Killing conservativism

Professor Bainbridge catches on, only five years late:

It’s time for us conservatives to face facts. George W. Bush has pissed away the conservative moment by pursuing a war of choice via policies that border on the criminally incompetent. We control the White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and (more-or-less) the judiciary for one of the few times in my nearly 5 decades, but what have we really accomplished? Is government smaller? Have we hacked away at the nanny state? Are the unborn any more protected? Have we really set the stage for a durable conservative majority?

I wasn’t writing political columns when George Wilson Delano was elected for the first time, but I think my track record has been solid on predicting that W. not only was no conservative, but that he would stab conservatives in the back at every turn.

He has not disappointed me, although he has certainly disappointed millions of conservatives who innocently voted for him in 2000 and foolishly voted for him again in 2004. George Delano has done more than repeatedly insult our intelligence, he has betrayed the nation by selling out our national security with CAFTA and LOST.

But I commend the good professor for daring to come out and say what all too many conservatives are whispering behind closed doors. It will be interesting to see how Three Monkey Republicans in the national media will attack those they will surely see as turncoats enabling a second Clinton presidency.

Nevertheless, if Hillary comes to power, Republicans will have no one to blame except themselves for electing such a deceitful man to the presidency. Bill Clinton was a terrible liar because everyone knew he was lying, or at the very least being openly disingenuous. George Delano, on the other hand, is an excellent dissembler because he cultivated a simple and honest image that conservatives were all too willing to swallow.

Even when the president tells an obvious untruth – religion of peace, they hate us for their freedom, etc – his supporters defend him and blame his words on others because they are so sure that he cannot possibly be responsible for the lie. That is the sign of a truly impressive liar.

The acorn never falls far from the tree.

A release date

I was wondering how many books had titles similar to that of my next novel – the one I finished last year – so I typed it into Amazon and was surprised to discover this.

So, if you are inclined to place a really, really, really early preorder, it would seem that you can do so before the cover has even been produced. I don’t know why you’d want to, but there you go.

As it turns out, the answer is three, although they are all sufficiently obscure and happen to leave out the “The”, so there’s no problem. I’d been thinking I was good, since I still had some nice W words with which to work, such as Wind and wings, but clearly I need to get a little more obscure. The Weft of Darkness, perhaps, or The Whinge of Devils.

Of course, if I actually want to sell more than ten thousand copies, I should probably call the next one something on the order of The Picasso Puzzle or Tara Cotta and the Philosophising Stoner.

The inevitable approaches

Washington caves on Iraqi sharia:

The Bush administration has insisted Iraqis have the right to form their own government but has, at the same time, explicitly said it would not countenance the kind of clerical rule that took root in Iran.

Now, despite its long-held position – and in the face of insurgent threats – Washington has signaled its willingness to make “Islamic principles” the standard for legislation….

Kurdish negotiators, who oppose making Islam the ultimate source of law or subjecting legislation to religious tests, are outraged at Washington’s apparent flip-flop.

“We understand the Americans have sided with the Shi’ites,” one secular Kurdish politician said. “It’s shocking. It doesn’t fit American values. They have spent so much blood and money here, only to back the creation of an Islamist state. I can’t believe that’s what the Americans really want or what the American people want.”

Translated, this means that the Iraqi people don’t have the right to form their own government if it isn’t to our liking, unless they really want to be stubborn about it. I know I’m shocked….

There are two choices in Iraq. Genuine democracy and the resultant Islamic state, or military rule, however disguised by legal contortions and democratic trappings. It is important to remember that three of the four Islamic countries where elections have been permitted, secular governments rule only by virtue of army support. The Algerian civil war still continues as a result of the one election that was held there and the Turkish army has instigated three military coups in order to prevent elected politicians from establishing an Islamic state. The Pakistani government has been precarious for years and can’t even trust its own security agencies; only Indonesian democracy does not rely completely on a foundation of military rule and many do not consider it a genuine representative democracy.

If it weren’t for the fact that US soldiers still are at risk in Iraq, I’d quite enjoy watching the administration’s ridiculous plans play out so predictably.