December 7, 2005 by s.z.

Another 'War on Christmas' Soldier Story  Our soldier o' the day is, of course, General Bill O'Reilly, and we are honoring him for bringing horror.  (Don't you hate when you have a Christmas potluck and you end up with 10 plates of deviled eggs, 5 Jello salads, but nobody brings the horror?) Here's part of the Media Matters report on Bill's generous offer: On the December 2 broadcast of Fox News' The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, host Bill O'Reilly stated that he would "use all the power that I have on radio and television to bring horror into the world of people" who "diminish and denigrate the [Christmas] holiday." What a nice gift for baby Jesus's birthday. He later added: "There is no reason on this earth that all of us can not celebrate a public holiday devoted to generosity, peace, and love together," cautioning that "anyone who tries to stop us from doing it is gonna face me." Yeah, if you stop Bill from celebrating Christmas by saying "Happy Holidays" to him, then he'll shoot you right between the head!  But Bill does have the right idea.  For instance, there's no reason on the earth that all of us can not celebrate a holiday devoted to "joyful and reverent fellowship with family and friends" -- and so everyone out there should damned well better celebrate it, no matter what their religious background, or else!  (Bill will be bringing falafel for this holiday celebration -- and that will be horror enough. Our Runner-Up Soldier o' the Day is James Lileks, who brings us the news that the war is over.  (Apparently Brad R won, and Christmas lost.) But it seems that Lileks hasn't been invited to any of the high-powered, hush-hush War on Christmas strategy meetings, and so he doesn't know how well the war is actually going.  I blame the media for failing to report the good news from the malls. The War on Christmas seems a little less intense this season. Geez, we have Bill O'Reilly promising to bring horror to the enemy's world -- how intense of a War do you want, Mr. Lileks?. If the War on Christmas has simmered down this year, there might be three reasons: -- The lull is an illusion; the war continues. See, "atheist filmmaker Brian Flemming" has officially declared war on Christmas -- although admittedly in a "tongue-in-cheek" manner.  And Lileks is not amused. Give the man a few years and he'll be showing up at little kids' funerals shouting "There isn't any heaven!" at the mourners. Sure, he will, Lileks.  Um, aren't you the one who said that people should be forget about all this War on Christmas nonsense and instead devote some serious worrying-time to "the possibility of a flu pandemic or a nuclear-armed Iran, either of which might make you feel, um, dead"?  So, how can you spare any panic for rogue atheists and their possible plan to someday wound the feelings of mourners? But on to the second possible explanation for why Lileks has seen so many fewer Santa causalities in this year's anti-Christmas skirmishes. -- A truce has been reached: The secularists have agreed not to picket the Postal Service for putting the "Virgin" Mary on a stamp, and the religiously minded have promised not to say "Merry Christmas" to strangers unless they first secure a signed waiver for mental stress, and do not say the words within 500 feet of a school. Once again, we see that Lileks has failed to hear the good news from the War on Christmas front.  He seems to have missed the report about how the Religiously Minded sent gray-haired mothers to infiltrate the Postal Service, and were thus able to thwart the post office's secret plan to kill the Virgin Mary stamps.  The Religiously Minded also started boycotts of businesses where the sales clerks fail to wish one a "Merry Christmas" with enough emphasis on the third syllable of the phrase. Plus, the RMs won the Battle of Candy Canes, and so now your religiously minded tots can pass out sweets flavored with Jesus blood in the public schools. As for the secularists, they have ceded all of their "Holiday Trees" to the superior numbers of the RM  forces.  They also saw Kirby, the Wal-Mart customer service temp who sent the Psychedelic Mushroom manifesto to the Catholic League, get captured, fired, and possibly executed.  (Kirby was reportedly the number two man in the anti-Christmas army, and his loss hit the secularists really hard.) -- The war is over, and the secularists won. It's hard to see any other conclusion, really. James is obviously one of those damned defeatists who are looking at the war through a soda straw (or a PixyStix, or something), and so are failing to see that the schools and hospitals are continuing to get rebuilt day after day, meaning that the war is going great.    Wal-Mart -- that crass, horrid wad of red-state values, if you believe the left -- can't even say "Merry Christmas" on its home page. Can't ... or won't?! As Wal-Mart goes, so go 9,000 Chinese factories, all of which are busily stamping out "Happy Holidays" signs for 2006. So, the Chi-Coms are behind the War on Christmas after all!  Now you know the REST of the story! Well, the actual rest of the story is that the evil elites of the overclass have ceased to pretend that they are people like us (they are actually the minions of Cluthu Cthulhu, of course).  And since everybody has to cater to the whiny overclass, it seems that now "shopgirls in malls" are "unable to say 'Merry Christmas' without coughing as though they had inhaled a fishbone, and looking around to see if the manager heard."  Poor Lileks -- the shopgirls never give him quite the response that he wants.  Do you think it's something personal, or just the fact that Target is firmly under the control of the anti-Christmas forces?  UPDATE: I deeply regret the misspelling of the name of the elder god Cthulu Cthulhu (a mistake which I blame on evil kittens) (and Dave), and hope that he/she/it can see its way to only inflict the regular amount of eternal agony on me for my error. 3:52:28 PM

'Do Some Soul Searching' and Some Diagnosing While Rummy may or may not be Mad As a Hatter, he undoubtedly has an odd way of looking at things. So, just for fun, let's look at some sections of the speech he gave to the Johns Hopkins School of International Study on Monday (text provided by the Wall Street Journal), and see what you think of his thought processes.   If one is viewing events through a soda straw, one should know that one is by definition selectively focusing on facts that may highlight one's perceived view and not seeing other perspectives. A full picture of Iraq comes best from an understanding of both the good and the bad, and the context for each. Among the continuing difficulties are: Bursts of violence, including continued assassinations and attempts to intimidate Iraqi leaders and those supporting the legitimate Iraqi government. Continuing U.S. and Iraqi casualties. Iran and Syria continue to be notably unhelpful. So, when we look at the "bad" perspective of this war, we see that people on our side keep getting killed.  Plus, Iran is allegedly trying to build nuclear bombs, and Syria continues to sponsor terrorism. Sure, these things are difficulties, but hey, let's stop focusing on all the negative stuff! However, there are also a number of positive developments to be seen, if one looks for them: The political process is on schedule. Iraqis have a Constitution they wrote and voted for, and hundreds of candidates are politicking for the elections. There seem to be growing divisions among the enemies of the Iraqi people, particularly after the bombing of a wedding reception in Amman, Jordan. Yes, on the plus side, innocent people were killed at a wedding reception in Jordan.   Oh, and this caused some of our enemies in Iraq to disagree with some of our other enemies -- which is good!. More of Iraq's neighbors now seem to believe this new democracy might succeed and are moving to get right with the Iraqi people by being more active in their support. It's a good thing if the other nations in the region are trying to bribe the Iraqi powers that be. A vital and engaged media is emerging, with some 100 newspapers, 72 radio stations, and 44 television stations. And while this media may have been bought and paid for by the Pentagon (via the Lincoln Group), it is emerging -- and it's providing jobs (via the Lincoln Group) for some of the bright, young, conservative journalists for whom the Heritage Foundation couldn't find work.  Another positive development! Sunnis are increasingly taking part in the political process, further isolating those who still oppose the legitimate Iraqi government.  While some Sunnis are opposing the legitimate Iraqi government by fighting as insurgents, others are taking part in the political process.  Therefore, if you'd stop looking at things through a soda straw, you'd see that things are going well in Iraq.  So, when we view the full picture, we see that there are only three "continuing difficulties" in Iraq, while there are five "positive developments."  Proof that we're winning this war, which you would know if the damned media weren't so focused on the deaths and stuff. And besides, we fight them (Sunnis) there so we don't have to fight them here. Indeed, the most important reason for our involvement in Iraq--despite the cost--is often overlooked. It is not only about building democracy, though democracies tend to be peaceful and prosperous and are in and of themselves good things. It is not about reopening Iraqi schools and hospitals or rebuilding infrastructure, though they are proceeding apace and are desirable and essential to ensure stability. It's been over two years and we're STILL reopening Iraqi schools and hospitals?  Damn, we must have bombed the hell out of them for it to take this long to get them back up to pre-war speed. But, simply put, defeating extremist aspirations in Iraq is essential to protect the lives of Americans here at home. Imagine the world our children would face if we allowed Zawahiri, Zarqawi, bin Laden and others of their ilk to seize power or operate with impunity out of Iraq. Imagine the world our children would face if an ill-conceived and faultily-executed war created a situation where these possibilities could exist. Oh, wait, we already live in that world. They would turn Iraq into what Afghanistan was before 9/11--a haven for terrorist recruitment and training and a launching pad for attacks against U.S. interests and our fellow citizens. Let's not talk about what Afghanistan is now, and how "Violence blamed on insurgents linked to al-Qaeda and the Taleban has left over 1,400 dead in Afghanistan this year," because that's not part of our topic, which is "The Good News From Iraq, Why the Media Won't Tell You About It, and Why We Can't Pull Out the Troops." Quitting is not a strategy. No, being greeted with sweets and flowers is a strategy. The message it would send to our enemies would be: that if America will not defend itself against terrorists in Iraq, it will not defend itself against terrorists anywhere. And it will also send the message that if we won't defend ourselves against Iraqis (whom we pissed off by invading their country) in Iraq, then we won't defend ourselves against pissed-off Iraqis anywhere. Now, all you psychologists out there, it's time to evaluate Rumsfeld's mental health.  Do you think he's mad as a hatter, gone off his trolley, is living in cloud cuckoo-cuckoo land, or is just using inappropriate defense mechanisms, such as denial, magical thinking, and stupidity.  YOU make the call! 5:37:51 AM

War On Christmas Soldier o' the Day Today we honor Renew America's Christian Hartsock, mostly because we love his name.  (Seriously, isn't "Christian Hartsock" the perfect wingnut name?) His column is called "O Friendship Tree, O Friendship Tree."    Christian Hartsock When they're not thinking up laughable euphemisms for the mythological "penumbra emanation" of an alleged entitlement to commit ruthless infanticide against helpless infants such as "a woman's right to choose," liberals are scratching their heads in a desperate effort to think up alternative names for those unidentified ornament-adorned objects that normal people tend to refer to as "Christmas trees." Personally, when not committing ruthless infanticide against helpless infants, I like to relax by making up alternate names for Christmas trees -- today I came up with "Gay Marriage Trees," "Hillary Clinton Presidential Pines," and "Satan Sticks" (that last one is in honor of the Druids, whom we learned at Halloween used to go trick-or-treating from castle to castle to get virgins to sacrifice to the devil -- they also liked trees). Anyway, Christian goes on to recount those classic War On Christmas stories which have been retold for generations, such as the one about the four-year-old who painted a picture of a Kwanzaa menorah because there was no room at his preschool for the Christ child and his holiday. And about how, in three separate instances, Christmas trees were referred to as a "holiday trees" (not mentioned are the million times when they were called "Christmas trees"). And the story of how little Michaela and Jonathan of Plano, Texas weren't allowed to proselytize their classmates last Christmas. Yes, these stories always give me a warming glow too. And now, in true 19-year-old pundit fashion, Christian will explain the Constitution to us: Let's return to the First Amendment. Directly following the establishment clause is what is known as the "free exercise clause," which, along with the preceding clause, states, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (emphasis mine)." Inasmuch as it is the religious duty of Christians to share and teach about their faith with and to other people, it is safe to say that the school fascistically infringed on the students' rights to exercise their religion. The fundamentalist offshoots of Mormonism say that is their religious duty to take plural wives. So, I'm sure that Christian would argue that the government fascistically infringes upon these polygamists' first amendment rights whenever it arrests any of their patriarchs for bigamy (or child rape). So why do liberals harbor this instinctive compulsion to cry "Bah, Humbug" every time Christmas comes around? Because, when they were children,  their parents were taken to debtors prison, and these Christmas-haters compensated by devoting themselves to earning money? Why do liberals tremble at the sight of Christmas trees? Because their hearts are two sizes too small? Why do they hate the idea of small children humbly acknowledging the true meaning of Christmas?  Because they hate small children (as witnessed by how they are always committing ruthless infanticide on helpless infants)? The answer is simple. Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, and liberals hate the idea of people worshiping someone who is not one of them. Christian, honey, there is compelling evidence that Jesus was indeed one of them.  They see themselves as being intellectually superior to everyone else, and thus harbor delusions of divine authority over mankind itself. This is why they feel at liberty to terminate pregnancies at their convenience. It is why they feel at liberty to decide whether Terri Schiavo lives or dies. It is why they feel at liberty to redefine marriage according to their own relativistic standards. It is why they feel they shouldn't be sentenced to death if they're convicted of murder. Yeah, those damned liberals who support legal abortion, who decided that Terri Schiavo had voiced a wish not to be kept alive if in a persistent vegetative state, who favor allowing same-sex couples to marry, and who rename Christmas trees, and who commit murders  -- when get convicted of those murders, they don't feel they should get the death penalty.  It happens all the time.  They feel this way because they are gods. Well at least this year we'll all be enjoying Christmas and the gods won't be. They won't be enjoying any holidays, because they'll all be executed for those murders they committed. Christian Lee Hartsock, 19, is a screenwriter, filmmaker, and political columnist. [...] A native of Oakland, California, Chris is currently a student at Brooks Institute of Photography in Ventura where he is pursuing a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Film and Video Production. He is at work on a film called "Separation," a documentary on the secular left's attempts to purge Christianity from the public square. While Brooks Institute of Photography doesn't seem to offer a Bachelor of Arts degree in Film and Video Production, we still wish Christian all the best in pursuing his ambition.  We also hope that his student project about purging earns him a passing grade for his program. 3:36:52 AM

Passings and New Arrivals Here are the recent changes in the s.z. household: First, it is with sadness that I announce that Maestro, beloved cat, athlete, and local celebrity died on 1 December, 2005. He was a great feline-American, and deserves a nice obit (preferably one in the NY Times), but it still makes me too sad to think about his passing to write one for him. But I will tell you that he had more friends than I do. Seriously. During the summer, I'd always find people petting him when he was outside -- and if he wasn't outside, they'd ring the doorbell to ask if he could come out and play. His callers included little girls, teenaged girls, older couples, young families, and a couple of divorced fathers who would bring their kids by nearly every week in lieu of getting the kids their own pet. He was a brave, gentle, and loving friend right to the end, and he will be missed. Also leaving us recently was Hamster, who passed on Sunday after a long (in hamster years) battle with cancer. His interests included running around the house in his hamster ball and bullying the cats, chewing on things, and hoarding food. He was smart (for a hamster), and gentle and affectionate (for a hamster). I haven't got a headstone for him yet, but when I do, I think his epitaph should read "He Never Bit Anyone, Ever." I'd like to say that we'll never see his like again, but, hey, he was a hamster, so we probably will. But he was a good hamster. Joining the s.z. family as of last night are two semi-feral kittens that my sister persuaded me to adopt. Their mother is a wild cat who hangs around my sister's house. The mother showed up with kittens about a week ago, and since it's getting really cold now, and since the kittens looked kind of thin, my sister was worried and trapped the babies who could be lured (by some turkey morsels) into entering a cat carrier. Then she gave them to me. The kittens run and hide every time I enter the guest room where they are being sequestered, as they are apparently convinced that I kidnapped them for some nefarious purpose. Right now they are sleeping in my bookcase, on top of the fake-leather bound classics on the bottom shelf. While they don't seem delighted to be here (despite the fact that they eagerly snarf down the canned cat food I give them, once I leave the room), since the temperature is supposed to get below zero tonight, and since their mother basically kicked them out and encouraged them to make their own way in the world now that they're weaned, I think my kidnapping was in a good cause. (Well, actually my sister kidnapped them - I am just holding them prisoner). Tomorrow they go to the vet for a check-up and shots, meaning that any headway I made today in winning their hearts and minds with all that cat food will be lost. Jet Jaguar hasn't met them, but he knows that there is something evil is in the guest room, and it seems to worry him. But then, he was the one who always tried to alert me to the danger posed by hamsters, and so I think he's used to his role as a Cassandra. Anyway, the kittens are about 8 weeks old, long haired, and male. One is gray, with tabby markings on his face. The other is gray and white. They both have very sweet faces, but are rambunctious little cusses when they get to playing (this morning they knocked over a rack holding video tapes, spilled their water all over the floor, and tried to climb the curtains). They fear humans, but appear to love literature. I am open to suggestions as to names for them. 2:27:01 AM