George Allen: Jew, Not a Jew?

During a debate this week with his opponent, Jim Webb, George Allen was asked by reporter Peggy Fox if his mother's family was Jewish, which would make him, according to Jewish law, a Jew, even though he was raised a Christian. Allen reacted with outrage to this question. "To be getting into what religion my mother is, I don't think it's relevant," he fumed. "So I'd like to ask you, why is that relevant? My religion? Jim's religion ..." Of course, religion should have nothing whatsoever to do with a political campaign. As long as someone running for office has made it clear that they are a deeply religious God-fearing Christian (or Jew) and made at least one speech discussing how their religious faith has impacted on their values and demonstrated their opposition to taking religion out of the schools and government, then their religion should not even be raised as an issue.

But while some conservatives accused the reporter of trying to "tar Allen as Jew," others were upset that Allen seemed so angry about being called a Jew, accusing the reporter of "casting aspersions" on his character as if being Jewish were something to be ashamed of. On The Corner John Podhoretz (who happens to be a Jew) wrote, "I really don't want to be on Jewish Patrol here in the Corner, but does anybody agree with me that George Allen's response yesterday to a reporter asking him whether his grandfather Felix had been born Jewish was just...weird?" Jonah Goldberg (also a Jew) agreed that it sounded "odd" and said it "reinforces my growing misgivings about Allen as a politician."

I must admit I was surprised at first that Allen seemed so angry about being asked if he was Jewish. However, as a former Jew who converted to Christianity after seeing The Chronicles of Narnia, I can sympathize with Allen and think he should be cut some slack. It's not easy being a member of the world's most hated minority and it must have been a bit of a shock to suddenly learn the news. Apparently, Allen has tried to keep people from knowing about his Jewish roots until he could come to terms with it himself. For years his mother hid this fact from him no doubt to protect him. She never told him the reason that his grandfather was arrested by the Nazis, a fact that he has mentioned in interviews to explain why he supports the War in Iraq. He probably believed it was because his grandfather was a gypsy or a communist or gay so imagine his shock upon learning that his grandfather was arrested for being Jewish.

Perhaps Allen was upset that finding out he had Jewish ancestry so late in life would invite comparisons with John Kerry and Wesley Clark, who also learned that they had Jewish ancestors, though they didn't seem quite so angry about it. I'm sure he was probably wondering what his friends at the Council of Conservative Citizens would think, since some of them believe that Jews are "the children of Satan" and that they "control the wealth of the world." He probably thinks that his being Jewish is incompatible with his embrace of the Confederacy and that his Jewishness just emphasizes the fact that he grew up in California and not Virginia.

But if Allen had grown up in Virginia he would know that contrary to the stereotype many people have of Virginia as just a redneck state, Jews have long played an important role in Virginia history. Jews were among the first settlers in the Virginia colony. They fought in the revolution, owned slaves (and supported abolition) and even fought in the Confederacy. The first Jew elected to the Senate, Louisiana's Judah Benjamin, became the Confederate Secretary of State and was honored on the Confederate two-dollar bill. Most people would also probably be surprised to learn that Virginia is the 16th most Jewish state in the country and although Northern Virginia may not be considered by some to be part of the "real" Virginia, Falls Church and Fairfax, Virginia, have the third and fourth largest number of Jews as a proportion of the population in the U.S., respectively.

Allen's newfound Jewish heritage might actually be a boon to his campaign and not only in Northern Virginia. The Christian Right has long been suspicious of Allen because he supported including "sexual orientation" the Federal Hate Crimes law until he reversed himself last December and agreed that not liking gay people might not be such a bad thing after all. His support for exceptions to anti-abortion laws for such things as saving the life of the mother and revelations that he had invested in the company that makes RU-486 also gave some Christians pause. But Christians love the Jews because Israel is the key to bringing about the Rapture so this revelation could only help. And people will really believe him when he says that despite his vote on lifting the debt ceiling, he actually does believe in "frugal" government. He doesn't actually have to say that Jews are good with money, but I think everyone will get the idea. However, Allen should be very careful about not appearing "too Jewish," which could turn some voters off. Telling reporters, as Allen did the next day, "I still had a ham sandwich for lunch. And my mother made great pork chops," is a good way to distance oneself from some of the aspects of Jewish culture that might make it difficult to relate to the average voter. The fact that he is only half Jewish will make it easier for some voters to take. Then again, appearing to be a "self-hating Jew" would also be bad.

Saturday Night Live once had a skit with Tom Hanks playing the host of a game show called "Jew, Not a Jew" where contestants had to guess whether celebrities were Jewish. It was inspired by a game Jews actually play in their own homes although apparently it was never played in the Allen household. You would be surprised at how difficult the game can be sometimes. Paul Newman and Cary Grant? Jews! Who knew?

Although the day after the debate Allen issued a statement saying he "embraces" his Jewish heritage, it's going to take a little work to convince people that he really is proud to be a Jew. After he was unfairly accused of being a racist for calling a young Indian Webb campaign worker "Macaca," his campaign held an "Ethnic Rally," in which he embraced people of all races and ethnicities, putting to rest once and for all the idea that Allen is a racist. To show that he is proud of his Jewish heritage, Allen might want to visit the Jewish Confederate Monument in Richmond and pay his respects. One thing his campaign may want to do to help Allen truly embrace his Jewishness is play "Jew, Not a Jew" with him. His campaign manager could make little flash cards with the faces of prominent celebrities and ask Allen, "Jew or not a Jew?" between campaign stops. I think he will be surprised at how few he gets right. Knowing that there are plenty of Jews who don't seem Jewish should be a great help to Allen's self-esteem.

Share This Post


Jon Swift, George Allen, Virginia, Macaca, Jim Webb, Racism, Confederacy, Religion, Judaism, Anti-Semitism, Politics, Beltway Traffic Jam

Kidnapped Fox Newsmen Let Us Down By Not Dying

One of the reasons Fox News is the only news that can be trusted is because of the high caliber of the people who work there. Unfortunately, the two Fox journalists who were recently kidnapped, Steven Centanni and Olaf Wiig, did not live up to the high standards of Fox News while they were in captivity. Many in the conservative blogosphere believe that by surviving their captivity, they let us down.

At first, conservative bloggers were pulling for Centanni and Wiig. They clamored for their release and attacked their kidnappers, knowing that the more they blogged about it, the more likely that the kidnappers would capitulate in the face of this virtual onslaught and release them. They were outraged that the story wasn't getting the attention it deserved from mainstream media and speculated that it was because of bias against Fox News. Michelle Malkin even quoted some liberals who expressed contempt for Fox News and seemed to feel the men deserved to be kidnapped, including such well-known and respected thinkers on the Left as Bob Laurence, the TV critic for the San Diego Tribune and former Snohomish County, Wash., Democrat party official Mike Whitney. They seemed to be speaking the unexpressed thoughts of all liberals. Although Fox News President Roger Ailes later revealed that he had asked the rest of the media to keep a lid on its reporting while negotiations were going on, which might have accounted for the lack of stories by the MSM, that does not negate the possibility that they did, in fact, have contempt for the Fox News journalists anyway.

Once the conservative blogosphere secured the release of Centanni and Wiig, however, they began to have questions about their conduct. The fact that Centanni and Wiig were Fox News journalists did not shield them from scrutiny. In fact, it meant that they were held to a higher standard than just any old kidnapping victims. While we might expect bad behavior from Reuters or Al Jazeera journalists, who because of their biased reporting are legitimate military targets, we really expect a lot more from Fox newsmen. For some, the journalists' actions while in captivity were a "career ender."

Some conservative bloggers were critical of the "politically correct" statements the men made after their release. "I have the highest respect for Islam, and I learned a lot of good things about it," Centanni said. Other bloggers were disgusted by the picture of the men shaking hands with Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Hanyeh, while still on Palestinian territory. They began comparing the men to Jill Carroll and digging into their past for evidence of alleged pro-Palestinian sympathies. Inevitably there was speculation the men must be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, although one blogger did suggest one other possible explanation: "I wonder if the journalists are complete and total morons or clear victims of Stockholm Syndrome."

But conservatives were most troubled by a video that was released showing the men converting to Islam at gunpoint. David Warren, who writes for the Ottawa Citizen and Real Clear Politics, deplored their "cowardice" for converting with guns to their heads instead of dying as martyrs. "The two Fox journalists, whom I will not stoop to name, begged for their lives even though, in retrospect, their lives probably weren't in danger," wrote Warren, who risks his life everyday living in Canada, a place I must confess I am afraid even to visit. "They could see nothing wrong in serving the enemy, so long as it meant they'd be safe."

Debbie Schlussel, one of the blogosphere's leading experts on Islam, pointed out that once the men had converted to Islam, even under duress and even if they had their fingers crossed, there was no turning back. "Once a Muslim, always a Muslim . . . or certain death. That's a core tenet of Islam," she said with a sadness that reminded me of John Wayne in The Searchers, who vowed to kill his niece after she was kidnapped and besmirched by Indians rather than let her live with the shame. "I hope they have good security," Schlussel said helpfully and vowed to "keep an eye on Centanni's reporting from the region from hereon." The fact that they were released alive was enough to make them objects of suspicion to Schlussel, who no doubt would be killed by her captors immediately if she were kidnapped: "It needs to be repeated that so many Americans captured by Muslims--including Arab and Muslim Americans in Iraq--have met slaughter and beheading. And yet apparently pro-Islamist journalists, like Jill Carroll and reportedly Steve Centanni, are released to freedom."

The gunpoint conversions of Centanni and Wiig led many bloggers to speculate what they would have done in the journalists' situation. Most agreed that they would have been braver. Although La Shawn Barber urged her readers not to "judge" the men, she maintained that if it had been her, she would have taken a bullet for Christ. March Hare went even further, claiming that if Muslims had threatened her children with death if she didn't convert, she would have let her children die the way Abraham was prepared to sacrifice Isaac (or Ishmael, if Allah pulled a similar stunt in the Quran, which she wasn't really sure about). Hopefully, God won't ask her to sacrifice her children, but her kids might want to be extra cautious whenever they see Mommy with a knife. Independent Conservative said that he would rather die than look like a wimp in the eyes of his sons: "What example of manhood would I be showing my 2 sons, who I'm showing the faith to, if I allowed them to see me deny Christ? " The Anchoress was less sure if she would make the "right choice" but added, "I believe I would de-capitate before I'd capitulate," which I'm sure we all find very reassuring. Debbie Hamilton at first claimed she "probably would have done just like they did, ... read that stupid statement and get the heck out'a dodge," but later said she felt ashamed, perhaps by the courage of so many other potentially martyred bloggers, and quoted this statement from Vanishing American, which condemned the men: "While yes, we can understand their desire to survive, is their subservient behavior a good portent for the West's chances in the struggle against Islam?"

While so far there have been only two shotgun conversions that we know about, many bloggers believe that this is just the beginning of a veritable deluge of such incidents, regrettably encouraged by the capitulation of Centanni and Wiig, and something must be done to stop it. Even worse, soon Muslims will be able to carry out forced conversions on a massive scale backed up by nuclear weapons. Dan Riehl recalls Ann Coulter's statement after September 11: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." Although he says he is opposed to this course of action and only wanted to point out how hypocritical the Left is for apparently approving of gunpoint conversions by Muslims but not Christians, I wonder if this may not be the solution to this sudden rash of forced conversions by Muslims. Maybe we should convert them at gunpoint before they convert us. Since there are one billion Muslims in the world, though, we better get started soon.

I think the next time Fox hires journalists they should make sure they hire someone who has the integrity to die rather than convert to Islam. Perhaps they might screen prospective hires by asking on the job application if they would choose death or Islam. They could even stage a mock scenario where someone bursts into the room during the job interview and puts a gun to the applicant's head just to test the response. Clearly, Fox News must do whatever is necessary to avoid risking such a lapse in judgment again.

Now, I know some of you must be thinking: "What would you do, Jon Swift, if someone tried to force you to convert at gunpoint?" Well, it's very easy for me to say that I would not convert if they held a gun to my head or to the heads of my family or to the heads of my pets or even if they held a gun to the head of La Shawn Barber or Debbie Schlussel. I can state that without any hesitation whatsoever. Of course, no one is holding a gun to my head right now.

Share This Post


Jon Swift, War on Terror, Terrorism, Fox News, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Weblog, Blogosphere, Internet, Steven Centanni, Olaf Wiig, Jill Carroll, La Shawn Barber, Debbie Schlussel, Michelle Malkin, Politics, Foreign Policy, Beltway Traffic Jam, Comedian Jenée: People are Idiots OTA #24, OTA Weekend Trackbacks, OTB Weekend #7

Cult of Civilianality

With reports that almost 6,000 civilians were killed in Iraq in May and June, bringing the death toll of civilians for the year to 14,388, and daily news reports of civilian death tolls in Israel, Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, there is rising concern about the cost of war to those the liberal media refers to as "innocent bystanders." The Bush Administration tried to alleviate some of this concern by calling on Israel to "limit as much as possible so-called collateral damage not only to facilities but also to human lives," in the eloquent words of White House spokesman Tony Snow. To show just how much they care about protecting the innocent, the Bush Administration is rushing delivery of precision-guided smart bombs to Israel, which will make it possible for Israel to conduct more compassionate bombing raids in Lebanon. But others are questioning whether these civilians are really as innocent as they seem. Is it possible some of them may actually deserve what's coming to them?

"I am not buying into the innocent civilians meme," writes the Atlas Shrugs' Pamela, the Internet smart bomb whose delivery Israel unaccountably rejected, though it is hard to imagine after watching this video who would make a more impassioned and articulate advocate not only for Israel but for world Jewry as a whole. "If by ignorance, complicity, neglect or helplessness the Lebanese wouldn't throw Hezbollah out and establish a strong government, then they must pay the price for the sins of Hizbollah. And if people put up with dictatorships, theocracies, totalitarian regimes -- as they did in Nazi Germany -- they deserve what Hezbollah deserves."

Civilians, schmivilians, agrees Harvard Law professor and torture advocate Alan Dershowitz, who earned his reputation by selflessly rushing to the defense of clients like Claus von Bulow and OJ Simpson who suffered unfair discrimination because of their extreme wealth. He would like the media to replace the whole notion of civilians with what he catchily calls a "continuum of civilianality." Instead of lumping, say, women, children and goatherders into one vague category of innocent bystanderesqueness, he believes that each civilian death should be rated on a sliding scale of complicity not unlike the scale used by other less successful attorneys to calculate legal fees for indigent clients. Hovering around 9.0 on Dershowitz's continuum are victims of "Hezbollah missiles and Hamas rockets" that "target and hit Israeli restaurants, apartment buildings and schools." But while he believes "the line between Israeli soldiers and civilians is relatively clear," Hezbollah and Hamas militants unfortunately are nearly indistinguishable from "civilians," he says, putting the word in the print version of air quotes. "Nor can women and children always be counted as civilians," he writes, an argument that may especially come in handy the next time he is on a sinking ship with too few lifeboats.

Regrettably, not only do innocent Lebanese and Palestinian civilians and guilty militants all look alike, Dershowitz argues that those who insist on living in areas where terrorists live after receiving ample warnings from the Israeli Army to abandon their homes, are guilty by association and deserving of collective punishment. "Those who voluntarily remain behind have become complicit," he writes though he does make an exception for those who "cannot leave on their own" presumably because they are old, sick, infirm or impoverished. While these unfortunates may lack the means to flee the carnage, they can at least take some solace in the fact that when the final tallies of body counts are toted up, they "should be counted among the innocent victims," according to Dershowitz. While it's difficult for the military to make such distinctions in the heat of battle, he thinks the media should do so after it's all over instead of just broadcasting raw body count data.

For example, on the sliding scale of tragedy that we might refer to, borrowing the title of another Dershowitz essay, as the "Arithmetic of Pain," if terrorists are at 0.0 and babies are at 10.0, people from Lebanon would tend to fall below 5.0 while people from Israel would tend to fall above 5.0. So when the media says, for example, that a family of three Israelis died in a Hezbollah rocket attack in Haifa and a family of three Lebanese died in an air raid in Southern Lebanon, we are not getting the full picture. But if the media reported instead that a 9.2, a 7.3 and a 9.4 died in Haifa and a 3.7, a 4.1 and a 10.0 died in Southern Lebanon, wouldn't that give a more accurate, a more human picture of what really happened? Then all that you would have to do is average out the figures and you would see that the Haifa attack was an 8.6 in the "Arithmetic of Pain," while the deaths in Southern Lebanon rated only a 5.9.

Critics of Dershowitz claim that by fudging the lines between civilians and soldiers he is making the same argument terrorists make to justify their attacks. But this could not be further from the truth. Terrorists don't value any life at all, not even their own. To them everyone is a 0.0. Some people have also mistakenly compared Dershowitz's words to those of terrorist sympathizer Ward Churchill, who said after 9/11 that the people in the World Trade Center were not "innocent" because they "formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire … both willingly and knowingly." But while Churchill believes no one is innocent, Dershowitz is merely saying that innocence is quantifiable. Paraphrasing a passage from George Orwell's Animal Farm, Dershowitz concludes his brilliant essay by saying, "Every civilian death is a tragedy, but some are more tragic than others." If the media adopted Dershowitz's simple idea, then we would all have a better idea of when to cry.

Jon Swift, Alan Dershowitz, Atlas Shrugs, Continuum of Civilianality, Iraq, War on Terror, Terrorism, Bush, Tony Snow, Ward Churchill, Lebanon, Israel, Middle East, Foreign Policy, Politics, Beltway Traffic Jam

100,000 and Counting

This week on the very day of the seven-month anniversary of this blog, we had our 100,000th visitor. I thought I would celebrate this milestone with a selection of some of the email, comments and reviews this blog has received since it is the readers rather than your modest host that has really made this blog special.

Recently, for example I had this delightful email exchange with a lawyer, whom I will identify only as AV, Esq. out of respect for his privacy:

Subject: Re: reasonable conservative
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:43:06 -0700 (PDT)

There's another name for a reasonable conservative - A
LIBERAL!

Jon Swift replies:

Dear Mr. V:
As a lawyer I'm sure you are familiar with the liable laws but since I am someone who is not litigious and am also a big supporter of tort reform that will enable only the very richest people to sue somebody and return us to the days when men settled disagreements like men through fisticuffs or pistols at dawn, I am going to ignore your insult and hope that it never happens again. Having said that, let me say thank you for visiting my modest blog and for taking the time to write.

AV, Esq. replies:

Hahahahahahaha!!!
1. The threat of a bullet in the head is a huge incentive to avoid negligence - is that the idea? Brilliant! Those are the words I would expect to read from one who characterizes himself as a "reasonable conservative." So what's the remedy when Dow dumps chemicals into ground water that causes the children of an entire town to suffer lukemia at a rate 20 times higher than usual?
2. I don't know how you could "reasonably" interpret my initial comment as an insult. I guess when you inject such outrageous opinions into the public domain you receive so many ad hominem attacks that you just erroneously presumed that's what I intended.
3. Libel laws? What are you talking about?

Jon Swift replies:

1) You insulted me when you accused me of being a "liberal." I can think of no worse insult except perhaps to be called "gay" or "lawyer."
2) Under the First Amendment (which you might have read once in law school), I am free to inject my opinions anywhere on the body politic, no matter how wrong those opinions may be.
3) I am not a chemist so I don't know why you are suddenly bringing up something Dow Chemical did but I'm sure they have a good explanation.
4) I never mentioned "libel laws." If you go back and read my missive you will see I referred to "liable laws," laws that make one liable for anything one says, but, of course, you already know this and are just trying to confuse me. But I also said I am not litigious so you don't have anything to worry about.

AV, Esq. replies:

Bahahahaha!!!
Apparently, I gave you too much credit. The is no such thing as "liable laws." And, you gave yourself too much credit. I didn't call YOU a liberal. I said a "reasonable conservative" was a liberal. You are . . . something quite a bit less than reasonable.

While I value these "frank exchanges," as the State Department might call them, occasionally I get an email that makes me feel that what I am doing has been all worthwhile, like this one I received from the Baghdad Bureau Chief of a major American newspaper:

You're a funny guy, and your posting on the Jill Carroll controversy made me laugh out loud. Thanks for giving me a good laugh in the midst of rather bleak surroundings.

It seems that my Amazon reviews have inspired quite a few people to write and comment. My review of The Politically Correct Guide to American History moved the author Thomas E. Woods Jr., to write me and (as some speculate) perhaps to comment as well on the blog post I wrote about it.

I also received this email, which I reproduce here, with my reply:

Dear Mr. "Swift"
Like you, I am an average joe conservative. I agree that all media is biased (even Mr. Limbaugh). However, after reading through a few of your blog posts and seeing some reviews on amazon.com I believe your moniker is ill suited. Swift was a clever writer who cut to the heart of an issue and had a knack for exposing humanity's achievements and downfalls. You are not either of these. Your writing shows a disturbing lack of research and forethought. Your use of political blogging is comparable to giving a monkey a gun.

Jon Swift replies:
Thank you very much for your comments. I am not familiar with this "clever writer" you refer to who is also named Swift, but I would like to know more about him. I must confess that that Jon Swift is not actually my real name but is in fact a name I gave myself as a tribute to the brave Swift Boat Veterans. I'm not quite sure I understand your comment about a monkey with a gun. Is it some sort of reference to Evolution? I should tell you that I am opposed to Evolution no matter how much evidence they come up with to support it. If, on the other hand, you are recommending that we somehow extend the Second Amendment to animals, I will have to admit it is an idea I have not thought about before but it is very interesting. Thanks again for writing.

My Amazon reviews also inspired this comment from a very exasperated reader, which can also be found here:

Anonymous said...
Mr "Swift",
I came across a review you wrote on Amazon that made me laugh. Then I read your blog and laughed even louder. I thought, "can this guy really be this idiotic?". So then I went and read all of your Amazon reviews and realized that you are even more idiotic than I originally thought.

And before you jump to conclusions (since that's clearly what you always do), please know that I am a proud, card-carrying Republican. In fact, it was your "review" of 100 People Who Are Ruining America that made me realize what a moron you really are. You aren't even smart enough to judge a book by it's cover -- you judge it by it's title. You helped the left by giving the book 1 star when if you would have just looked at the cover or read even one sentence from the book description or had even a clue as to who Bernard Goldberg is, you would have realized that he is a conservative Republican commentator blaming left leaning Hollywood types for America's cultural problems.

Your other book reviews are also just based on the title and you clearly don't even take 2 minutes to research anything you say (which is clear in your belief that Osama bin Laden was already dead -- even Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Jay Leno all talk about the fact that he is still very much alive). For example, in Maureen Dowd's Are Men Necessary, if you had just listened to a single interview she gave on the book you would realize that she ultimately concludes that men ARE necessary.

Even better is your retarded review of The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. If you knew what politically incorrect meant (which you clearly don't) you would realize that the book isn't giving incorrect facts but a "politically incorrect" view of history. In fact, your one star review was another boon for the left as this book is actually written by a conservative Republican trying to point out the historic flaws of liberals in America and how they hide those facts.

I could go on and on about how stupid you really are, but I doubt that you'd understand the majority of the words since you can't understand irony, metaphor and you judge things literally by their title. Do you even have a junior high school education?!?!?

And for the record, to say that the media is biased and that you get your news from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Jay Leno just shows how incomprehensible your stupidity really is -- don't you realize that all three of those that you mentioned ARE THE MEDIA??? And, with the exception of Jay Leno who skewers both right and left because he's after the laugh, that they are just as biased to the right as other organizations are to the left???

And to not read or listen to an opinion because it differs from yours just shows closed-mindedness and an ignorance of history.

Will you even have the courage to go back and change your Amazon reviews of the fine conservative works that you skewered because you weren't smart enough to read beyond the titles?

I hope not -- the less exposure you have to the rest of the world, the better. Moron.

Occasionally, when I write a hard-hitting post about a powerful special interest, I receive some very passionate responses such as these comments on my post "No Amnesty for Old People":

Angrysenior said...

You're surely a 30-something pseudo-intellectual TWIT who has NO CLUE what it's like to be 67 and forced to decide on a STUPID prescription plan designed by beaurocratic IDIOTS!!

You say...

...before the deadline and would just reward aging slackers...

...they should just be happy they have health care at all...

...It's not as if old people have a lot of other pressing appointments...

...It just seems that old people like to complain...

...It's about deeply sympathizing with peoples' problems and sincerely hoping that private enterprise will be able to do something about them...

WHAT VICIOUS CONTEMPT FOR THE ELDERLY!! Did your mother beat you, or lock you in the coal hole?!?! You're a pathetic insult to Jonathan Swift, a perceptive political critic, not a POMPOUS ASSHOLE!!!

I'm among the minority of seniors who analyzed Part D and CONCLUSIVELY found it to be CRAP!! I would spend $550 a year MORE for it than paying for my Diovan an Lipitor IN CASH!!

GROW UP!!!!!!!!!!

BenMerc said...

Now you've done it...

Even Angrier Senior!!!1! said...

Get off my lawn, Swift!!!1! I catch you drinkin' outta my garden hose and leaving it running again, so help me! I'm gonna...

ulp!
Chest...pain.
Left...arm...tingling.
ulg!

*thud*

My blog has also inspired other bloggers to write about me and even moved one blogger, my dear friend Figo, whom I hope is doing well in a very troubled part of the world, to translate some of my posts into Hebrew, which is quite an honor. Here are just a few links to some of the reviews my blog has received from my esteemed colleagues in the blogosphere:

Terra Extraneus
Rogel's View
Ahistoricality
Immunoblogging
Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying
Reid Report
Medulla Noodle
Poised at the Starting Line
Travels with Shiloh
Bad Attitudes
What I Meant To Say Was…
Bloggy Award

Finally, I want to extend a special thanks to some of my frequent commenters, correspondents and friends, who have been especially supportive of this blog, though it is by no means meant to be an exhaustive list, as I deeply appreciate everyone who has taken the time to write me an email, comment, blogroll me or just read what I have written and lurked in silence. I am especially grateful to Pierre Tristam, Polimom, Mash, BenMerc (my second-most frequent commenter), ZenYenta, Joe Gandelman, Mike Finn, Kevin Hayden, Tom Watson, Andrew Sullivan, Jeremiah Erby, outofcontext, MistahCharley, Shaun Mullen, The Truffle, g1lgam3sh, BlondeSenseLiz, Blue Girl, the wonderful folks at Bad Attitudes and Anonymous, who seems to be my most frequent commenter of all--and my harshest critic. Please be sure to visit the blogs mentioned here, as well as the other blogs on my blogroll, and give them your support as well.

Jon Swift, Weblog, Blogosphere, Internet, Conservative, Liberal, Politics, Comedian Jenée: People are Idiots OTA 18, Carnival of Trackbacks LXXVIII, Samantha Burns OTA Weekend, Case Notes from the Artsy Asylum Open Trackbacks, Party Blog Open Trackbacks

Looking at the Bright Side of World War III

As events in the Middle East spiral out of control, many are worried that we may be on the brink of World War III. I must admit that I, too, was concerned about the violence and bloodshed over there until I started reading what folks on the Rapture Ready Forum are saying. They don't seem very concerned at all with what is happening there. In fact, they are downright giddy at the prospect of all-out war. For them, every rocket that flies into Israel and every bridge that is blown up in Lebanon just brings us one step closer to the end of the world, which is a good thing. They made me realize that it was un-Christian of me to be thinking only of the innocent Israelis, Lebanese and Palestinians caught in the middle of the fighting instead of the Rapture that awaits those of us who are saved. Where others see only tragedy, we saved Christians see the fulfillment of prophesy. Instead of seeing the silver lining in every storm cloud, to us the storm clouds are the silver linings.

I must say the excitement of some of the posters at Rapture Ready is infectious. (Note: Apparently the thread where some of these comments appeared has mysteriously disappeared for some reason though some of these quotes can also be seen elsewhere on the Internet. Update: Thanks to Daryl Cobranchi, who has pointed out that a Google cache copy of the thread is available here.) "For the first time in my Christian walk, I have no doubts that the day of the Lords appearing is upon us," writes Ohappyday. "I have never felt this way before, I have a joy that bubbles up every-time I think of him, for I know this is truly the time I have waited for so long." A person who posts under the name "Waitin" exclaims, "I too am soooo excited!! I get goose bumps. It was quite a day yesterday, in the world news, and I add in local news here in the Boston area!! Tunnel ceiling collapsed on a car and killed a woman of faith, and we had the most terrifying storms I have ever seen here!! But, yes, Ohappyday, like in your screen name, it is most indeed a time to be happy and excited, right there with ya!!" "My head is spinning...I want to stay on the news 24 hours!" says jreed3. "Everything is on hold here at my house. No housework, cooking, sewing, anything. All focus is on breaking events over there," writes BamaLady. "I think that things are going really fast now!! Come Lord Jesus!!" elfuddo exults.

Events are moving so quickly that Kidsintow123 is wondering if she will be ready to meet her "Bridegroom," Christ. She would prefer that the Rapture be delayed just a bit so that she will have time to get her hair and nails done because she wants to be "all spiffied up for Him when He does arrive to take me home." (Let me just add in case anyone gets the wrong idea that I believe Jesus is only a "bridegroom" for women since they don't have gay marriage in Heaven.)

But while recent events in the Middle East have brought on this latest explosion of elation, for quite some time the posters at Rapture Ready have tracked every earthquake and volcano, every report of an Avian Flu outbreak, and every change in the weather, hoping, praying that this is a sign of His Second Coming. Many are thumbing through their copies of the Left Behind series of books (which claims that the Antichrist will be the son of two homosexual fathers, so keep a watchful eye on the children of any gay couples you know) looking for evidence that This Is It! BHiles points out that one sign to look out for is the destruction of Damascus prophesied in Isaiah 17. (Update: BHiles ego-Googles and discovers this site.) Many Christians, who were very disappointed when Israel apparently set back the clock on Armageddon when it entered into the peace process with the Palestinians, are praying that Israel will be the agent of the destruction of Damascus, for which Christians would be very grateful, although, sadly, the citizens of Israel will ultimately be among those Left Behind. (If it's any consolation to the people of Israel just let me say that I will be thinking of you up in Heaven.)

There are a few Christians, however, for whom the human toll of the violence in the Middle East gives them brief pause. I doubt these wet blankets are very much fun at church socials. "Am I alone in feeling guilty about the human suffering like my joy at his appearing some how fuels the evil I see everywhere," Ohappyday says. "If it were not for the souls that hang in the balance and the horror that stalks man daily on this earth, my joy would be complete." In another thread Empyrean asks, "Is it wrong to feel excited about all that is going on in the Middle East right now? I am torn between wanting all hell to break loose over there, because it means we are closer to going home, and guilt because of these feelings." Zhan tries to set the minds of such worrywarts at ease by pointing out that there "two separate yet connected issues here." Issue 1: excitement that "the Lord is returning soon"; and Issue 2: not so much excitement that it is "very likely 10's or 100's of millions of people are about to die." She goes on to liken the Second Coming to childbirth, which is very exciting, despite "the pain of the birthing process."

But if the Rapture is anything like harpazo1 describes, there probably won't be much time for Christians to worry about all the death and destruction they'll leave behind. "Hey guys...with all that is going on, the excitement is palpable!!!" harpazo1 writes. "I was (and have been) reflecting lately on what the actual rapture moment will be like (whenever it happens....lol).....i Know it's instantaneous but do ya think we'll have like a second of "realization" like (**horn blast**) and then thinking, "OH IT'S HAPPENING!!! THIS IS IT!!" Or we'll actually feel ourselves being lifted up and sailing through the air??? OR, do ya think we'll just like blink and be in the presence of the Lord that quick???"

If all these signs are true and we are coming upon the end of the world, it looks like I converted to Christianity just in the nick of time. Because I haven't been a Christian for very long, I didn't realize that my compassion for the victims of all the violence in the Middle East betrayed an unhealthy obsession with worldly concerns. Now I realize that the deaths of hundreds of millions of people is just part of God's plan. I wonder if George Bush and the other saved members of his Administration knew this when they decided to kick the hornet's nest in the Middle East. Anyway, if this is the beginning of World War III, I say, "Bring it on!"

Jon Swift, Rapture Ready, World War III, Left Behind, Christianity, Iraq, War on Terror, Terrorism, Bush, Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Middle East, Foreign Policy, Politics, Carnival of Trackbacks LXXVII, HistoryMike OTA, Pursuing Holiness Open Trackbacks, Adam's Blog Open Trackbacks

The New American Empire

Thomas Friedman recently wrote that our attempts to foster democracy in the Middle East just don't seem to be working very well, though the next six months will no doubt be crucial. One of the problems with democracies in the Middle East is that the people seem to vote for the wrong parties. What we need in the Middle East, it seems, is the kind of democracy where the people don't actually get to elect anyone. So how can we give the people of the Middle East all of the blessings of democracy without letting them vote?

The problem with these fledgling democracies stems from the fact that an essential step in the progression to democracy has been left out. Iraq was at one time a democracy. Immediately before it was a democracy, it was a colony of England. And what was the United States before it was a democracy? Also a colony. In fact, most democratic countries in the world were either colonies or colonizers before they became democracies. So before Iraq is able to become a democracy, I think we need to make it a colony first.

President Bush has said that he wants to spread the blessings of Liberty around the world. Unfortunately, I think he may be going about it the wrong way in his first attempt at this goal by giving in to the politically correct idea that Iraq should be allowed self-determination. A much more efficient way of remaking the Middle East in our own image would be to make Iraq the first colony in the New American Empire.

By making Iraq a colony we could give them all of the advantages of being a democracy, without any of the disadvantages. Iraqis would get the benefit of U.S. government programs and they would get to spend dollars at all of the American companies that would spring up there. After they have proven that they are capable, we could even give Iraqis a non-voting representative in Congress, the way we do for Washington, DC. Of course, we would get a little something out of the arrangement as well since all of their oil reserves would be under the control of the United States.

Iraq, of course, would just be the first member of this New American Empire as we spread liberty throughout the world. We might also consider making Afghanistan a colony if the situation continues to deteriorate there. Lebanon seems ripe for colonization, as I'm sure Israel will want us to take that parcel of land off their hands when they get through with it. Colonizing Syria might encounter some resistance at first, but it would certainly be a lot easier once the surrounding countries are American colonies.

I don't think we need to limit our empire just to the Middle East. Making Mexico a colony would solve the immigration problem in one fell swoop. In fact, one of the reasons people immigrate to this country is that they want to partake of the American lifestyle, which they have seen depicted in Hollywood movies. By becoming a colony of the United States, a country's citizens would be able to enjoy the fruits of the American lifestyle without actually having to immigrate here. Soon we might find that many countries will be clamoring to become colonies of the United States and our troops will be welcomed with flowers, just as Vice President Cheney said would happen in Iraq. Once we can say that the sun never sets on the American Empire and the era of Pax Americana has truly begun, then I think we will have succeeded in spreading liberty throughout the world.

Jon Swift, Thomas Friedman, Iraq, War on Terror, Terrorism, Bush, Democracy, Lebanon, Israel, Aghanistan, Syria, Middle East, Mexico, Immigration, Foreign Policy, Politics

Jill Carroll vs. the Blogosphere

The reaction to the release of Jill Carroll was a watershed moment for the Internet, illustrating the stark contrast between the old mainstream media and the blogosphere. While the mainstream media rushed to judgment and proclaimed the release of Carroll by Iraqi kidnappers to be a positive thing, many in the blogosphere urged caution. I was especially proud of many of my fellow conservative bloggers who instead of posting their initial unfiltered thoughts without thinking about what they were saying, stepped back and took a moment to ponder the ramifications of her release. Maybe her being alive wasn't such a good thing after all, they said after some reflection. Maybe it would have been better if she had been beheaded.

When a video came out of an interview in which Carroll said she had been "well-treated" by her captors, the natural inclination might have been to dismiss what she said since the video was released by an Iraqi party with ties to her captors. But The Corner's Jon Podhoretz, whose natural skepticism about anything that contradicts his world view is especially inspiring, insisted that we take a second look. He presciently predicted what many would soon be saying: "I expect there will be some Stockholm Syndrome talk in the coming days." National Review editor Jonah Goldberg also perceptively saw through the premature jubilation that greeted the news that she was still alive. "Jill Carroll is increasingly starting to bug me," he said. "I'm getting a very bad vibe."

On little more than a hunch, conservative bloggers dug in to find the real story. Mick Stockinger wrote what many people were afraid to say out loud: "I don't want to sound like a nut, but could this have been staged?" he said of her kidnapping. "May as well just come right out and say she was a willing participant," echoed Orrin Judd. "I say the kidnapping was a put up deal from the get go," chimed in the folks at RedState. Regular Ron, who displayed a surprisingly sophisticated knowledge of the theories of Barthes and Derrida, deconstructed her statements to reveal what she really said. And Little Green Footballs applied scientific analysis to the video, saying, "Note that even after her release, Carroll maintained that she had been treated well by her captors-so it would appear that this journalist for the Christian Science Monitor made these anti-American comments voluntarily."

In the mainstream media only The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz, who increasingly takes his cues from the great work that conservative blogs are doing, saw what many of his colleagues refused to see, "Carroll seemed bent on giving her captors a positive review," he wrote. "Why make a terrorist group who put her family and friends through a terrible three-month ordeal sound like they were running a low-budget motel chain?" Now that Ben Domenech is gone, Kurtz seems to be the only independent voice left at the Post.

When it was later revealed that Carroll made these statements at gunpoint, the speculations of these brave conservative bloggers were confirmed. As anyone who watches the show 24 knows, when people have a gun to their head, they always reveal the truth. Although Carroll later tried to back away from the video, her disavowals were made after she was safe and sound and free to make up any story she wanted without fear of consequences.

But if there is a real heroine in this saga, it would have to be Debbie Schlussel, who was on this story from Day One with the tenaciousness of a Komodo Dragon on a goat. "Why are so many people who claim to be patriotic Americans so overjoyed that Jill Carroll was freed?" she wrote the day of her release. "Here's a clue for the obviously dimwitted. Why was Jill Carroll freed? Maybe it had something to do with the fact that she HATES AMERICA and our Mid-East policy. And, oh yeah, she HATES ISRAEL, too."

Schlussel delved into Carroll's past writings and detected left-wing bias that had heretofore been hidden to almost everyone. She pointed out that criticizing the War in Iraq is actually evidence of anti-Semitism, something I had not realized before. But most of all I was impressed by how Schlussel refused to back down from her statements no matter what "evidence" was presented to her. When even some conservative bloggers attacked her, she didn't cut and run but went on the offensive. Although some went so far as to say that she should apologize for her statements, Schlussel refused, saying, "As for any calls for an apology, the apology is owed to ME by all the premature articulators out there who didn't read closely."

I can appreciate Schlussel's complaint, which she is often forced to level at anyone who disagrees with her, that people have not read what she has written closely enough to catch the hidden nuances, even though she takes great pains to help her readers out by often WRITING IN CAPITAL LETTERS. I think this is a big problem in the blogosphere. I have noticed myself that sometimes when people read what I write, they actually think I mean the opposite of what I say!

The blogosphere is young and we sometimes make mistakes, but I think this whole episode has shown us how it is already superior in many ways to the MSM (which is what we bloggers like to call the mainstream media because it is easier than writing out the words m-a-i-n-s-t-r-e-a-m m-e-d-i-a and the time we save by not writing out the words "mainstream media" can be spent doing more research to back up what we say). One of the mistakes Jill Carroll made was that she tried to go out into the Iraqi countryside to get closer to the story, which caused her to lose perspective. It is bad enough that some members of the mainstream write about Iraq from their hotel balconies, where they can still be distracted by bombs going off, instead of reading Pentagon press releases in the peace and quiet of their own offices back home where they can reflect before they write the way most bloggers do. In fact, after Jill Carroll has time to think about all the terrible mistakes she made in Iraq, maybe she should start a blog.

Jon Swift, Iraq, War on Terror, Terrorism, Jill Carroll, Weblog, Blogoshpere, Internet, 24, Jon Podhoretz, Jonah Goldberg, Howard Kurtz, Ben Domenech, Washington Post, National Review, Debbie Schlussel, Conservative, Liberal, Politics, Foreign Policy, Carnival of Trackbacks LVIII, Beltway Traffic Jam, Never Forget, Voteswagon Open TrackBack, Samantha Burns OTA Weekend, Jo's Cafe Weekend Specials 408-409, Right Wing Nation Weekend Free Thread, MooseTracks, Soaring Sunday, Carnival of the Vanities #186