Never let it be said that comic book publishers lack for material, as long as McCarthy and House Committee on Un-American Activities (inaccurately given the acronym HUAC - House Un-American Activities Committee - I guess HCUAA wasn't pithy enough) lurks in their collective conscience.

Wildstorm's recent release, titled "Red Menace", is a comic book riff on themes most recently explored in the film "Good Night and Good Luck". Once again we get the American government on a hatefilled, prejudiced and completely unnecessary search for Communists in America, this time among the superheroes of the 50s. This theme is being rehashed for its timeliness, I suppose. After all, aren't searches for terrorists that focus on Islamic radicals completely unwarranted? It isn't as if most terrorism worldwide has Islamic fundamentalism as its source. Is it? Today, standing in for the poor misunderstood Communists we have the poor misunderstood Michigan imams.

This 'timely' theme is also being explored in Marvel Comics reworking of the entire Marvel Universe with "Civil War". I guess DC Comics didn't want to be left out in the cold when it came to equating American efforts fighting terrorism with the "paranoid" search for Communists during the Cold War.

"Red Menace" resurrects Leftists favorite boogy man, Joseph McCarthy and his, as they see it, completely unwarrented search for Communists in America.

Any chance that some day we'd get something that gave us an interesting and original take on this period in modern America history? Maybe something inspired by Ronald Reagan's and Roy Brewer's fight against very real Communists in Hollywood? Or maybe a something using The Black Book of Communism as a source rather than Zinn's propagandistic hate-America "People's History".

I was chrismated into the Greek Orthodox church some 4 years ago, and must confess that I am not a paragon of Orthodox faithfulness. I do not attend liturgy regularly. In fact, in the last year I’ve been to a Catholic Latin Mass more often than I have been attended the Orthodox liturgy. Today, Sunday, 17 December 2006, is, however, my name since I am after the Prophet Daniel. So I made my way to the liturgy.

I arrived a bit late since I gave a neighbor’s car a jump-start. I observed the regular rituals upon entering the church; I crossed myself, kissed the icon set up just inside the door, lit a candle and said a brief prayer for my wife, my parents and finally myself, picked up the week’s bulletin, kissed the icon of St. Paul, for whom the church is named and entered the naïve.

I browsed the bulletin while the priest recited the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.  That is when everything seemed to go downhill.

Each week’s bulletin has an icon of a saint. This week’s bulletin had the icon of St. Dionysios. St. Dionysios, I learned is “an unparalleled example of forgiveness”. The example of St. Dionysios’s forgiveness read as follows:

“St. Dionysios … remained [the Bishop of Aegina] for many years before returning to a monastery on [his] beloved island of Zakynthos. One evening, a desperate man showed up at the monastery gate, pleading with Dionysios to hear his confession. He confessed to committing murder and was now being pursued by his victim’s family. Dionysios agreed to give him refuge, but soon learned that the murdered man was HIS OWN BROHER! Despite being saddened by his own personal loss, Dionysios followed Christ’s example: after instructing the man in the necessity for repentance, he forgave him of his terrible sin.”

So far so good. Dionysios showed great Christian mercy and strength hearing the man’s confession and forgiving him in Christ’s name even after learning that the victim was Dionysios’ own brother. Furthermore, I have no problem giving a man, who committed a terrible crime, refuge from a lynch mob. Protection should be provided such that justice (or what passed for justice in the 16^th century) could be properly executed. The description of Dionysios continued:

“[Dionysios] continued to protect his brother’s killer, going so far as to send the authorities in the opposite direction of the man’s escape route.”

WHAT!?! This I just do not understand. Is this what Christian forgiveness is supposed to be? Are Christians to forgive murderers to such an extent that one will even disrupt the wheels of justice and prevent the proper authorities from executing their sworn duty? This is what I’m supposed to emulate and look up to as “an unparalleled example of forgiveness?” What came to mind as I read that last sentence was, ‘If this were done today this ‘saint’ would be guilty of harboring a fugitive and obstruction of justice. What’s so Christian about that?’

I often hear that Christians are to be ‘in but not of the world’. Isn’t this taking that exhortation just a bit too far?

I have often felt the urge to leave the Orthodox church. As noted above, I’ve attended more Catholic Masses than I have Orthodox liturgies in the past year. Honoring a man who would hide a murderer from those appointed to find and bring him to justice is just one more reason to leave Orthodoxy for Catholicism.

I do not think that, upon hearing the confession, Dionysios should have handed the man over and, with what the murderer confessed, acted as the prosecution’s star witness. No priest should be called to give witness to what was said in the confessional. On the other hand, no priest has the right to prevent the authorities from doing their job. If Dionysios had emphasized repentance as much as forgiveness, he would have allowed the murderer to be taken, tried, judged and punished. His Christian forgiveness would still stand AND justice would have been served. Instead, Dionysios set himself above the authorities and not only forgive the murderer, but allowed to escape punishment as well.

It seems, in this case at least, that forgiveness took precedence over repentance.

I wondered if the term "American military" was used and in what context, in the Baker-Hamilton-Chamberlain Committee report after discovering that it only discusses victory as it would apply to Al Qaeda, . This is what I found:

"Many military units are under significant strain. Because the harsh conditions in Iraq are wearing out equipment more quickly than anticipated, many units do not have fully functional equipment for training when they redeploy to the United States. An extraordinary amount of sacrifice has been asked of our men and women in uniform, and of their families. The American military has little reserve force to call on if it needs ground forces to respond to other crises around the world." (p. 7) (Emphasis added)

"There is no action the American military can take that, by itself, can bring about success in Iraq. But there are actions that the U.S. and Iraqi governments, working together, can and should take to increase the probability of avoiding disaster there, and increase the chance of success." (p. 70) (Emphasis added)

And some might wonder why I call this the "Defeat through Diplomacy" report.

If the American military killed the Islamo-Nazis attempting to create yet another Islamic totalitarian regime, that, by itself, would bring about success in Iraq. But absurd rules of engagement and foolish diplomatic niceties ties its hands.

On Dennis Prager's show (12/6) a caller pointed out that the Baker-Hamilton-Chamberlain Committee thinks the Islamo-Nazis in Iraq will be pacified if Israel hands the Golan Heights over to Syria: "In exchange for [various Syrian] actions and in the context of a full and secure peace agreement, the Israelis should return the Golan Heights..." (p. 75).

This got me thinking, so I did another search through the "Defeat through Diplomacy" report.

Israel is mentioned on 34 seperate occasions in 75 pages of text. (I'm not counting the Appendices).

Let me see if have this right: If the Israeli-Arab conflict is resolved, then the Islamo-Nazis killing Iraqis and Americans (but mostly Iraqis) in Iraq will give up, go home and ... do what? open falafel shops?

Thank you for that tremendous insight, Baker-Hamilton-Chamberlain - "Defeat through Diplomacy" Committee.

During her show, this morning (Wednesday, 12/6), Laura Ingraham noted that the Iraq Study Group (ISG) only mentioned victory in context associated with how the major Islamo-Nazi terrorist group Al Qaeda views the Iraqi front in this war.

In fact, ISG noted 'victory' on three separate occasions in this "Defeat Through Diplomacy" report. Here they are:

That's it. Three mentions. All from the perspective of Al Qaeda.

Did not a single member of the Baker-Hamilton-Chamberlain Committee contemplate an American-Iraqi Victory on this front? Apparently not.

The future does look grim for Iraq, especially if Swedes and Europhiles like the folks on this committee are leading the way.

Since my only other option at the moment is to write a tremendously tedious paper for a Management and Leadership class, I thought I'd let the few readers I have know that DC has improved their comic book covers a great deal since those in Lileks' Bleat, linked below.

Here is a glimpse of Action Comics #844 cover (No, it did not include the Batman image adjacent to it). I'd say it's something of an improvement over Perry White slicing Supe's shirt open while blathering like he's the New York Times' Editorial Board.

If you're not reading his Bleat or listening to him at The Diner then you are missing a great American Humorist.

Today's Bleat may not be his best, but it does feature two classic Action Comic covers. And, unlike Mr. Lileks, I am a Superman fan. If you can make out the number on the Superman-Perry White cover you can see this the Issue #297. Today DC's Action Comics sits at #845. Just 155 issues to go and Action Comics will hit #1,000. That is a lot of comics. I don't think any other title has reached that number.

Lileks may not be a Superman fan but, when Superman meets the "Girl of Tomorrow", he can certainly make you laugh:

Or maybe it's just the kid in me who thinks that flatulance is almost always funny.

I just finished The Ruins, by Scott Smith. In fact, I was almost late to work today  as I devoured the book's last few pages. It is one of the best horror books I've read in a very long time. If you think you're the hardened horror aficionado and can't be rattled by anything, then you have to read this book. I am certain that there will come several moments as you make your way through this that you will simply have to put it down for a few moments just to catch your breath. You will then be quickly drawn back to its pages, wanting to know what happens next.

Check out this review, by Laura Miller, at Salon Books:

The horror elements aside, which won't be revealed here, it is the realism that makes this book such a compelling read. You know the characters. You've met them in your own life. You may even be able to remember your own vacations that began just the way Jeff's, Eric's, Amy's and Stacy's vacation began: Fun in the sun and making new friends in some exotic local.

I do have one small quibble with the book. That is, with all that the characters go through, not once does a single character turn to God or even pray for a moment. I think this certainly shows a slight bias toward materialism. However, this didn't keep me from enjoying the book. I am fully aware that most of our culture is soaked in this worldview. Which means that most of our young, especially if they are college graduates, have fully absorded the materialistic philosophy.  Therefore, how the characters deal with their situation is entirely believable.

One of the characters, however, was an Eagle Scout, but if you want to find out which one you have to read the book. Read Scott Smith's "The Ruins". You won't be disappointed.

As much as I would like to take credit for this, I can't. It came to me via a friend at work. Enjoy.

OLD VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible

MODERN VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, ABC & CNN show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, "It's Not Easy Being Green."

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, "We shall overcome." Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

Ted Kennedy & John Kerry exclaim in an interview with Dan Rather that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his "fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the "Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act," retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a
defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients. The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Don't vote for Liberals

The film has largely come and gone from theaters with barely a whimper (though it will likely garner a great deal of Academy attention come Oscar time). However, I wanted to point out an excellent review of the film by a woman who knows a great deal about storytelling.

Barbara Nicolosi, at her ChurchoftheMasses blog, evicerates Clint Eastwood's "Flags of Our Fathers". Here are a few choice quotes:

Barbara knows story. When she tells you that you got it wrong, you better listen. Got that Clint?

I listened to Hugh Hewitt report on Republican after Republican go down to defeat and realized that the House of Representatives is about to be given to a "mother and grandmother" from San Francisco. It crossed my mind, that a significant reason why these loses are occuring is because Conservatives simply are not fighting the culture wars anymore. In fact, on one very important front, I don't think they were ever fighting culture war.

I'm referring to the Popular Culture front: movies, novels, television, short fiction, music, and, yes, even comic books.

Tens of millions of Americans watch hour after hour of television, spend Friday or Saturday night at the multi-plex, devour the latest pot-boilers on Barnes & Noble best-seller's table or are avid fans of bands gracing Rolling Stone's cover. Too many conservatives think the best way to influence these folks is to write volume after volume of non-fiction. Be honest: Do you  really think the millions who read The Da Vinci Code or who went to see Borat are going to be influenced by Sean Hannity's Let Freedom Ring, Hugh Hewitt's Painting the Map Red, or Laura Ingraham's Shut Up and Sing?

While studying with some Hollywood screenwriters, who happen to be Christian (yes they are out there), it was made clear to me that Hollywood is the center of influence and Washington, D.C. is the center of power. Hollywood understands this, why don’t conservatives?. Look at the slate of recent movies meant to influence the audience against the Iraqi front in our war against Islamo-Nazism: Jarhead, Syriana, Good Night, and Good Luck, Paradise Now, Flags of Our Fathers, the Manchurian Candidate remake, V for Vendetta, the soon to be released Harsh Times, etc., etc., etc. When the film glitterati wanted to get the public behind government run health care along came John Q. Movie executives think big pharmaceutical companies threaten grannies ability to get meds and are generally responsible for the suffering in Africa. Their answer is The Constant Gardner. Fearing conservative Christians are about to set up a theocracy in America, Hollywood honchos get behind The Da Vinci Code and the documentary Jesus Camp. I could go on and on with this. Where are the conservatives in this fight?

Republicans did a great job, back in 1994, taking power in D.C., and they held on to it for over a dozen years. And what did they do with this? Oh, sure, they cut taxes (which still aren’t permenant), and they actually took the fight to the Islamo-Nazis dead set on destroying civilization (though that may now be in question given recent election results). However, they were largely turned out on their ear by a populace that appears to have little stomach for sacrifice in the war against Islamo-Nazism and that cannot recognize a booming economy when it stares them in the face. Now these Republicans seem intent on running to the middle, i.e., to the Left, in order to regain the power they lost. All the while they fail to understand that, by handing victory in the culture war to the Left, by not fighting at all, they will continue to be on the outside looking in when it comes to influence America.

It would be generous of me to report that conservative are barely scratching the surface. There are some very stalwart folks fighting it out in Hollywood. The point in this front of the Culture War has been taken by Jason Apuzzo and Govindini Murty who have built the Liberty Film Festival from nothing and kept it going with little more than their passion for film. Meanwhile conservatives focus on East Coast think tanks, and magazines like National Review and The Weekly Standard. Your average American is more likely to know who is in and who is out on Dancing With The Stars than who the Secretary of State or Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is. Why? Because they pay attention to what is happening in popular culture. Why don’t conservatives?

Jason Apuzzo has written a great essay on exactly this subject. I am in complete agreement with him. I have no sympathy for the Republicans who lost in the recent election. Here are a few choice excerpts:

 Here is what it’s like to be a conservative in Hollywood: you have access to … none of the studios, nor to the most important independent producers, agencies, or film finance sources. You actually have no money; your films are frequently financed on VISA and American Express cards. You’re scrappy, and have to live by your wits, ideas and talent. Basically you have The Liberty Film Festival and LIBERTAS pulling for you, and a few odd people scattered throughout the system - most of whom are deeply fearful for their careers. Other than that, you’re on your own …

 …

 A striking number of [Republicans] have told us some variation of the following: that they like Hollywood and the media being run by the Left, because that gives Republicans ’something to run against.’ That the steady, unending stream of left-wing agitprop coming from Hollywood, along with the celebrity liberal activism, has been a great thing for Republicans … because after all, it riles up the base!

 …
 
… what Hollywood does is shape the nation’s narrative. And right now, as we fight the War on Terror and fight in Iraq, the narrative being shaped by Hollywood is this: that America is an imperialistic, war-mongering, ruthlessly profiteering, neo-fascistic Christian theocracy that does not merit the world’s admiration or allegiance. And frankly, it’s hard for America to fight and win a war when Hollywood shapes the war-narrative that way.

 …

 So this is generally what we see nowadays: conservatives write trenchant columns about tax policy while George Clooney romances starlets in film and on magazine covers. This week, for example, People Magazine will again declare George Clooney ‘The Sexiest Man Alive!,’ while Peggy Noonan will write another windy Wall Street Journal column about post-election malaise. I’ll let you guess which article will get more attention …

Until this sort thing changes, Republicans are going to seem out of touch, distant, old and irrelevant. The reason? Because the culture war conservatives say they want to fight isn’t being fought in Beltway think tanks or at National Review - in fact, it isn’t even being fought in elections, per se; it’s being fought in multiplexes, in People Magazine, on Xboxes, at Netflix and on YouTube. Conservatives not only aren’t fighting the culture wars, they don’t even seem to know where the battlefields are.

Jason has got it exactly right. If I see one more conservative author who spends all their time mau-mauing politicians in Washington D.C. and complaining about Hollywood, politics and the courts I just might scream. When conservatives actually get in the Popular Culture game, instead of just using it as a foil to “rile up the base”, then they will discover a recipe for actually shaping that culture. Government is not there to shape the culture. Government is there to ensure that the nation is kept safe. Many conservatives seem to think that government can shape the culture. They are wrong. 

Join Jason and Govindini in their fight in Hollywood. Join the creators behind the comic book Liberty Girl. Support the folks behind Liberality For All. Watch quality television like Friday Night Lights.

And if you have the money, support the folks who are truly fighting for America in the culture war. Donations to the Cato Institute, American Enterprise Institute

What I and, I think, Jason, are saying is: Stop whining and get in the game!

It looked like any other polling place. A line of citizens (I hope) waiting to exercise their right to choose. This being one of the few "rights to choose" that I whole heartedly support. Another "right to choose" I support is the right to choose firearms, but that may be another post. And, of course, it was just another polling place. One of millions throughout the nation today. I waited about 30 minutes or so before I finally made my way to the electronic voting machine. Not a long wait, but seemingly too much for some.

I was disgusted with one potential voter who came in with her teenage son, saw the relatively short line and promptly left. Pathetic, I muttered to myself, truly pathetic. Men and women braved bombs and bullets in Baghdad to exercise their right to vote, and this woman couldn't stand in line for 30 minutes. What kind of lesson did she teach her son? "Son, if you have to wait more than 5 minutes to cast your vote, just forget it. It isn't worth it." How many millions of Americans have shed blood and lost fathers, brothers, sons, wives, sisters and daughters to protect our right to vote? This woman couldn't sacrifice less then 1 hour of her evening.

And how many more like this woman are there throughout the nation? How many are going to wake up in the coming years and wonder what might have been if only they had stood in line a few moments instead of rushing home so as not to miss a moment of "Dancing with the Stars"?

Again, Pathetic. Simply pathetic.

Today is Election Day. For the Secular Left and Right this is practically a national holiday. This is especially true for those who, because the government has forced the hands of employers, take paid time off from work in order to vote.

Just remember: No matter how the election turns out our response to it is all a matter of Attitude. So reflect on these words from Charles Swindoll, should the vote go against Republicans in 2006.

In fact, remember these words everyday.

giving us an inside look at life among the Liberal Hollywood Elite, in Michael Tolkin's The Return of the Player. And he couldn't be more shallow, narcissistic and generally obscene.

I just finished reading Michael Tolkin's sequel to The Player, titled, naturally, The Return of the Player. The Return is a book that Liberals will love, for is it just chock full of the Liberal worldview. If Conservatives enjoy reading about the debased lives the ultra-wealthy live then there may be something here for them as well. They may enjoy this in the same way Liberals enjoy "American Beauty". The Left believes that behind every door in the center-right American landscape live middle-age men who lust after teenage girls and closet homosexual, Nazi-loving ex-military men. The Right believe that behind every door in Tinsel Town, New York or Martha's Vineyard are sex crazed, pot-smoking do-gooders who couldn't care less if what they do actually does any good, as long as it gets them invited to the right parties.

Every character in The Return of the Player could not be more depraved or pathetic. There is the main character, Griffin Mill, a guy whose sole goal in life is to get as rich as possible so he can afford to buy an island to which he can escape when the world ends.
There is the cruel gay Jewish producer Hollywood producer who only cares about breaking the billion dollar barrier in personal wealth, and who thinks that Griffin is just the guy to help him through it. $750 Million, you see, just isn't enough. There is Griffin's Goth loving, sometimes Mormon sometimes Jewish ex-wife whose main source of personal satisfaction is phone sex with guys she meets online. There is also Griffin's current wife, who won't divorce Griffin because he doesn't have enough money to keep her in the lifestyle she's become accustomed to. These are the central figures revolving throughout a world of wealth most people cannot imagine.

While this is a darkly humorous look at the lives in the incredibly wealthy, where a private school isn't just a place where your child is educated. It's the key to the executive washroom for the parents, which for them, is far more important. It is also a 240 page excursion into the Liberal mind. I often had to remind myself that Tolkin is not giving me a polemic, as much as he is giving me what Liberals whether in Hollywood, Telluride or Martha's Vineyard think.

There is this:

And this:

At page 176-177 we are given a long diatribe, by one of the billionaire's referenced in the quote above, on how it is Hollywood's job to "destroy religion". This, the billionaire Gunther Hitt talking to Griffin, is just a taste:

And mixed into this speech are one of the many references about how manmade global warming is going to melt the polar ice caps and we're all going to have 3 days to get our stuff in order. Did I mention that this is a work of fiction. I probably should at this point. Despite the fact that it often reads like a Michael Moore mockumentary.

After slogging through the liberal nonsense throughout this work one comes to the end where we are given an entire chapter that is Griffin Mill, Narcissist, Nihilist, Polygamist and Porn-promoter in dialog with none other than former Pres. William Jefferson Clinton. In a book where the current Pres. is referred to predominantly as a guy who stole elections we are informed that "Bill Clinton adds to everyone's knowledge of themselves. For that, these men are willing to let him f*** their wives. Clinton is a genius..." Thank you, Michael Tolkin, for that bit of insight.

Would I recommend this book? Only if you can keep reminding yourself that this is a work of fiction satirizing the insane world of the Liberal Elite. I just wonder if that is what Michael Tolkin meant to write.

The stupidity of some liberals never fails to amaze me. This morning, as I drove into work, I was amazed by someone trying to live out the Don Henley lyric, "I saw a Deadhead sticker on a Cadillac", from his song "The Boys of Summer". 

Orange County, California is not generally known as a haven for wild-eyed liberals. It is one of the few areas, in Southern California, that can be characterized as Center-Right and where Republicans are regularly sent to Sacramento & Washington, D.C. The city of Laguna Beach resides within OC and is a stark exception to this (so, naturally, when Hollywood creates a series about Orange County, titled "The Real OC", its setting is Laguna Beach). So when I see a Liberal flaunting their silliness on a bumper sticker in the Reddest parts of Orange County I'm taken aback.

Today it was the sight of a Che Guevara sticker on a BMW 5 Series luxury station wagon that sent me reeling. What goes on in the mind of an adit who would slap one of the most obvious faces of Totalitarian Communism on the backside of a blatant symbol of Western Capitalism? I am confident that, if asked, the irony of this combination would be completely lost on the driver, who was clearly a now graying product of the 1960s.

Furthermore, do these fools who slap Che Guevara's face on t-shirts and car window stickers have any idea what this monster did on behalf of the "People's Revolution" that created Communist Cuba? I could point to this or this or this or this article for information on Guevara, Castro and the Communist Hell they made out of Cuba. However, some folks might just complain that the website where those articles are published is just a mouthpiece for rabid anti-Communist, Right Wingers. Fine. Don't read those articles. Read Paul Berman at Slate. Here is Mr. Berman's opening paragraph:


Berman goes on to quote some of Che's writings that Hollywood or other capitalists who try to get rich from Che's image don't want you to know about:


No doubt the dummy driving the BMW with Che's picture on the rear window does not know the first thing about Che. His information probably comes entirely what Hollywood fed him in the beautifully photographed, well acted bit of Left-wing propaganda "The Motorcycle Diaries".

I should start carrying a camera around with me so I can photograph this stuff. Nothing will make you laugh more then the backside of most Liberal's mode of transportation.