Scott:

Continually reminding us of the gendur of the French Foreign Minister is a bit of "piling on", eh what?

I believe that given the unisex name, we poor Americans must have the additional info pointed out (sort of the same as our media refering to Bill Clinton as "President" Bill Clinton, so that we can't forget). I wonder, if Dom stood naked before the General Assembly, would that finally settle any nagging doubts as to his gender?

PS
Is "miniscule" a French word? Oui oui! (pronounced wee-wee!)

Scott Ott, you're my hero.

Rip Rowan

The hamperer has no clothes!

>> SCRAPPLEFACE IN WA-PO

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24984-2003Mar14.html

(Article about patriotic and pro-Bush sites on the web, also has links to dozens of patriotic petitions and organizations)

There are none so blind, as those who refuse to see

By the way, where is that ICC indictment of the nekkid hamperer for his role in the Rwandan genocide (1994)? Sounds like a bit of quid pro quo to me.

Bitherder, great use of the language. I love it.

I didn't get this until I read the fourth paragraph, and then I was on the floor laughing!

Let's all Pray that Helen Thomas never decides to do this at a White House press conference! Or Hillary Clinton either! Yeccch!!!

Well of course he's naked! Hans Blix told him its getting really hot out there . Now that's something to worry about lads; not that silly terrorism stuff!

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin (who is a man)

A man?? With raisins for 'nads???

OK,
That Helen Thomas comment went way too far. I now have to get some soap and wash my mind out...
In the words of my famous friend Alfred E Neuman, Blech!

I saw a picture of that NO BUSH demonstration...
of all those naked wimmin, But it was from too far away.. i couldn't tell for sure if it was really true.

Did anyone notice if Annan was a NO BUSH demonstrator?

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin (who is a man) is the personification of French diplomacy. His ability to see the clothing on Cafe au Lait (my pet name for Mr. Annan) shows how in step he is with the United Nations. My God! Rumsfeld was right when he said that going to war without the French is like going fishing without your accordian.

TO
JOHN LEMON
RE:getting really hot out there .

THE KIDS SAW THIS, THEY CALLED BLIX A JACK______!
WHO COULD NOT FIND A RELEVANT ISSUE IF IT HIT HIM IN THE FACE

OUT OF THE MOUTH OF BABES

Blix has his head so far up his money loving a$$, he doesn't realize the numbers of people being tortured and killed by the mn he is trying to save. He kills so many people, it makes wars look pitiful in numbers.

I have always been amazed at the selectivity of the liberal mind. It is always able to compartmentalize elements of a problem and to hone in on that aspect that tends to support, or at least lean toward their argument. I guess if they had a theme song it would be titled something like Reduxio ad Absurdem. Certainly was is terrible and certainly innocent people will be killed, but to me, it is better if the innocent people dying are Iraqis rather than my family. Somehow this concept escapes them. The Emperor's New Clothes is undoubtedly the right frame of reference for talking about Hans Bliz, Kofi Annan, and the rest of the world wide clown car we call the UN.

right on Joseph...

The Lib's really don't want to actually get "in the game" or be responsible for (or to) the rules. They only want to referee it (for a fee)... so they can make which ever side win they want. To them thats not even an absurd idea. What's your problem anyway?

The latest twist? Blame Dubya for "failing to rally the worlds support" to oust Saddam. Watch the news in the upcomming days, folks, you'll start to see this one more and more. This type of tactic works on gullible people, the majority of whom vote democratic for lots of different reasons anyway. Block the progress, fight against the solution, cloud the issue, then blame the opposition. (Can anyone name an issue where this hasn't been their tactic?) But this new twist is a dangerously silly one and will likely get some bandwagon jumpers. The American voters spoke out last November, people. The Dems mis-judged this result and promised a more hard-line approach in the wake of their failure, and we're getting that now. Very dissapointing, not at all surprising.

great model greyhawk;

but add ...

Then take all the credit for what does finally work in spite of them, as if it was their idea in the first place.

Indeed sir, as we shall surely see in a few days.

Wow! Shortly after I posted the above I came across this little on-line left-wing nut site
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15379
curtesy of WSJ Opinion Journal.

"'Bush Wins': The Left's Nightmare Scenario" By Mark LeVine (from which I quote below) illustrates exactly what Phrog means. Do read the whole article, but here's a cut:

"In this . . . scenario, the war is over quickly with relatively low U.S. casualties, some sort of mechanism for transitional rule is put in place, and President Bush and his policies gain unprecedented power and prestige. From my recent conversations with organizers and their latest pronouncements, it is clear that this possibility has yet to be addressed. Waiting much longer could spell disaster for the antiwar movement. . . .

In such a scenario, especially if there is no major upsurge in domestic terrorism, the antiwar movement will find itself publicly discredited and politically marginalized; remember the Y2K dooms-dayers? . . .

If the movement doesn't move with full effort to lay the groundwork for a Bush Wins scenario the massive organizing and consciousness raising of the last year could well prove fleeting, forcing the movement to start from scratch in mobilizing public opinion a year or two down the road."

JP

The kids are alright!

Things that gladdened my heart today:

1. Seeing the French Ambassador to the UN have a hissy after the US Ambassador laid the problem squarely at their feet.

2. Listening to GBW tell the Iraqi soldiers that" 'I was only following orders...' will not be a defense..".

3. Listening to GBW tell the Iraqi citizens "stay away from the fight - right after we liberate you, you'll be safe and we'll bring food and medicines."

4. Watching O'Reilly's disgust when he said "...he (Saddam) gave the whole world the finger!" [nope, not the language of diplomacy, but says it like it is]

5. Watching O'Reilly's fury when he told the French "...KEEP YOUR FRANCS!"

6. Seeing all the information coming in on the TV, net, radio and print media of the backlash directed at NM.

Godspeed to all soldiers

I just read an interesting piece in the newspaper. It was a wire story so I am sure that others have had a chance to read it. The article was essentially Martin Sheen's tantrum at being criticized for "giving voice to the unheard", his words, in public. It seems that according to Martin, he can say whatever he likes; however, we the plebians are forbidden the same right, unless, of course, we happen to agree with him. Why is it that liberals are emphatically in favor of all free speech which agrees with them, and so unalterably opposed to any that disagrees? I guess it's because they are always right and the opposing opinion is always wrong. It has never occurred to him that he is misusing his celebrity, or that with widespread fame goes commensurate responsibility. These people are so curiously insular in their lifestyles and in their opinions, that we, the commonfolk cannot possibly understand their thinking. They change wives and husbands like they change their clothes. They breed out of wedlock like rutting animals, flaunting their illegitimate children and bizarre childrearing practices in the public face. It will be interesting to see how they deal with the reality of the war that they thought they could prevent with their public hissy fits. Poor Martin, and Jeanine, and Susan, and Richard, and Sean. They finally met up with a president who, rather than bending every which way the focus group blows, says what he means, means what he says, and does exactly what he promised. Nights in the Lincoln Bedroom with Bill certainly weren't like this.

The emperor isn't wearing clothes...and someone named
Dominic Vile Pan noticed what? That the protester was not as right minded as he because he dared to tell the truth? Shocking!

I have read a book... "Status civilization" by Robert Sheckley... I think everybody MUST read it. Problems of this blog are discussed there very attentievly!!!