E Pluribus Anus

Judging by the symbol above the door,  Greendale Community College has opened a satellite campus in our neighborhood.  Or perhaps it's the Asterisk Luxury* Apartments.

*Not actually luxurious.

Kraftabulous Abs!

Via our friends at Truth Wins Out, it seems that Kraft has produced an awesome print ad featuring, well...this:

Yowza!  That's not Kraft, that's Kraft-Ebing!

Predictably, OneMillionMoms have (or has, since I suspect it's One Mom sending out the same email a Million times) been overwhelmed with a titanic case of the vapors and are (is) encouraging the American people to "take action" in response to the ad. I completely agreed, until I realized MillionMom didn't mean it as a cute euphemism for masturbation. Nevertheless, they (she) have (has -- okay, I'll stop now) gone to all the trouble of writing out a handy-dandy form letter for us to get cranky with Kraft:

As a parent and a member of OneMillionMoms.com, I am highly offended by your company's decision to feature a nude model in your "Let's Get Zesty" ad campaign.  Your decision is disrespectful to me personally, and to my family. If Kraft continues to use such poor taste and inappropriate marketing choices, I will make a conscious effort to shop for products other than yours. 

Your current ad is soft porn, and I find it extremely offensive. It is also degrading and harmful to impressionable young men and women. Your 2-page ad resembles a centerfold! 

Kraft is pushing away loyal, conservative customers with this new ad campaign. I will not be able to buy Kraft dressings or any of your products until your company cleans up your advertising. The consumers you are attempting to attract – women and mothers - are the very ones you are driving away. Who will want Kraft products in their fridge or pantry if this vulgarity is what they represent?  

Currently, it is embarrassing to be associated with Kraft by owning their products. As a consumer, I urge you to no longer use sex to sell your products. Kraft is better than this and doesn't need to stoop so low to sell products. This disgusting advertising campaign needs to be discontinued immediately. I look forward to hearing from you regarding my concern.

Well, this prefab email form-letter is just one big Mad Lib to me, so I altered it as I saw fit, then emailed it off right away:

As a parent of two cats and a delighted spectator of OneMillionMoms.com, I am highly offended by your company's decision to feature a nude model in your "Let's Get Zesty" ad campaign, because if there's one thing I despise it's false advertising, and clearly this man is only mostly nude, since his naughty bits are concealed beneath a convenient, if not improbable, triangle of gingham.  Still, despite this visual obstruction, it's not hard to imagine that somebody's got quite the Chicken in their Biskit (and when I say "chicken" I mean "rooster."  And when I say "rooster" I mean "cock.")  And while we're on the subject, what's the damn deal with that modesty panel in the picnic blanket?  The thing has four corners, plus a pie-shaped flap you can flip over your Claussen in the event you spot a photographer crouching in the tree above you?

Your decision is disrespectful to me personally, although my family seems to enjoy it (by which I mean my cat Riley has taken to rubbing the ad all over her face, repeatedly.  I can only assume you treated the page with the musky pheromones of a rampant male in full rut.  Still, it smells better than those perfume ads in Glamour -- and most of your products, now that I think about it.) If Kraft continues to use such poor taste and inappropriate marketing choices, I will make a conscious effort to ensure I'm alone in the house the next time I flip through a People magazine.

Your current ad is soft porn, and I find it extremely pointless, because I for one won't spring for Creamy Bleu Cheese until I see penetration!  I don't care how zesty your Italian is, although I wouldn't kick him out of bed for eating Lunchables. On the other hand, your 2-page ad resembles a centerfold! Well Done!

Kraft is giving loyal, conservative customers unfamiliar and unwanted tingly feelings in their dank and mildewy nether regions, and now they will not be able to spread a thick blob of Miracle Whip on their Oscar Meyer Bologna without thinking about the Weinermobile pulling into a one-car garage.

The consumers you are attempting to attract – women and mothers - are the very ones who love this kind of advertising. I mean, who do you think is buying all those issues of Cosmopolitan ("Seven Sexy Secret Uses for Roquefort Dressing That'll Have Him Tossing Your Salad!")?  Who will want Kraft products in their fridge or pantry if this vulgarity is what they represent?  Probably people who don't look to a line of condiments for ecclesiastical advice on sexual morality (and whatever you do, don't seek a serious, long-lasting relationship with Kraft American Singles; the name alone says they're just looking to get laid).

This disgusting advertising campaign needs to be discontinued immediately and replaced with ads from earlier decades, when good corporate citizens like Kraft maintained high standards of public propriety, and only sold their non-dairy processed cheese substitute with pictures of naked chicks.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding my concern.  In the meantime, I'll be in my bunk.

The Answer My Friend, Is Ablow

You know, it's been awhile since we last consulted one of the many distinguished headshrinkers who specialize in distance-diagnosing President Obama and his liberal enablers -- far too long, in fact.  So set your 50-minute timer, grab a box of Kleenex, and let's all have a breakthrough!

According to his bio, "Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team."  He also looks like a cross between Terry O'Quinn and Telly Savalas -- kind of a John Lockjak, so don't be surprised if during your session he sucks on a lollypop or gets possessed by the Man in Black (or vice versa).  Anyway, if you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the Fox News Medical A-Team.  They seem kind of whorish and not very picky.

Dr. Ablow's credentials are surprisingly legit for a man in his field ("He received his Doctor of Medicine degree from Johns Hopkins Medical School in 1987, and completed his psychiatry residency at the Tufts-New England Medical Center") although some of his more recent ventures have sharply veered off the high road, plunged down an embankment, and exploded in a fireball, as mandated by the 1975 Supreme Court ruling Monza v. Mannix.

During May, 2011 Ablow launched Dr. Keith Ablow Life Coaching, offering a team of life coaches trained by him who are experts at applying the content of his books Living the Truth: Transform Your Life Through the Power of Insight and Honesty and The 7: Seven Wonders that Will Change Your Life. The Life Coaching business ultimately failed, and was discontinued due to a lack of interest, as it is no longer an option on his website.

I've never been quite sure what a "life coach" does, but I assume they sit across from you with a megaphone yelling "Breathe!  Breathe! Breathe!" and if you die, they gruffly order you to "walk it off."  Actually, now that I think about it, life coaches probably explain this influx of zombies we've been having lately.

Anyway, since Dr. Ablow wrote an entire book about Truth and Honesty (I haven't read it, but I'm assuming he took the "pro" position), we can expect that the following piece will be one of the rare Foxnews.com articles which eschews tendentious arguments and confines itself solely to proven facts.

Is Obama waging psychological warfare on Americans?

I must admit, that's a pretty provocative question, but I'm not really in the mood to wade through an 825 word article, even if it does mean discovering the truth about whether the President is at war with my psyche.  Fortunately, Foxnews.com is well-acquainted with the attention span of its average reader, so the question is answered in the first thirteen words:

I believe that the Obama administration is conducting psychological warfare on conservative Americans. 

And there you have it.  Okey doke then, I guess you can all go on about your business now.  Thanks for stopping by, have a good day...

Not only that...

Sigh...

but it is also waging this war on all Americans who previously viewed themselves, their country, their Constitution and their overwhelming belief in God as a force for good in the world.

So...I guess that means the conservative Americans mentioned in the first sentence view themselves, their country, their Constitution and their overwhelming belief in God as a force of evil?

"What?  Oh, uh, just receiving another tax deductible donation for my 501(c)(4) social welfare organization."

The psychological warfare began with an apology tour in which President Obama publicly “confessed,” presuming to speak for all of us, for the shortcomings of America and our supposed contributions to tyranny and all manner of evils around the world.

At first, this Certs-like combination sentence/paragraph struck me as gibberish.  Then I remembered that "Ablow co-founded the New England Brain-Mind Institute"...

As seen in the motion picture Bowfinger...

...which uses hour-long doses of the veterinary anesthetic ketamine to treat mental illness; so in an attempt to the meet the same high standards of journalistic rigor that Dr. Ablow demonstrates, I went to Wonderland on Cahuenga and scored a hit of Special K.  Now I'm following his argument perfectly, although not that paramedic's finger that's moving slowly back and forth in front of my eyes.

This confession planted in the American mind the notion that our values and beliefs might not be in line with freedom and truth.

Yes, Obama spilled the beans, but to be fair, the secret that our values and beliefs might not be in line with freedom and truth almost got out in 1787, when they started passing the Constitution around the states for ratification; fortunately, nobody squealed to the ladies and the slaves.

The president, with the help of his administration, is attempting to conduct psychological warfare on Americans who value autonomy and free will.

I guess we should have expected that, since he promised several times during the campaign to "mind-fuck everyone but the Calvinists."

It was reinforced by the first lady stating during the 2008 presidential campaign that she had never felt pride in our country.

Wow, that's an oldie. It's like I've tuned into the Classic Rock station of right wing b.s.

These statements were seemingly shrugged off by Americans who, collectively, seemed to be telling themselves that they were hearing discontent channeled from disenfranchised groups in our nation who, nonetheless, loved the country—and all of us, too.

Look, I like you as a country, but I feel like we're moving a little too fast...

But, deep inside the American psyche, something more malignant could have been planted—the seeds of self-hatred and self-doubt. And I no longer believe that those seeds were planted unintentionally by people as smart and capable as the president and first lady.

And what's the first thing Michelle Obama did when she got her hands on the Executive Mansion? She "broke ground on the largest and most expansive vegetable garden to date on the White House lawn" and immediately planted seeds of self-hatred and self-doubt, then dug a nice celery trench.

The psychological warfare has continued, I believe, with other opportunities the president has had to make American’s question their individual freedoms and autonomy.

He's cleverly undermined American's faith in proper apostrophe placement!

This has included misrepresenting horrific crimes, such as the one which unfolded in Newtown, Connecticut, as evidence of the need for gun control measures, when they clearly evidenced a need for revamping our mental health care system.

We don't need to disarm our jittery, violent citizens when we can simply release roving bands of psychiatrists to accost them on the street and shove cameras in their face:  "Ablow also performs (as a 'documentary' style television experience...he terms 'Street Therapy' wherein he approaches apparent strangers on the street with a camera crew and engages them in conversations about their personal problems on camera...There are a number of ethical concerns regarding this practice. However, Ablow is no longer a member of the American Psychiatric Association...and is therefore no longer bound to uphold those standards.")

Registering assault weapons and banning high capacity magazines will have absolutely no meaningful impact on gun violence in this country.  Our only rational hope of preventing another movie house, college campus, or elementary school massacre lies in identifying mentally unstable and heavily armed American's, then soothing them with shouted interrogations about their toilet training and masturbation habits, conducted on public street corners in the harsh glare of TV camera lights.

Gun rights are inextricably entwined in the American psyche with freedom to defend oneself. Attacking gun rights, I believe, is an element of the psychological warfare on the American belief that force is justifiable when confronting evil.

...or at least when trying to impress Jody Foster.

My belief that psychological warfare is being deployed on Americans by this American president and his administration has been solidified as news has come out of the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS.

It's fortunate for your side in the war, Doctor, that your beliefs don't require evidence to be solidified, only news.  Must really shorten your supply lines.

This black ops targeting doesn’t just have the effect of slowing the financial momentum of these groups. It has the goal of dispiriting them and making them feel helpless to achieve their goals.

This was the secret mission of Seal Team Six the night they landed in Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad -- to fill him with a sense of futility and ennui.  But due to a garbled text message from Command (thanks, Autocorrect!), they misunderstood their orders and filled him with lead, thus depriving the world of a clinically depressed criminal mastermind who would train a new generation of emo terrorists that wouldn't really get much done in the bombing and shooting department, because why even bother killing people, when they don't care about us?  Nobody cares about us!  All our potential victims are such phonies...

If liberal Americans stand by and do not seek swift and severe justice for those who perpetrated these acts, then they will have tacitly been victimized, too.

You know what we do in these parts to folks who dispirit Tea Party organizations, and make their members suffer feelings of helplessness and loss of financial momentum?  We hang 'em!  Of course, that means gettin' a lynch mob together, but I can't seem to find my phone tree list, and most folks are at work this time of day anyway, and traffic's kind a bad right now 'cause they got things tore up over there where they're putting in the bypass, and...ah hell, what's the point?

Because they will have tacitly agreed that it is acceptable for their government to target certain political movements for persecution—and that will have fundamentally changed the psyche of America.

I'd love to see Dr. Ablow's prescription pad ("Take two tax breaks with food and save the receipts, because the meals are also tax deductible.")

Seen through the lens of psychological warfare, the failure to defend our embassy in Benghazi need not be understood simply as a screw-up.

As a writer, I'm naturally fascinated by the methods employed by other members of the profession, and after careful study, it appears that Dr. Ablow goes about constructing a logical argument by imagining that his subject -- in this case, the Obama Administration -- is the eponymous mammal in a game of Whack-A-Mole.

 It could reflect an actual strategy on the part of the administration to reinforce the notion that homicidal violence born of hatred toward America is understandable—even condonable—because we have generated it ourselves and are reaping the harvest of ill will we have sown. In other words, we should take our punishment.

I don't know about that, but somebody needs to take their medicine...

The president said as much when he blamed the murder of our Ambassador to Libya on a film that criticized Islam.

This misstatement may disclose not just incompetence and may not just be evidence of a cover-up, but may be evidence of exactly what I am theorizing here: that the president, with the help of his administration, is attempting to conduct psychological warfare on Americans who value autonomy and free will and free markets and small government, by convincing them that they are wrong-minded, prejudiced and pathological and should deeply question their beliefs—including some ensconced in the Constitution.

Chief among them is the 7th Amendment, which guarantees the inalienable right to make YouTube videos without getting hassled by the Man.  Or Chico for that matter.

The wiretapping of journalists would be, then, just another black ops technique in an ongoing war against our freedoms.

It's even worse than you think, Doc.  The Administration has not only wiretapped journalists, they also spied on a guy who works for Fox News!

There will be those that say that many American leaders have sought to target groups hostile to their views. Some will point to President Nixon or Senator McCarthy or J. Edgar Hoover. And that debate can be had.

But I assert that this administration is engaged in a coordinated attempt to dispirit, disarm and disenfranchise large portions of the American population and to weaken our founding principles through what is best understood as psychological warfare.

Again, as an aspiring writer I take every opportunity I can to learn from my betters, and I notice that Dr. Ablow has now used the phrase "psychological warfare" eleven times, demonstrating that he can drive home a point the same way John Henry drove steel (although he doesn't seem to possess an equivalent flair for drama, or he would have realized that this would be the perfect point in the essay to drop dead).

And with that statement in the public domain, let us, at least, be aware and notice how many events unfold in-keeping with it, over the next months and years.

I honestly don't know what "unfold in-keeping" means, but I'm guessing it has something to do with motel owners who pass the time by sabotaging origami.

The enemy of psychological warfare is the knowledge of what is really happening to us and remembering who we really are.

I don't actually have a joke for this, I just wanted to make sure you guys got an even dozen of psychological warfare (although the next time it's my turn, I think I'm gonna bring glazed crullers, or maybe chocolate-dipped maple logs instead).

Sundays With SZ: Let's Go Dutch!

Housekeeping note:  Our friend Thers is having a pledge drive over at Whiskey Fire (details here).  If you have a few plinking nickels rattling around that coffee can, please consider making a contribution to keep our national conversation on the great social and political issues of the day well supplied with the word "fuck."  Thank you.

Originally published October 25, 2003.

"Ketchup is a Vegetable!"

Matt Drudge has apparently obtained a copy of the script of the upcoming miniseries "The Reagans", and provides more examples of how the bio-flick fails to properly reverence its subjects (Drudge on THE REAGANS) : 

Actress Judy Davis's portrayal of Nancy Reagan appears to be inspired by the Joan Crawford camp biopic MOMMIE DEAREST; wild mood swings, dramatic lighting, and tart-mouth insults are hysterically delivered by Davis.

[The showcase line "Ketchup is a vegetable! It is not a meat, right? So IT IS a vegetable" is likely to become the "No wire hangers ever!" camp highlight of the season.]

Well, I wasn't going to watch this show, but if it's got Nancy chanelling Mommie Dearest and advocating ketchup, then I am so there!

One camp scene shows Nancy and Ron both standing nude [wrapped in towels] when they first learn from NBC's John Chancellor they have won the election.

Ewww!  Maybe I'm not there after all.

Per Drudge, the movie also shows Nancy popping pills, and slapping a young Patti.  Matt claims that Nancy "has reached out to Hollywood heavyweights, including Merv Griffin, to somehow stop" the upcoming movie. 

But Drudge's real outrage over the whole business seems to be that Mr. Barbra Sterisand, James Brolin, is playing Ron, and so has a conflict of interest -- not because Barbra is a known an ultra liberal, but because . . .well, here's Matt:

An immediate member of the Brolin/Streisand family is currently suffering from HIV, according to press reports.

During a scene in the film which his wife pleads with him to help people battling AIDS, Reagan says resolutely, "They that live in sin shall die in sin" and refuses to discuss the issue further.

Actor Brolin delivers the uncorroborated words with extra confidence.

And you know Brolin's just doing that as political payback -- he should say the words with REGULAR confidence, to prove that he's not using his acting as some kind of political vendetta against Reagan for not taking any action against AIDs.  In fact, no actor with a family member suffering from HIV, or anybody who even KNOWS somebody who has (or had) HIV, should allowed to appear in a movie about Ronald Reagan.  It's a conflict of interest, like Matt says.

Anyway, Drudge's report has the usual far-right mouth-frothers in the expected uproar.  But let's here from a new one!  Here's 14-year-old pundit Kyle Williams (WorldNetDaily's even younger version of Ben Shapiro) -- he balances the fact that he hasn't actually seen "The Reagans" by also denouncing Runaway Jury for portraying gun manufacturers as being "white men" whose "only drive is money" (Hollywood: Dangerous to America):

Matt Drudge aired numerous clips of the film on the "Rush Limbaugh Show" on Friday. The entire thing is a hatchet job on the Reagan Revolution, the revolution of modern-day conservatism. This is nothing short of a retaliatory strike on the GOP.

The entire thing is completely despicable. Although news stories report on a film that has yet to air, I'm confident that the final product will turn out worse than expected. It's another example of the dangerous power of the media.

No, talk radio is not dangerous. National Review, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan, et al are not dangerous. When readers and listeners take in their opinions, they know they are opinions. They can choose to accept them, reject them, consider them or do whatever they want.

With "Runaway Jury," moviegoers let their guard down and open their minds to what promised to be an exciting, suspenseful movie. With the upcoming "The Regans," television viewers, no doubt, will expect an interesting movie and hope to learn some insights into the life of the Reagans, but instead will see liberal propaganda.

Ah, to see the world with the innocent eyes of a child, and to honestly believe that big companies like CBS do things like deliver retalitory strikes on the GOP.  (Kyle never says what the GOP did to make CBS want to retaliate, but I suspect that the network is trying to punish Republicans for not watching David Kelly's "The Brotherhood of Poland N.H.") 

And not to rag on Kyle or anything, but one would have to be naive indeed to think that a movie based on a Grisham novel was going to be exciting and suspenseful.  

But Kyle does have a point about how somebody could go to the movies, trustingly leave their mind open, and so be reprogrammed by the evil Hollywood liberals.  I can see this poor sap now, coming out of the multiplex and telling his wife, "Now it all makes sense!  Gun manufacturers smoke cigars, rig juries, and ARE ONLY IN IT FOR THE MONEY!  No WONDER they charge for their products!"  And then, just like in the climatic scene of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, his wife is forced to shoot him, because he's become one of THEM!

In any case, I admire Kyle's confidence that "The Reagans" will be even WORSE than he thinks it will be, because "it's another example of the dangerous power of the media":  the power to read your mind, ascertain your overwrought, Matt Drudge-fueled fantasies, and then surpass them by making a movie that is even LESS reverential to the Reagans than you could imagine.  Maybe by having Ronnie back a wacky space-laser system named after a George Lucas movie, or something. 

But I kid the people who weren't alive in the '80s.  And since Kyle has written a book (Seen and Heard) which "takes on the establishment, offering clear evidence that a leftist agenda is at work in our nation," I guess I shouldn't mock him for his youth.  But I will say that a home-schooling program that exposes him to Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter constitutes child abuse.  I hope the authorities are looking into this.

And speaking of people who grew up never learning the valuable interpersonal skills that public schools can provide, let's check in with Blowhard Bully O'Liar, to get his take on the reported "live in sin, die in sin" line.  Bill uses his Talking Points Memo to says that it's now Ronald Reagan's Turn to know the pain of being defamed -- albeit it not as horribly as Bill O'Reilly has, of course.  I've annotated it, for your convenience:

Talking Points realizes this drum has been pounded again and again by us, but it's worth saying again.  America is becoming a defamation nation where the worst accusations imaginable [e.g., that Bill O'Reilly lied about having won a Peabody award] are acceptable in the elite media [i.e., the media that isn't Fox News].  CBS has big problems here. There's an outcry over the situation. There's plenty of time to cut it out of the film.  If CBS doesn't do it, malice will be charged [by Bill O'Reilly -- the guy behind that Fox lawsuit against Al Franken].

Many Americans have an emotional attachment to Ronald Reagan. They don't want to see him smeared in a TV movie [and many American have an emotional attachment to Bill O'Reilly, and don't want to see Al Franken smear him by pointing out that Bill lived in Westbury, not Levittown].  And there are enough things that Mr. Reagan did wrong that can be legitimately portrayed as with any president.

There comes a time when society has to make a decision.  Right now, defamation is selling and smear merchants of all kinds [i.e., Al Franken] are making big money.  The public is responsible for that [the public will burn in hell for buying Al's book].

If CBS includes that defamatory scene about Ronald Reagan in the movie, I'm not going to watch it.  If every American did the same thing, CBS wouldn't have any viewers.  And believe me, the defamation would be removed. [If every American didn't watch "The Reagans," then CBS would know it wasn't what America wanted to watch, and they wouldn't buy any more programs about the Reagans or conservatives.  Problem solved.  However, the defamation would still be there, even though nobody watched it.  So, new plan: nobody watch ANY programming on CBS until they promise to remove the defamation.  And let their sponsors know that you're going to do this, so they will add to the pressure on the network.  And in the meantime, while you're not watching CBS you'll have more time to enjoy all the fine programming on the Fox News Channel --a channel wihich would NEVER defame anybody!]

But young Kyle and old Bill will be glad to hear that "The Reagans" accepts Ron's assertion "that he knew nothing of the illegal diversion of funds to the contras fighting in Nicaragua"-- at least, per the elite media NY Times.  

However, Reagan does reportedly say to Oliver North, "Hypothetically, if you really wanted to help me out, you would sell some arms to Iran and divert the profits to the Contras; but don't tell me anything about it!  And don't tell George anything either, because he's such a wimp."  And Reagan says this while nude!  But if we all boycott Fox News, I bet CBS will take all this out before they air the program.

So, "The Reagans."  I think everybody should spend a lot of time and energy worrying about this television miniseries, and forgot about the problems in Iraq, the Plame leak investigation, exactly who oversold the Iraq threat and why, etc.  And you should boycott all the television networks, all Hollywood movies, and ketchup, just to be on the safe side.

Post-Friday Beast Blogging: The Birth Canal Edition

"Is it safe to come out yet?"

"Shhh! I'm crowning."

Sundays With SZ: Sex and the Single Mole

Welcome to our weekly look back at some of the classic posts from the nine year history of World O' Crap.  Originally published October 16, 2003.

Undercover Conservative, Part 3:

Ann Coulter's Dating Club, William F. Buckley's Bedtime Stories, and Don't Let Doctors Turn YOU Into Hillary Clinton!

     It's time to finish up our report on the links and ads from some of our favorite conservative sites.  But first, an update on my attempt to join the Young America Foundation's 100 Club: Well, I got in!  I have an assigned secret identity ("Freedom") and a secret password (well, I can tell you that, but it's almost as inspired as my secret identity).  But sadly, the club isn't nearly as cool as I thought it would be.  First, since they're going to mail my welcome package to my address at Oral Roberts University, it doesn't look like I'll ever know the point values for the various conservative activities they're trying to encourage.  (But we can speculate.  For instance, I think that "Denouncing Coming Out Week" probably got Ben Shapiro 10 points, last week's "Outing GramGram as a Druggie to Deflect the Heat from Rush" got him 20 points, while Jonah Goldberg got 50 for being editor of National Review Online.)

However, I did learn from the site that I can get 30 points for attending The Western Leadership Conference!  And here are some of the reasons why I should attend:

• You'll get to meet and hear from some of the nation's leading conservatives.
• You can purchase popular conservative books at drastically reduced prices.
• You can your club members can learn the secrets of successful campus activism and how to draw the largest crowds on campus.
• It's a chance to leave your leftist campus and be around other conservatives for a weekend.

The speakers include Michael Reagan, Peter Robinson ("Author and speechwriter in the Reagan Administration"), some activist people I've never heard of, and, as a special treat, Lionel Chetwynd, "Award-winning screenwriter, director and producer," who will be also showing his exciting made-for cable movie, DC 9/11: Time of Presidential Super-Heroics.

So, if you know of any young conservatives who want to escape their leftist campuses for a weekend of indoctrination and boring TV, sign them up for this conference.  It's only $25 (which includes food, lodgings, and materials, which makes it quite a travel bargain) -- so, if you just want a cheap weekend near Santa Barbara, you might want to attend even if your campus isn't all that leftist.  

Plus, there will be a seminar on activism training, where you will learn, among other things, how to:

• Increase and maximize your funding from the university and private supporters; 
• Mount a successful campaign to counter leftist attacks on your speaker;

Because:

In order to challenge the Left on campus students must not only articulate the argument for free markets and individual liberty, but also organize successful events that promote conservative ideas to other students.

Maybe I'm behind the times, but shouldn't we just let the kids, both leftist and rightist, articulate their own arguments and organize their own events?  Because otherwise they're never going to learn, and once they're President, they'll still be relying on grownups to do these kinds of things for them.

But back to the 100 Club: their message board is a letdown too.  For while it has provocative-sounding folders, such as "Left-Wing Lunacy: Expose the intolerant, silly, and otherwise questionable actions on the campus Left," that one doesn't have any posts in it.  Apparently the left just isn't coming through with intolerant and silly actions on campus anymore.  I weep for our children. 

In a folder called "Dirty Trick Campaigns: Expose how liberal administrators and/or students have attempted to stop your event through bureaucratic maneuvers or intimidation," there have only been five posts in the past four months.  It seems that Gonzaga University officials objected to posters announcing a talk on "Why the Left Hates America" on the grounds that the Left doesn't actually HATE America --  but since they still let Daniel Flynn speak, it wasn't all that dirty of a trick, and didn't provoke much discussion.  In other news, a while back some "hippies" stood next to some girl who was protesting war-protesters.  Also, the same girl complained that the evil bureaucrats at her school are requiring freshman to live in the dorms ("So instead of competing in a free market with other housing establishments, they simply want to FORCE students to buy their unsatisfactory housing!!"), but nobody seemed all that outraged by her tale.  It's sad when this is the best oppression that a campus can muster.  I encourage all liberal students and administrators to intimidate some conservatives, so these kids have something to talk about.

And that's about it on the board, except for a couple of laments about Rush, a dated prediction that Arnold was going down in flames in CA, and a sprinkling of Reagan nostalgia along the lines of "I wish I was alive when Reagan was President, because he was was a REAL conservative, and was all evil and stuff."

So, Club 100: another secret plan funded by a crazy old billionaire designed to subvert our nation by brainwashing our youth.  But still, so very not cool.

Now, on to my second update: the ANN COULTER DATING CLUB!

Well, almost.  It seems that one of Ann's paid sponsors is an online dating service called Other Singles -- and if you sign up through Ann's site, you get to be part of the Ann Coulter.Org Singles subgroup at Other Singles, now 613 members strong.  If you too want to sign up, when you get to the "politics" section on the questionnaire, leave it set on "conservative" or "very conservative", and you qualify to meet your Ann Coulter mate!  It could be one of THESE mystery dates (note: the names and the punctuation were changed for privacy reasons) :

First, here's Im4-Guns, a 28-year-old male.  He's above average in looks, just like everybody else:

What are some of the qualities you look for in someone you are dating?:
Conservative, non-smoking patriot that loves the outdoors.  

What things turn you off about someone?:Liberals, narrow mindedness, laziness  

Tell others more about yourself:The people I respect are: Garner Ted Armstrong; Ronald Reagan; Rush; Mike Reagan; Sean Hannity; Ann Coulter; Micheal Savage; and many other conservative talk radio host.  

Now, let's hear from Teddy, a 42-year-old, separated male (also an above average-looking guy):

What are some of the qualities you look for in someone you are dating?:Attractive
Desire for sex

What things turn you off about someone?:
Smoking
Overweight
Other men's children
Problems
Gold Diggers

While Ann's group seems to be at least 80% male (ladies, take advantage of this great opportunity!), let's meet HottieChick, a 24-year-old slender, blonde, extremely attractive, extremely stylish, woman:

What are some of the qualities you look for in someone you are dating?:I'm looking for a Conservative guy that can treat me in the fashion to which I'm accustomed. I like older men, especially if they are well-situated, but I also like younger guys that can treat me like the exciting, attractive girl I am. I dress sexily to please my man and love talking about politics and God.  

What things turn you off about someone?:Don't write me if you are obviously unattractive. I can't stand liberal politics or America-haters. Also, don't write if you can't take me out to the high-class places I like to go. I am NOT a McDonald's type of girl, and offering to take me to the park will not fool me.  

Tell others more about yourself:I am a very sexy and intelligent person. I like to talk about politics with people that agree with me, and I like high class places. 

Personally, I think that Teddy and Hottie are a match made in AnnCoulter.org heaven, and I hope these two young people find each other soon.

Now, on to NRO and their wonderful treat for children: Moral Stories from National Review Books! And since these stories were all personally selected by William F. Buckley Jr, you know your kids will adore them! And they are all at least 100 years old, thus ensuring that your children aren't corrupted by the faintest hint of modernity.

The National Review Treasury of Classic Children’s Literature, (Original Volume)42 Wondrous Stories by Literary Giants, Personally Selected by William F. Buckley Jr.

This veritable celebration of tales finely told and lessons charmingly taught is a must - for your children or grandchildren, for that beloved niece, nephew, or godchild, for that nice neighborhood kid, or for the local school library.

Yes, it's not just a celebration, it's a VERITABLE celebration.  A celebration of lessons learned, morals imparted, and virtues conveyed.  Buy a copy for every kid you know, since they all need to be taught a thing or two.  Why not get one for that nice neighbor kid -- or even better, for that bratty kid who listens to the "rap" music and throws his ball in your yard.  That will fix HIS wagon.  And donate several of them to the local library, as a form of social policy.

 But wait--there's more!

NEW: The National Review Treasury of Classic Children’s Literature, Volume Two37 Wondrous Stories by Literary Giants, Personally Selected by William F. Buckley Jr.

Last year we published The National Review Treasury of Classic Children’s Literature — a big, lavishly illustrated book that featured dozens of delightful and wholesome children’s stories from some of America’s best writers from the late-19th/early-20th centuries.

Yup, that's our key selling point -- these stories are WHOLESOME. 

Like the first volume, “Treasury 2” contains dozens of stories from literary giants, many first published in St. Nicholas Magazine, the famous journal that established a Golden Age of children’s literature over a century ago. Here are some of the many authors and stories you will find:

* MARK TWAIN, the famed author of Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn, wrote the equally entertaining (but too-forgotten) sequel Tom Sawyer, Detective. This classic mini-novel — featuring Tom, Huck, and Jim up to their old, beloved antics — was first published in 1896 in Harper’s, and is republished here (along with all the original artwork!). You'll find it to be rollicking fun (and far superior to anything published today).

Because it's WHOLESOME!  They just don't publish anything wholesome these days, forcing kids to try to learn moral lessons from Penthouse or The National Review.

* JACK LONDON, the revered author of The Call of the Wild and so many more, appeared in our first collection. He returns in the sequel with the exciting sea tale, “The Cruise of the Dazzler.” It’s classic London, and one of five mini-novels — the others are Julia Truitt Bishop’s delightful Another Chance, Marion Ames Taggart’s The Wyndham Girls, and Adeline Knapp’s action-packed The Boy and the Baron — that will thoroughly entertain and enthrall boys and girls of all ages (while promoting those values and lessons that we share, and that are increasingly at a premium!).

Yeah, they'll be enthralled.  But more importantly, they'll be inculcated with those values and lessons which WE all share, but that which the reprobates and scoundrels who write modern children's books don't.  Because just like you just can't get good help these days unless you import it from Third World nations, you can't get properly didactic children's literature unless you dredge it up from the past.

They'll fill the special someone who reads them with that rare feeling that wonderful tales finely told impart.

Bill wrote this ad copy himself, didn't he?

FRANK BAUM entertained millions of children with his “Oz” books. He appeared in our first book, and has an encore here: His story, “Aunt ’Phroney’s Boy,” is typical of the tales in The National Review Treasury of Classic Children’s Literature, Volume Two. It’s an engaging story marked by unsurpassed prose and offering a clear lesson — precisely the kind of literature children deserve (need!) to be exposed to!

Because if they are exposed to that literature WITHOUT clear lessons, they'll waste their time ENJOYING their reading, and we can't have that.  Because if you leave it to the kids to pick their own books, they'll just read the Harry Potter books, become Satanists, and go to hell. 

Have you ever heard of Blanche Willis Howard, Elaine Goodale Eastman, or Winthrop Packard? We hadn’t, until we saw their stories — “Frieda’s Doves,” “Little Brother o’ Dreams,” and “The Wizard Shoemaker” — in St. Nicholas. It was like stumbling across priceless gemstones. And now they (and so many more like them!) are polished, gleaming, and yours to enjoy in the The National Review Treasury of Classic Children’s Literature, Volume Two.

Heck, don't bother buying the books for the kids--just make them read these ads!  They'll find them rollicking fun, and learn many important lessons as they visit a precious world of wonder and whimsy and horribly overwrought, old-fashioned prose.

Anyway, I was a pretty omnivorous reader when I was a kid, and probably would have enjoyed some of the stories in the old St. Nicholas magazines if I had found them in their original form, or in a book published in 1902 or so.  But even I, a polite, well-mannered young girl who had been gently reared on the values and lessons we all share, would have thrown this book at your head if you had given to me for Christmas, because I hated it when adults tried to dictate to me which valuable lessons I should be learning.  But hey, if YOU want to give it to a beloved niece or that nice neighborhood boy, be my guest.  But I have to warn you: this book is hefty, and will really hurt if the kid has a good arm.

And we conclude our tour of the colorful world of the paid ads at conservative sites with some gems from Newsmax, finely cut and polished to a veritable gleam, to give you that special feeling that only hucksterism well done can impart.  Plus, they offer clear lessons, and so are just the kind of thing you need to be exposed to.  Here's an especially rollicking one right from the Newsmax homepage:

Don't Let Your Doctor Turn You Into Hillary!The medical mainstream wants to turn every red-blooded man into a whining, wimpy, estrogen-filled Hillary. Don't let it happen to you!

Okay, I won't!  Let's click on the ad (Dr. Al Sears) and see how to avoid it:

MODERN MEDICINE WANTS TO TURN YOU INTO A WOMAN - AND YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW IT! Discover the true facts of male aging, health and virility from America's only Alternative Medicine Specialist for Mature Men. 

It may sound a little strong to say it, but men are not only being "feminized," we're being subjected to a slow and potentially deadly "chemical castration."

No, it's not a conspiracy. It's ignorance. A combination of outdated conventional medical theory and modern health fads. And pollution.

And what makes it worse is that all the conventional thinking on male health is garbage. Junk medicine.

In a word, bull. And for the most part, the people who tell you this are fatter, have higher blood pressure, and die sooner.

So let other people follow the crowd and starve themselves eating bibs of lettuce, bland vegetables and tofu. Let them avoid meat, stop beer and wine and the occasional shot of excellent Scotch and a fine cigar, let them spend an hour a day on the treadmill, avoid sunshine and everything else that makes life fun and pleasurable... (continued)

Yes, only Newsmax breaks stories like this: the vast, medical conspiracy to turn men into Hillary Clinton!  While this might seem like the plot of B-horror movie starring Bela Lugosi, I'm sure Newsmax wouldn't have accepted Dr. Al's advertising if he wasn't legit.  I didn't read the rest of his really, really long ad and so don't know what his plan to reverse Hillaryism entails, but it doesn't appear to involve eating right, exercising, or avoiding booze and tobacco, so it probably has the AMA's endorsement.

Now, here's something we can all use.  A way to become a millionaire ... and never pay taxes.  How, you ask?  It's easy.  First, get a million dollars.  Then, when the IRS asks you why you never paid taxes: you say two simple words: "I forgot."

Well, actually what Liberty Resources advocates is: first get a bunch of credit cards and charge all the stuff you want.  Then, don't pay for it.  And when the bank asks you why you never paid your bills, you say: "Because YOU aren't legally allowed to loan me credit, and so I don't have to pay you back!  Plus, you owe me a bunch more money, for cheating me this way." 

But they explain it better than I can: First, here's what it says on the NewsMax ("America's Scam Source") Home Page:

ZERO Balance Your Credit Card Debt Legally Without Having to Make One More Payment! Work directly with Attorney. 

Sounds good, doesn't it.  So, let's click on their ad (Liberty Resources):

LibertyResources.com.  Freedom and empowerment through the truth.

So, what can you do if you are overburdened with credit card payments, and lines of credit?

The theory of debt reduction we employ is founded in law and has had excellent results at arbitration and within the courts. The end result is that we are able to eliminate almost any unsecured credit debt issued by national banks – including credit cards and lines of credit such as VISA, Master Card and American Express. After the process, in most of the cases that we have seen, not only is the debt eliminated, but you will end up with an arbitration award in the amount of the last balance. (In other words if you owed $5,000 dollars on a VISA card, after the process, not only will the debt be eliminated but the bank that issued the VISA will owe you $5,000!)

How is this possible - to eliminate credit card debt legally?  The simple answer is that national banks are not allowed by law to loan credit. They can only loan money. Further, banks are not allowed to become surety for another person. In other words they are not allowed to guarantee the payment of another person’s debt. Consequently, the credit loans you have entered into are voidable... at your choice.

[snip]

One of the largest mental hurdles each person must overcome internally is the moral issue that will be used against you relative to owing on the debt. Essentially it boils down to this, “You agreed to the terms of the credit card, you took advantage of the convenience of the credit card, if you do not pay you will have become unjustly enriched, and it is immoral to enter into an agreement, take advantage of it, and then argue against its enforcement.”

To these essentially sound and morality based arguments consider the following:
If a party breaches its authority, by entering into an agreement that it knows it is not allowed by law to execute, is it moral to allow that party to enforce the agreement?
Is it moral to force a person to pay on a credit card bill, when that person did not know that the bank did not have the legal authority to issue credit or to become surety? 

So, NOT paying your debts is the righteous thing to do -- because otherwise, you're just enabling the bank and encouraging them to continue fraudulently extending credit to people.  Default today: it's your duty as a morally upright conservative man or woman!  Thanks, Newsmax, for bringing this message to the Rightwing American patriots whom you serve!

Anyway, that concludes our little tour of the seamier side of the internet.  We hope you have found it both instructive and educational, and it imparted to you many clear lessons, and kept the medical establishment from turning you into Hillary Clinton.

Post-Friday Beast Blogging: The Lost Weekend Edition

RILEY: All right...just because there's a pile of rich ripe dirty laundry on the bed doesn't mean I have to lay on it...or rub it all over my face...or bury my nose in it and huff the stank...

RILEY:  I can easily share the bed with a bundle of used Beefy-Ts and boxer shorts reeking of pheromones and not succumb to my baser instincts.  I mean, come on, I'm not some animal, I can control myself...

RILEY:  ...first thing tomorrow.

MEANWHILE, on a recliner not far away...