in the most insidiously-sexual of manners; verily, your children will weep bitter tears when they witness Elmo being sodomized by the deviant Gonzo and his pansexual chickens”

Scrappleface has a George Bush action doll rescuing the unfortunate plastic warrior:

(2005-02-01) — Just hours after Islamic militants in Iraq threatened to behead a kidnapped U.S. soldier doll, the camouflaged action figure was rescued in a daring nighttime operation by a toy George W. Bush action figure.

Even as the mission was secretly under way, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-MA, went before the Senate to call for the immediate withdrawal of 12,000 military action figures from Iraq.

Varifrank sums up the situation of the terrorists nicely:

Can you get any more impotent than this? Toys? Who are they kidding? Did they think no one would notice? It has to be a bad week to be an islamic teenage terrorist, first old women and young girls laugh at you and vote, despite everything you told them, now in your bold attempt to get some publicity, someone in your cell decides to use his G.I. Joe collection to convince the Americans to leave Iraq.

I would say that no one could be this dumb, then I remembered Mohammed Salameh. He was the guy who wanted to get his deposit back from the rental agency after using it to bomb the WTC. I thought to myself that people must eat a lot of lead paint chips in the Middle East…

Red State Rant has begun a “Free Cody” campaign. Cody is the name of the action figure currently being held by the terrorist and threatened with beheading:

Will it Never end? Yesterday an Islamic terrorist group released pictures of what it called US soldier John Adams. John Adams real name is Cody and he is a toy registered with Dragon Models USA, Cody is a special OPS figure. The Liberal Advocacy group People for the American Ethical and United Democratic Treatment of Plastics (PAEUDTP) have already responded, registered a complaint with someone and the group plans a march on Washington to pressure the President to remove all Toys from the Occupied Iraqi areas. Patricia Burk of PAEUDTP (whew!) commented this president is responsible for the figure and a whole lot of other stuff to. “Bush lied and good Toys died.”

I wonder what’s going to happen to the guy who thought this up?

.

The road is long
With many a winding turn
That leads us to who knows where
Who knows when
But I’m strong
Strong enough to carry him
He ain’t heavy, he’s my brother.
(”He Ain’t Heavy He’s My Brother” by Rufus Wainwright)

It was in the faces of those Iraqis who voted on Sunday. Emotions that couldn’t be captured by any camera, couldn’t be described by any reporter or pundit who, for hour after hour on Sunday droned on about the historic nature of this moment.

Somehow, I don’t think the Iraqis were thinking very much about history; at least not the way that the talking heads were speaking about it. How could they? After all, the historical perspective of an American living in a country barely 200 years old is laughable compared to an Iraqi whose civilization goes back nearly 10,000 years.

I have no idea what the Iraqis thought of this election as it related to their history. I do know I saw something in the faces of those Iraqis that bridged the chasm of years separating their civilization and mine. It’s something so basic, so elemental to the human condition that it must be something we’re born with, something passed down through the ages by some kind of hardwiring in our brains or perhaps even something in our genes.

It is the desire to be free.

How else can you explain the fact that millions of Iraqis, demonstrating an almost unearthly courage in the face of threats that would have frozen the hearts of just about anybody in the west, went to polling places that they knew all too well were targeted for terrorist attacks?

And to prove that courage knows no gender, age, or economic status, the Iraqis made the occasion of this vote a chance to share the experience with family. Widespread reports of even the poorest Iraqis getting dressed up in their Friday-go-to-Mosque clothes and walking (sometimes up to 13 miles) with the whole family in tow, pushing the elderly and infirm in carts, carrying children too young to vote but old enough so that when it’s their turn to exercise their natural rights as human beings, they’ll remember this day and be able to put into context how far they had come.

Then there were the tears; both mine and the Iraqis. I didn’t expect to be so affected by seeing people engaged in the simple act of voting. But watching them weep, I teared up as well. I was happy for them, yes. But more than that, I felt a vindication. Not a shallow triumphalism that manifested itself amongst some on the right side of the blogsphere in a crowing “I told you so” attitude towards the left (although God knows, they deserved that and worse). But a vindication of my belief that despite the best efforts of the terrorists and their “useful idiot” allies in the press and leftist circles around the world, the sacrifices of those killed and wounded in this war have not been in vain. That here is a direct correlation between the spilling of American blood, the spending of American treasure and the physical manifestation of a selfless idea; the idea that liberty is the birthright of every human on the planet.

It was almost as if for one brief moment, the dead had come to life, the lame had regained use of their broken limbs, the grief stricken had been granted a reprieve in pain, and the all the bickering and backbiting about this endeavor had been silenced. I felt a closeness, a kinship with those men and women that transcended any differences in religion or culture. It was a feeling of brotherhood whose members share common hopes, common dreams, and similar aspirations; the simple, yet powerful belief that the life a parent bequeaths to the next generation will be better than the one lived by the current generation.

Middle east expert Fouad Ajami:

It was almost like we as Americans had grown estranged from the people of Iraq. We came to doubt them. We got used to seeing them in a foul mood. We didn’t see enough gratitude on the ground in Iraq. For a fleeting moment, today, January 31, in the immediate aftermath of the election, it seems as though we’ve closed a circle. We’ve gone back to that dramatic day, April 9, 2003, when that statue of Saddam Hussein was toppled in Firdos Square [in Baghdad]. We now seem to be bonded with the Iraqis because they were doing the most American of things, voting. (Hat Tip: Belgravia Dispatch)

If indeed “the circle is closed” as Ajami points out, there’s no doubt that the cost has been high; higher than anybody would have predicted on that glorious April day in 2003 when most Iraqis joined us in celebrating the downfall of one of the bloodiest tyrants in human history. So the question becomes how to hold that circle together? What can we do to insure that this is a magnificent first step towards self-government instead of something we look back on 5 or 10 years from now with rueful regret at our folly.

I think the answer is pretty clear; we’ve got to stay the course. We’ve got to continue to help the Iraqis with the mundane but vital chores of protecting and nurturing this nascent democracy. Surrounded as they are on all sides by nations that wish them to fail, Iraqis have a hugely difficult time ahead. There will be setbacks. It will appear at times that unity is impossible, that compromise is out of reach. But somehow, Iraqis must find a way to make all the disparate segments of their society coalesce so that the sum of its parts is greater than the whole.

A tall order, that. But an order that Americans and freedom loving people everywhere stand ready to help fill. It won’t be easy and it won’t be pretty. But the Iraqis are family now. And they need our help.

Isn’t that what brothers and friends are for?

Kiefer_Sutherland_108504a
Originally uploaded by elvenstar522.

God, I love this show!

Let’s get right to it, shall we?

SUMMARY

We learn how the Super Secret Nuclear Power Plant Override Meltdown Gadget works…or doesn’t. The idea that they could actually shut down the cooling system for a nuclear chain reaction from a remote location is, well…interesting. Good thing it couldn’t really happen. (Although I’ll bet some of the Islamofascist dingleberries are watching the show and going “MMMMMMMMMM…We got to get us one of THESE things! Maybe Abdul could pick one up for us when he stops at the hardware store to pick up some plutonium …”)

Audrey and Jack, in an effort to ID the American traitor working with the Islamofascist terrorists, head off to the firm that has the security tapes for the party where Audrey saw the guy.

Navi and Dina (sounds like a good title for a Fox sitcom) find out that young Behruzz has killed Takrit and is on the loose. Dina, hoping to save her son from the clutches of bad dad Navi, meets up with Behruzz and double crosses her own husband by urging the youngster to flee for his life. Enraged, Navi shoots Dina, but loses the two in traffic. He reports to his terrorist boss(not the mastermind) that the “job” isn’t done, at which time the boss (played by The Mummy star Andrew Vosloo) gives Novi until the end of the day to kill his own family.

Meanwhile, fat geek Edgar may have figured out a way to thwart the plans of the terrorist by doing a little remote hacking of the nuclear power plants himself. (Anyone else really, really, really worried that our nuke power plants can be hacked by any fat guy with a lap top?)

Richard is DEFINITELY not going to give his dad Secretary Heller a father’s day gift this year.

Erin…well, you’ve gotta feel sorry for her. She’s got the President on her back about this terrorist threat and her daughter picks this day of all days to have one of her “bad days.” Not to mention the dumbass doctors at the CTU clinic who almost kill the kid by dosing her with a drug she’s allergic too.

I’ve got to say, after a very rough start, I’m starting to admire Erin Driscoll…still don’t like her, though.

And how about this…the world is about to end and Paul cries on Heller’s shoulder that he “has a broken heart…” I have only one thing to say about that:

BWAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAAAA…Get a life you spineless, spoiled brat! Eight million people are about to die and this guy is worried about his own silly, stupid, insignificant L’amours …Kinda makes you wonder if he’s involved in all this somehow, doesn’t it?

Finally, poor Jack and Audrey just can’t catch a break. After finding the mystery traitor on the tapes at the security firm, the offices are invaded by a bunch of bloodthirsty, murderous thugs who, after killing both CTU and security company personnel, start gunning for Jack and Audrey. Then, out of ammo and with things looking their blackest, who should show up to pull Jack’s chestnuts out of the fire?

Tony Almeida!

BODY COUNT

After recalculating Jack’s body count from last week, here’s where we stand:

JACK: 18 dead, 1 gratuitous wounding, 1 viscous pistol whipping.
Show: 88 with 1 wounded (Dina)

Jack took out 5 terrorists in the shootout. Tony claims 2. (I thought I might start a whole separate category for Tony’s kills but somehow, I think he’s destined for greater things). The terrorists took out 5 at the security company.

PREDICTION

Maryann is NOT working for the terrorists. She’s either working for the CIA or some other super secret government organization. Why do they want to kill Jack? Could Jack, in his capacity as Assistant to the Secretary of Defense, have stumbled across some kind of nefarious scheme to undermine the government or worse, bilk the taxpayers? The key is that Maryann’s contact mentioned killing BOTH Jack and Audrey (both work in the SoD office).

Stay tuned.

LOOSE ENDS

Terrorists opened the security company’s garage door from the OUTSIDE. Let me ask you this, gentle readers…would you use a security company whose own offices aren’t even secure?

‘Nuff said.

What an extraordinary week this is going to be!

Do I mean the Iraq elections? Maybe the choosing of a chair for the DNC? Or could it be the week that Ted Kennedy gets outed as Star Wars gangster and notorious womanizer Jabba the Hut (And Babs Boxer as Chewy?)?

No, you cretins! It’s SUPER BOWL WEEK!

That’s right…and what better game than Football to use as a metaphorical club to beat into submission this motely collection of weepy, simpering, truly and totally tasteless and awful posts we have for this weeks Bonfire!

Two notes: First, since my football knowledge spans several decades, some references may be a little obscure for you youngsters out there (anyone under 45). Therefore, I will, whenever possible, supply a helpful link to fill you in on the inside jokes. Second, I will refer quite often to “my beloved Bears” or more simply. “my beloveds.” Pay this no mind as its a sympton of a terminal illness we refer to in Chicago as “Waituntilnextyearitis.” (A similar condition can be found in Cubs fans. However, this is a chronic condition and not life threatening).

The American Mind has some pre-game eating suggestions regarding a twinkie. Couldn’t we just stick with nachos?

The Zero Boss has some more pre-game goodies…The Boss also has a picture of himself reminiscent of a Ray Nitschke bubble gum card of the early 60’s.

The Conservative Cat (is there any other kind of cat?) wants to “undo the damage” of the Iraq elections. Speaking of damage, watching “Big Cat” pancake those defensive linemen for my beloved Bears all those years makes me wonder what kind of matchup problems the Democrats would have if he were on our team?

The Chainik Hocker posts about the problems prosecutors are having in the Saddam case. Problems? Folks, this should be a chip shot. They should be able to walk into the end zone from where they are. I’d check the zebras on this one.

Useful Fools educates us on rent control. Considering what they just paid to renovate Soldiers Field, my beloveds could have purchased a quarterback, an offensive line, and maybe even a decent offensive coordinator.

The Alpaca Burger (Yum!) blogs on the art of “non blogging.” Yes, and your point is? I mean, is that anything like the Immaculate Reception? Kind of happened, but shouldn’t have?

My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy channels Snoop Dog and disses Blogdaddy. To coin a phrase; AIII! MY EYES! Kind of like spittin’ on the grave of Papa Bear.

Cao’s Blog invites you to write your name in the snow. Sounds like something T.O. would try at midfield, huh?

Basil’s Blog receives our very first flag of the day…5 yards for illegal contact. (Note: I THINK this last link is not work-safe. I don’t work so I wouldn’t know).

Dodgeblogium is drunk blogging…in Wales, no less. No NFL Europe team there (not to mention they think that football is a game you play with your FEET, of all the nonsense…)

King of Fools illustrates what life was like in the paradise created by Saddam Hussien and Michael Moore. Living under Saddam must have been something like playing for Ditka …only I’ll bet Saddam screamed louder.

Centerpiece tells us there are tax and spend liberals in California. Jyah! Like, this is should be a surprise, yes? I mean, it’s not like Super Bowl III or anything. Maybe more like Super Bowl XX I think.

Multiple Mentality has some extremely helpful tips on how to get out of a traffic ticket. Too bad the Raiders couldn’t have worked the Zebras here in a similar manner a couple of years ago.

Brian J. Noggle muses about robot farmers. …Gives me the shivers. Can you imagine Robot Football players? Some would say we’ve reached that place already.

How about this post from yours truly? Pure sweetness.

Finally, as an appetizer for that apres Super Bowl soiree how about some nice, hot camel meat? Interested Participant explains. Sorta gives the slogan “Genuine Taste” a whole new meaning, huh?

Well, that’s it! It’s been fun. If I’ve forgotten anybody or screwed up anywhere, I’ll betcha I hear about from ya.

Next week’s Bonfire will be hosted by Sophistpundit. (Jeez! That Glenn guy sure gets around, doesn’t he? Chalk up another one to blogdaddy).