December 26, 2005 by s.z.

Respected Conservative Thinkers v. Low Rent Pundits: A Battle for the Ages In today's round of "Ultimate Wingnut Challenge," the Respected Conservative Thinker team (which used to include actual respected conservative thinkers, until they got voted out for lameness) will be facing the fearsome Low-Rent Pundit team.  Some contestants could get hurt in this one (but as Tom Hanks once said, "There's no crying in Ultimate Wingnut Challenge"). In an effort to level the playing field, each contestant will only be allowed to submit a brief abstract of their most recent column (I will prepare the summary for them), and one paragraph from that work.  I will offer a comment or two on that paragraph.  From all of that information, plus whatever you already know about the contestant, you should form an opinion as to who should live and who should die (in relation to this contest). Now, let the games begin! 1.  We'll start with Respected Conservative Thinker Charles Krauthammer.  His column is entitled "A separation-of-powers dispute."  Abstract:  President Bush may or may not have the constitutional authority to conduct warrantless searches of the communications of Americans, but even if he did violate the Constitution, only a poopie head would conclude that he did anything wrong.  Sure, the President should have tried to comply with the law and/or get the law changed, but if he did indeed break the law, it was merely the kind of "error of political judgment" that any criminal might make. Sample Paragraph: 2005 was already the year of the demagogue, having been dominated for months by the endlessly echoed falsehood that the president "lied us into war." But the year ends with yet another round of demagoguery. Administration critics, political and media, charge that by ordering surveillance on communications of suspected al-Qaida agents in the United States, the president had clearly violated the law. Some even suggest that Bush has thereby so trampled the Constitution that impeachment should now be considered. The braying herds have already concluded, Tenet-like, that the president's actions were slam-dunk illegal. It takes a superior mix of partisanship, animus and ignorance to say that. Comment:  While Krauthammer seems to be attempting to paint himself as an impartial thinker who is above such things as partisanship, you'll note that the Americans having their communications intercepted are "suspected al-Qaida agents," not the more factual "people, numbered in the thousands, whom NSA supervisors suspected might have some kind of link to al-Qaida, but who probably didn't." 2.  Now, here's Low-Renter Debbie Schlussel, with "'Munich'--as Brought to You by Abu Spielberg, Minister of Disinformation!" Abstract: Spielberg's movie Munich is a simply a piece of liberal terrorist-appeasement propaganda because it portrays Mossad agents as having concerns about the morality of assassinating terrorists.  Oh, and the film is also anti-Jewish, because it portrays the terrorists as having families, and it portrays the Mossad agents as having marital sex. Sample Paragraph: Then, there is something I haven't read in other critics' accounts of "Munich"--something which made me sick to my stomach. Are the lives of the innocent Israeli athletes so worthless, that the scenes in which they are murdered by Palestinian terrorists must be interspersed with the self-doubting Mossad agent having sex? How would Steven Spielberg like it, if a loved one was shown being bludgeoned, in between scenes of a law enforcement official bouncing up and down on top of the agent's naked wife? And this happens twice, the first time with a pregnant woman and a sexual position I thought was reserved for NC-17 and X-rated movies. Thanks for blaspheming these murdered athletes' lives, Spielberg. Comment:  I haven't seen the movie, and so have no idea which sexual position Debbie is talking about.  And while I couldn't ascertain this information from a quick Google News search, I did learn that several other reviews ("Bland justice," "Avner's list: Spielberg's anti-violence message is too simplistic," "Vérité and verities in Spielberg's 'Munich'," etc.) discussed the intercutting of sex scenes with those of the murder of the athletes.  However, none of them thought that Spielberg's purpose was to blaspheme the athletes' lives, so yeah, you won't read that in other critics' accounts. 3.   Respected Conservative Thinker Midge Decter will be next.  Since Midge is old, and apparently hasn't written anything since that NR Digital column that urged the President to draft hippies (or something -- we only got the first few paragraphs for free), we're going to allow Midge to submit a piece from 1998 called "The Madness of the American Family." Abstract:  American society has turned "nutty" because people now believe that they have options other than being either a father and breadwinner (if you're male), or a stay-at-home mother (if you're female).  This turn to nuttiness started back in the late 1950's, when a guy wrote an article for Esquire in which he claimed that he would "Slit his throat" if he ever ended up like his father.  Then came the 1960's.  And now women think they should have the same job opportunities as men, and homosexuals think they should be allowed to have children!  Hell in a hand basket, my friends! Sample paragraph: What comes next, of course, is the legal adoption of children. Why not a family with two daddies? After all, some unfortunates among us don’t even have one. (Lesbians, of course, suffer no such complications. All their babies require for a daddy is a syringe. Thus, we have that little classic of children’s literature, to be found in the libraries of the nation’s public schools, entitled Heather Has Two Mommies.) Comment: Midge called a photo of a female reservist leaving her baby with its father as she headed out to serve in the Gulf War "as obscene as anything that has appeared in that cesspool known as Hustler magazine."  And she remarked that "No baby or little kid who is hungry or frightened or hurting ever calls for his daddy in the middle of the night."  So, I guess she just hates dads (except when they're out of the house, earning money to support their families) -- which would explain why the idea of a family with two daddies is so abhorrent to her. 4.   We'll next hear from Low-Rent pundit Kaye Grogran.  Her most recent column, "Just who are our enemies?," is from a couple of weeks ago -- but if we are going to allow Midge to submit dated material, we have to do the same for Kaye, since she's old too.    Abstract: The liberal news media is aiding and abetting the enemy by telling them that they (the media) don't think that the war is going smashingly.  The media is also helping Nazi Germany when they do this.  And everybody is picking on Joe Lieberman for making the President "look good."  However, WWII vet Sen. Daniel Inouye should be supporting the GOP's attack ads against Howard Dean and John Kerry because it's "completely unrealistic" to expect our troops to never have to fight in wars or suffer casualities.  And that's just Kaye's opinion! Sample Paragraph: I think the majority of us can thank our lucky stars that Howard Dean was not elected president. For some reason I can see him telling dangerous dictators to go to (well you get the picture) — if they dared to throw their weight around. Yes siree . . . he is definitely lacking (big-time) in diplomacy. Comment: I have no idea what the above paragraph means.  I'm guessing she's praising Bush for his excellent diplomacy skills when dealing with dictators, but that seems to make no sense, so it can't be that. 5.  Here's the newbie on the Respected Conservative Thinker team, Jeff Gannon -  A Voice of the New Media.  His contribution is the blog entry "Bush Finally Lashes Out at Reporters!"  Abstract:  Despite the title, it was actually Kofi Annan who lashed out at one reporter from the London Times.  But if it had been President Bush, and he had lashed out at those reporters who wouldn't let Jeff join in their reindeer games, man, it would have been sweet! Sample Paragraph (okay, since Jeff is the new kid, we'll post his entire piece): From the transcript: "you’ve been behaving like an overgrown schoolboy in this room for many, many months and years. You are an embarrassment to your colleagues and to your profession. Please stop misbehaving and please let’s move on to a serious journalist." While President Bush would have cause to say this to any number of White House reporters, especially NBC'S showboating David Gregory and ABC's condescending Terry Moran (who has now moved on to do the post-mortem on Nightline), these words came from UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to a reporter from the London Times who asked him about the desperately underreported Oil-for-Food scandal. The Old Media's reaction to Annan’s outburst: "Oh that Kofi! We've never seen him so angry - he must have been provoked." Not a scintilla of the bleating from journalism elites that you would hear if Bush had done it. Comment:  If Bush had done it -- and if he had even gone a little farther and had taken a horse whip to, say, Terry Moran -- Jeff would have helped him to give the blackguard what he deserved.  And then Jeff and Bush would have become best friends, and would have gone to base ball games together, and maybe even would have had sleep overs.  It would have been so great! 6.  Lastly, here's our own Pastor Grant Swank, with "Myth: Church & State Wall." Abstract: Liberals have twisted the phrase "separation of church and state" as part of their plan to "extinguish the Judeo-Christian faith."  They don't want you to know that while the Constitution does prohibit the establishment of an official religion, America has "a Judeo-Christian heritage and the right to present-tense expression." Liberals "will do whatever it takes to obliterate America of its rightful Judeo-Christian heritage," as we see "accented every year particularly during the Christmas season."    We must stop the liberals from prostituting this phrase by making "clear to the public what 'separation of church and state' really means."  And although Pastor Swank never gets around to explaining what it does mean, it seems to have something to do with ensuring that public schools give "Judeo-Christian adherents honor and space." Sample paragraph: Liberals believe that if they continue harping on the "separation of church and state" phrase, brainwashing the public with their prostituted definition, especially indoctrinating the next generation with their prostituted definition, then they will have won secularism for America's future. Comment: No comment needed. Okay, those are our six contestants.  Your job is to vote off two of them.  The remaining four will remain in the contest ... for at least another day. 1:51:11 AM

Uncle Jake and the Fat Man* The votes from our last round of "Ultimate Wingnut Challenge" have been counted -- it seems that Dennis Prager and Rush Limbaugh each received 19 black balls, and so will be leaving us.  (Peggy Noonan received 16, and so is on secret wingnut probation, meaning that she'd better submit some extra-purplish prose next time or she's out of the game).  Still, it was a triumph for the ladies, and it tends to prove that saying of Kipling about the female of the species being wingnuttier than the male. Now, as Dennis and Rush walk down that gangplank of shame and failure, we can spend half a minute reviewing their past successes.  Dennis has a distinguished record in wingnuttery (I still love his column from a couple of years ago in which he explains that "women's nature yearns for male protection," and so single women vote Democratic because they think the male government will take care of them).  Plus, I'm sure that his work in bringing tens of thousands of Jews back into the fold will give him all the recognition he deserves, so he has no need of the UW title. Rush, of course, basically invented wingnuttism -- and although the drugs have taken a toll on his abilities, he's still one of our nation's foremost producers of wingnuttery.  And although it sounds like the relationship with Daryn has cooled ever since he started believing that the phone company was plotting against him because of his conservative politics, we still think he'll do just fine without our validation. So, buh-bye, Dennis and Rush.  We hope your swim through the shark-infested waters goes well, and that you make it back to civilization in time to try for next year's title of Ultimate Wingnut. *Thanks to Bill S. for that title.  We're gonna cut him into our "Wingnut sit-com" deal, as soon as somebody greenlights it.  BTW, this is our current roster of contestants: 1.  Town Hall Columnists VBen Shapiro Dr. Mike Adams Doug Giles  2.  The Low-Rent Pundits Pastor J. Grant Swank Debbie Schlussel Kaye Grogan 3.  Media Wingnuts Ann Coulter Michelle Malkin  4.  Lifestyle Wingnuts Peggy Noonan 5.  Blog Stars John Hindrocket, Powerline 6.  Respected Conservative Thinkers Charles Krauthammer Midge Decter Jeff Gannon So, only 13 wingnuts remaining.  A dozen of them will be eliminated this week, leaving only one standing.  (Sadly, our war time powers do not allow us to actually eliminate them from society, only from this contest.)  Who will that last wingnut be? It's up to you, the Wo'C readers, to decide just who will be the Ultimate Wingnut of 2005! 1:17:21 AM