The Pendragon's Hall

The Blue State Conservatives blog announced today that due to the machinations of freshman senator John Thune, South Dakota's Ellsworth Airforce base will remain open. BSC rightly applauds this move by the administration and also point out that this will aid the GOP in the region. Democrats were counting on the fact that Thune had won on the promise to keep the base open and if he failed, the Democrats could have opined that they would have kept the base open, and point out that, all during those years when nobody was planning on closing military bases, they kept it open. And voters in the Dakotas and Nebraska and Iowa where Democrats still have some power, albeit a waning one, would take note. But the ball is beginning to swing the other way. Republicans have taken power and at least in one section of the country are acting like a majority party. Voters will remember this in '06 and '08.

I'm glad Pat Robertson has apologized for his foolish outburst the other day. But is it not the slightest bit intriguing that in 1997 Clinton advisor and media darling George Stephanopolous authored a Newsweek column calling for the assassination of Saddam Hussein and nobody said a word? Stephanopolous actually argued that Saddam was too great a threat to be left alone, that all the usual channels of stopping him had failed, and that Clinton employing an assassin would be preferably to a mass bombing raid that would "inevitably kill innocent civilians." I guess George didn't get the memo: Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction and was safely contained in Iraq by US/UN forces. The thing is, however, Pat Robertson is essentially a tele-evangelist who likes to shoot off at the mouth occasionally. He is not a serious policy-shaper. George Stephanopolous was that. He even offered Clinton advice on how to get around President Ford's ban on assassination of foreign leaders. Yet nobody appeared to be worried. Why? Well, one reason is that Clinton's government could do no wrong in the eyes of mainstream media. But another, subtler, reason is that everyone, I mean everyone, was convinced that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous man who needed to be removed for the threat he posed to the United States. And so nobody really cared how we did it. Probably many were impressed that the Clinton administration, so dovish when they themselves were in danger of being sent to war, were willing to "get tough" with Saddam. Unfortunately it was all talk. Saddam was left for the next administration to deal with. Thank God we finally got someone with a backbone.

"Unlike earlier wars, nearly all Arlington National Cemetery gravestones for troops killed in Iraq or Afghanistan are inscribed with the slogan-like operation names the Pentagon selected to promote public support for the conflicts."

This is how the AP begins its supposedly-objective report on how casualties are buried these latter days. The story itself goes on to explain that no one is sure how many graves are actually engraved this way, and that it is all up to the family, although they quote the parents of one fallen soldier as saying they were never asked. Their son "didn't want to be there. That's a fact." I wonder why their son was in the military. I find it hard to believe people want to go through all the rigors of boot camp to be employed building toilets for third world countries. My mother's cousin was angry he only got to go to Iraq after the war was over to rebuild bridges: he apparently wanted to help tear them down. Soldiers kill people and break things. That's their job. But I digress. Given what we hear from the press, from academia and from spineless weenies like Cindy Sheehan, I'm not so convinced peace is ever good for a country. All my life I thought it was. I thought it gave us the leisure to make life better, to improve things. Now the only outcome of peace that I see is to turn the world's only superpower into a country of whining women. By all means mourn for your dead, but don't dishonor their memory. Sheehan moans, "I wanted to take my son to Canada." First of all, lady, he wasn't drafted so there was no need for him to go to Canada. Secondly, he was an adult. Adults make these decisions themselves. Yes, it's very touching to hold up pictures of him as a baby, but that baby wasn't the one killed by terrorists (although they probably would if they could get at it). And now when the military offers to inscribe at no extra charge the military action in which the buried soldier died, the press immediately leaps on the story as some kind of cheap "politicking." The only thing that comes to my mind is, "Have you left no sense of decency?" The short answer is, no.

What a loser. Preacher-man Pat Robertson announced today he believes the United States should assassinate Chavez, the Communist-sympathizing dictator of Venezuela. Naturally, the press will leap on this to associate all right-tending conservatives with this blowhard. It is the truth that a communist country in Latin America is not good news for the United States but I really want to know what gives Mr. Robertson the authority to advocate all these policy initiatives. I'm not at all sure. I just wish he'd keep his mouth shut.

I feel sorry for the Iraqis. Here they are, trying to write a constitution amidst car bombs and hostages and gunfights, and the American Left is criticizing every move they make and advocating immediate withdrawal, leaving them high and dry. Howard Dean said last week that the new constitution left Iraqi women worse off than they were under Saddam Hussein. I've always suspected the good doctor believed rape was a woman's right. But apparently the privilege of sitting in the new Parliament or voting in free elections is not. Americans on the ground here know that Dean speaks only for the lunatic fringe but Iraqis working feverishly in Bagdhad do not. But then again, we do suspect things like this from Howard Dean. What is most disgusting is that President Bush is now having to cover his back from Republican presidential hopefuls. Senator Chuck Hagel (Nebraska) lit up TV shows today by declaring that Iraq is (surprise!) a quagmire like Vietnam and we're losing. He advocated setting an exit date and getting out of there pronto. Even John McCain hasn't stooped that far. The fact of the matter is...we're winning Iraq. Is it bloodless? No. Then again, nobody ever said it would be. The Iraqis don't think we're losing--they're still out there trying to recreate their own country. Are these terrorists gaining followers from among Iraqis? No. They're recruiting from Iran and Syria to fill the gaps blown in their ranks by the US military. Iraq has held free elections. They're moving leaps and bounds ahead of most countries in the Middle East and the vast majority of Iraqi people are dedicated to their future as a peaceful, democratic nation. I do not understand why Republicans who want to secure their future as the next President of the United States are trying to scuttle the current President who was just re-elected in a landslide. It doesn't make sense. Used to be party hopefuls would hew as close as possible to the incumbent, hoping to win an endorsement. The way it's going Bush may have to endorse Joe Liberman. At least by 2008, enough insurgents should have been killed to convince the American Left to take up whining about something else--maybe all the caribou born by Bush's pipeline.

I have never understood how the liberal mind works. Cindy Sheehan continues to dominate the news because of the "absolute moral authority" (Maureen Dowd's words, not mine) of a mother who lost a son in Iraq. Columnist Ann Coulter correctly points out that this would mean Mrs. Sheehan's moral authority might be trumped by a woman who lost two sons in Iraq. I wonder: how about five? At the height of the Civil War, President Lincoln wrote to a mother who had lost all five of her sons in the Union Army. If this lady had set up her tent outside the Lincoln's home in Springfield and started protesting the war in the south, I wonder what liberals might have said? Lincoln never downplayed the woman's sacrifice, but he obviously didn't think her moral authority was absolute. He tended to focus more on the sacrifice of the young men themselves, which is what the press seems to be forgetting here. As far as I can tell, Cindy Sheehan is still alive, and as horrible as the grief of losing a son must be, especially I guess for a war you don't believe in, I still prefer to believe the greatest sacrifice was made by her son, not by her. After all, she has a spot in the national limelight and all the big media giants sticking up for her. What a sacrifice. We've come a long way from the cry of the old general in Macbeth: "Why, then, God's soldier be he! Had I as many sons as I have hairs, I could not wish them to a fairer death, and so his knell is knolled."

And what is the newfound disgust for terrorism in the mainstream press? A Jewish gunman attacked Palestinian civilians yesterday in protest of Israel's pullout from the Gaza Strip. Ariel Sharon and other members of the Israeli government understandably deplore what happened and are calling it by its name, "Jewish terrorism." But the press has gone suddenly silent. They reported it as "Jewish terrorism." No commentary on how we have to understand that the Israelis are being forced out of their homes; no comparison to the Cherokees and the Trail of Tears or the minutemen or anything. Well, duh. The guy was Israeli. No excuse for Israelis, just Iraqis and Iranians and people who hate the US. The act was certainly reprehensible and certainly falls under the heading of terrorism, but the real tragedy of this incident was that it undermined Israel's indisputably "absolute" moral authority.

Iran is in the news a lot these days. The latest disturbance is that President Bush announced over the weekend that "all options" are open for ensuring Iran's compliance with the international ban on nuclear proliferation, including force. This is apparently a "departure" from Bush's original position which was that diplomacy and then sanctions should be used. But if the international community shows itself unwilling to use either then it would seem force is the next option. Of course liberals have been salivating for months about a Bush decision to use force on Iran and some people of a somewhat conservative mindset fear us being "bombed into oblivion"--by whom I don't know, I guess the North Koreans since, thanks to Neville Clinton, they now have nuclear weapons. I personally do not see a large-scale war on the order of Iraq or even Afghanistan occurring in Iran. What the US should do is arm the pro-western uprisings and let them deal with their own tyrants. (This is, I will admit, my plan B, after plan A, invade Iran and Syria while we were overrunning Iraq, was not followed.) Of course some will complain about past dealings with Arabs, how we armed the ones we thought were the best but we never have actually armed revolutionaries like these young Iranians. With Iran-Iraq we armed who seemed to be the least threat, but he was no pro-western liberator. These people actually like the United States, admire our way of life and want to imitate it...and for more than just our money. But to the peacenik crowd: fear not. I doubt anything will happen unless we do it so your beloved French will continue to share their cheese and whine without hindrance.

And also in the news, in one of the most spectacular turnarounds, and I say almost a Karma state, Saddam Hussein's daughter is calling trial proceedings against him "illegal and illegitimate" due to the fact that he is not allowed to meet lawyers for his defense, of which there really isn't any, without US or Iraqi military personnel in the room. Gee, who does this sound like? I say, what goes around comes around.

Rush Limbaugh detailed the story of Cindy Sheehan and how she is spending the night in a ditch in Crawford, Texas, to protest the war in Iraq on the basis that the President's daughters are not in Iraq, facing death. Who the heck cares? I mean, I suppose liberals who want to attract people to various careers with attractive girls might think Jenna Bush ought to model for recruiters but I don't think the army really wants that kind of publicity. I think it better to appeal to some higher motives than sexual attraction. Of course, this is not what Ms. Sheehan is really talking about, but that the President should have to sacrifice his daughters if he really believes in this war. What she's forgetting is that his daughters, like every member of the US armed forces, are adults. They make their own decisions. If they do not feel called to the armed forces, it's no commentary on the justice or the injustice of the war. But every member of the armed forces made a decision: they would enlist to serve their country, taking the risk that they would be sent into harm's way. But apparently liberals, as we have long suspected, have decided that they, the high and mighty, must make all decisions for everyone, and so the President ought to force his daughters to enlist in the military and go to Iraq to participate in this war and hopefully die so he can say he knows what the parents of soldiers feel like. And while they're at it, they will tell all the current members of the armed forces that it doesn't matter what they want to do with their lives, they should all stay home, go to USC and major in environmental studies. Give me a break.

According to NewsMax, Dick Morris has revealed that a private conversation with Terry McAuliffe last year has led him to believe that if Jeanine Pirro can raise enough cash in the next couple months to make it look like a tight race, say with Hillary winning by only seven or eight points, Hillary will withdraw from the race to avoid spending money earmarked for her presidential bid in 2008. My first question is, since when did Dick Morris become an optimist? He's the one who's been telling us for the last year that Kerry was poised to be elected president and unless Condi agreed to run in 2008, Hillary would win a sweep. Now, suddenly, he thinks, we can force her out of the Senate by heavy fundraising by a no-name from upstate. Get real, Dick. Hillary will run this race and, unless I am badly mistaken, she will win it going away. This is the time for pessimism if there ever is a time. Republicans are hinging their hopes on an unknown lawyer. I am seriously having doubts about this man. As late as last year he was apparently a confidante of Terry McAuliffe. He tries to depress Republicans when they are at their strongest in years. And now he tries to give us false hope. He is starting to remind me of Professor Snape.

All I really want to say about the New York senate race for next year is: Quick work. Two days as a candidate and already Jeanine Pirro is facing questions about whether her husband's conviction of tax fraud a few years ago will become a campaign issue. But then again, there is a silver lining: I don't think Hillary really wants to start comparing husbands.

An issue that is continuing to pique my interests is the ongoing battle of the Politically-Correct movement to reinvent life in all-inclusive terms. Now they are going after sports teams, both college and professional, who sport Native American nicknames, claiming they are racist. Come on! I mean, if you had the Nashville Niggers or something like that, that would certainly be racist and I could understand not wanting that. But the Florida State Seminoles? The Washington Redskins? And if they want to argue that sportsteams should not be named after humans at all, are they ever going to object to high school teams called the Crusaders? Or the Dallas Cowboys? Or the New York Knicks (short for Knickerbockers, a slang term for the Dutch)? Or heck, even for the Yankees. I mean, Yankee was a term of derision invented during the Revolutionary War and then applied to the North by Southern "racists." Maybe they could be the New York Cosmopolitans. The Cleveland Browns (named after the color) would be in real trouble too, because it could probably be argued that they are making fun of the brown brothers. And I'm sure someone will raise the same argument against the Cincinatti Reds. I guess the thing to do would be to rename all sports teams after animals, but even there we run into the PC problem. Could you call a team "the Huskies"-- a slave-dog? And get rid of the San Antonio Spurs because "spurs" can be used in cruelty to animals. And how long before someone is arguing that it's degrading to animals to be used as mascots for human sports? This thing can only go so far. Personally, I think the Native Americans ought to be honored; it shows we aren't forgetting their heritage. And minorities in general ought to stop looking for ways to be victimized and start concentrating on being productive citizens. There are only so many whites whose lives and careers you can wreck with a lawsuit to make you enough money to live comfortably the rest of your life.

Due to some technical difficulties, I have so far been unable to post my #1 person ruining America. So now, for the fourth time, I will attempt to do so. #1 on the list of people ruining America is...Jimmy Carter! No one can measure the contempt I have for this man. In addition to a failure of a presidency where gas prices skyrocketed, inflation and unemployment were in the double digits, terrorism and communism rampaged unchecked through the world and America became such a joke that Carter accused his own people of "malaise", he has since become the most active ex-president in history. Ex-Presidents used to keep to themselves, writing their memoirs and building their libraries. Now granted, Carter didn't have much of a legacy to pass on but he seems to think he did. And he seems to think we all want to hear from him at every opportunity. That's a bit bizarre given he barely squeaked out a victory over Gerald Ford and was crushed at the polls when a real Republican took the scene but the man is nothing if not narcissistic. Only most recently he has taken to lecturing the Bush administration on the Middle East peace process, saying if he had been re-elected there would now be peace between Israel and the Palestinians. What if the first Bush said that? In the 1990s, moreover, Carter came out of retirement to help the Felon in Chief broker an agreement with Stalinist North Korea. This was the deal: We would continue to fund their existence and they wouldn't build nuclear weapons. We all know how well that one worked. When Carter authored an insanely boring and politically-correct book on the American Revolution, the media gave it glowing reviews. Readers just yawned. But that doesn't compare to his accepting a Nobel Prize, essentially for his anti-America rants, on the eve of war with Iraq. He even traveled to a foreign country to give an acceptance speech that attacked the American government and undermined American foreign policy. Article III's definition of treason is somewhat vague but I think he would be covered if we still prosecuted traitors. But why listen to me? Just tie the guy up somewhere so he can't inject himself into any more policy disputes.

Do New York Republicans even want to win? They have announced recently that the leadership's choice to oppose Hillary Clinton next year is a no-name lawyer now living in the Albany area. This is exactly what they did last year and they got 25% of the vote. The best we can hope for is that the Conservative Party will stay out of it next year and she'll at least make a good showing. So much for derailing Hillary's presidential ambitions.

10. John Edwards. As a pretty-boy ambulance chaser, Edwards is part of a select group of lawyers who are driving health care insurance costs skyhigh in this country. The irony of John "Make-Sure-Everyone-Can-Afford-Health-Insurance" Kerry putting him on his ticket is just stunning.

9. John Kerry. Massachusetts Senator and would-be President thinks his few months in Vietnam have earned him diplomatic immunity for the rest of his life. But George Bush gets no such treatment. It was the Kerry campaign that leaked the forged documents to Dan Rather.

8. Howard Dean. Earned the chairmanship of the DNC by promising to make the Democrats a mainstream party again and then immediately denigrated the Republicans as the party of "white, Christian" racists. Not exactly the way to take the Dems from ideological blowhards to a party of real ideas again. So glad he's not president.

7. Ted Kennedy. If anyone else had committed adultery and murder on the same night and then used his family's extensive influence to cover it up, he'd have been banned from reponsible positions forever. Not in Massachusetts. This relic from Camelot actually still thinks he has the moral authority to lecture Presidents on how to treat terrorists and whether US prisons are comparable to Saddam Hussein's torture chambers.

6. Arlen Specter. This Pennsylvania "Republican" was re-elected last year only because President Bush endorsed him over a much more conservative challenger. The dust had hardly settled when Specter, as chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, announced he would not repay Bush in kind but still oppose any kind of conservative judicial nominee. For rank ingratitude, he deserves this listing.

5. John McCain. Another RINO (Republican In Name Only) who continually tries to scuttle the plans of real Republicans. His most recent betrayal of his party consisted of striking a deal with Senate Democrats which allowed them to filibuster Bush's nominees at will and only assured the passage of a handful. He's a leading proponent of governing like a minority party at all times.

4. George Soros. Hungarian billionaire used this country and its opportunities to get fabulously wealthy and now wishes to deny the same opportunities to others by throwing his billions into the fight against George W. Bush. Although ultimately defeated by real Americans at the polls, he won't go away, you can be sure of that. Note to Soros: Now that you've seen the New World, go home!!!

3. Michael Moore. The king of "schlockumentary" thinks so highly of himself, he didn't even want to be king. He wanted to be kingmaker. His movie "Fahrenheit 9/11" exploited terrorist attacks and their victims in order to take down George Bush and elect John Kerry. Other instances of Moore's wonderful compassion include: ranting in front of a Hollywood audience instead of gratefully accepting his Oscar; making millions off the suffering of parents in Columbine with "Bowling for Columbine"; constantly editing people's interviews to fit his own personal agenda; and his main problem with the 9/11 attackers being that their victims "DID NOT VOTE FOR (Bush)!"

2. The Clintons. They are a package deal after all. Bill set us up for 9/11 by scuttling intelligence, refusing Osama Bin Laden on a silver platter, cutting defense spending and wasting our weapons on a crackpot dictator in the Balkans. He also introduced oral sex with an intern, probably several, and then lying about it under oath into the national consciousness, and I guess it's not so bad. When all his practices finally caught up with him, and he was about to be impeached for "high crimes and misdemeanors" he suddenly got all macho and attacked Iraq and Sudan, destroying an aspirin factory and telling the world Saddam Hussein had WMD capabilities (something he has since denied). His wife, on the other hand, fostered a health care program so socialist even Democrats wouldn't touch it and continues on her PMS-induced rants whenever the mood strikes her. The two of them and their highly moral friends vandalized and shoplifted from the White House on their way out. It's amazing that even Bush can be a popular president after all this.

20. Madeleine Albright. First female secretary of state still claims some kind of expertise in foreign affairs and lectures President Bush. Stellar achievements include allowing North Korea to build nuclear weapons right under the nose of the United States.

19. Barbra Streisand. Another of the wacko, Hollywood types: supports abortion on demand and opposes the death penalty, but will go all out to protect the "environment", which apparently means wilderness wastelands in Alaska where she would never go and probably hasn't even seen a picture of.

18. NYT Editorial Board. Different editors trade off being the worst: there's Maureen Dowd, there's Paul Krugman, there's Nicholas Kristoff. Not a single conservative, or even moderate, among the bunch. The one who comes closest, William Safire, is an old Nixon Republican who voted for Clinton twice. The editorials in the NYT are merely platforms for liberal propaganda. Read them sometime and see if you detect any hint of balance.

17. Gene Robinson. Gay Episcopal priest about to cause a split between the American Church, which appears to be failing, and the vibrant, living church of Africa and Central America. All because homosexuals won't rest till they can fling their lifestyle in the faces of the godly.

16. Louis Farrakhan. If he were white, he'd be in the Klan. One of the most virulent, black racists living.

15. Jesse Jackson. This man makes his living stirring people up, causing disunity and making people feel like victims. Not a real great thing for fostering brotherhood.

14. Al Franken. Writes books entitled "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" about the Conservative Right and then doesn't even bother to research his claims. Most of his purported "lies" were later explained away as mistakes or...the truth. Still adds a good amount of invective to the national dialogue.

13. Gary Trudeau. Author of the popular "Doonesbury" comic, he excells at something liberals do best: taking people much more intelligent than him and making them look stupid. He couldn't survive in the room with Ann Coulter, much less Dick Cheney, yet he enjoys putting words in their mouth so he can win the argument. The last hurrah of the old "hippy" generation.

12. Kitty Kelley. Although Europeans (and the NYT) treat her like some kind of investigative journalist, the fact is her books are simply smear propaganda from one end to the other. I mean, who else would claim Nancy Reagan was having an affair in the 1980s...with Frank Sinatra? Or that Laura Bush is a drug dealer, something not even the liberal media would touch?

11. Michael Jackson. I think you know why.

The countdown continues....

30. Ben Cohen, of Ben and Jerry's fame. While content enough to enjoy the freedom and innovations this country has to offer, Cohen and his partner continue to fund strange projects and to carp from the sidelines about how rotten this country is, ignoring the fact that only in this country could they themselves have become so rich. Standard liberal tripe. Cohen even offered a book entitled "Fifty Ways You Can Show George the Door in 2004." Fortunately, the rest of the country isn't like Vermont.

29. Jose Canseco. Full of himself athlete juiced up on steroids, complained when he got caught that "everyone does it", and then wrote an entire book about how great he thinks he is. Ah well. At least he hasn't run for President yet.

27 & 26. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. These two belong together and the reason they make this list is because they originated, or at least perfected, the media's blatant bias in reporting. Woodward's books are written with a maximum of five sources and he even tells you what they're thinking at any given point. He also refuses to name his sources because it's more impressive that way. Usually they are revealed when the source complains that he's been misquoted. Bernstein, on the other hand, "remembers" himself being involved in events that he was nowhere near and takes credit for enough things to make one wonder if he isn't really the leading role in "Forrest Gump." That doesn't even come close to describing how they wrote "All the President's Men" as a spy movie and added in little fictional details to make it more interesting as a movie. All in all, these two cannot be trusted and the fact that they can lie and get away with it, the very thing they've accused Nixon and Bush of doing, shows the runaway power of the media.

25. Al Gore. Threw a tantrum on national television when a crucial state didn't vote his way. Gained back some respectability with a gracious concession, albeit five weeks late. Then lost whatever he had gained by going wild following the 9/11 attacks and screaming everywhere he went: "HE BETRAYED THIS COUNTRY! HE PLAYED ON OUR FEARS!" Liberals were up in arms when Ann Coulter accused them of chronic treason based on the fact they seem to root against their country fairly often. Nobody said anything, however, when a former Vice President of the United States accused a sitting President of treason during wartime. This man is completely unhinged.

24. Ward Churchill. This college professor is one-millionth Cherokee or something (and I think even that is honorary) and he has appointed himself spokesman for the entire Native American culture. This would normally be all right, except he has shown no ability to think his way through things and argue his points by logic so he resorts to name-calling, even referring to those killed on 9/11 as "little Eichmanns." In other words, the US brought the attacks on ourself because we're like the Nazis. Most Native Americans won't even touch this guy, but he goes on obliviously attacking all that is protecting him. If the country were really as censorious as he thinks, he certainly wouldn't be able to go on speaking carelessly in a time of war the way he does.

23. Al Sharpton. Let's see: color-baited Howard Dean in a scene where even we conservatives were hoping Dean would show some backbone and snap back the way he does at Republicans. But Dean was frightened. Of what? Well, Sharpton is best known for inciting riots aimed at Jews and he plays the race card shamelessly. He's the kind that makes you wish that colonization project had worked back during the Civil War and he could be inciting riots in Liberia now.

22. Dan Rather. He took a story he had fairly good indicators wasn't true in order to further his quest to be the next "Woodstein" and take down a sitting President. Glad he lost; but he's continuing the trend established in Watergate, that the press can openly display its bias and still be considered "objective."

21. Joy Hakim. Never heard of her? She authored "A Child's History of the US." In it she shamelessly pushed her own liberal views as fact: "Joe McCarthy was a liar. Not an ordinary, everyday liar." She also praises Jimmy Carter to the sky, comparing him to Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln, while decrying Reagan's fancy ball after the inauguration. No wonder the schools in New England keep churning out liberals.

to be continued tomorrow....

Today I shall continue with my "Fifty People Who Are Ruining America" list. This is a great week to do it as the news is all taken up with the space shuttle's woes. The next ten are as follows.

40. Theresa Heinz-Kerry. This ugly, bad-tempered, foul-mouthed witch makes the list because she is reinforcing one of feminism's most-proved laws: Girls, you really need a man to prop you up. Having married the Heinz fortune, she then married the Kerry fame. So glad she's not a First Lady.

39. Howard Stern. He used to be considered conservative and he is definitely politically incorrect, but he threw his hat into the ring against Bush last November and if being politically incorrect means constant sex jokes, mocking people with mental retardation and nonstop toilet talk, then maybe the PC-crowd has a point. Psychologists have a term for this: the anal stage. Kids and teenagers go through it: where they belch and pass gass and talk trash on purpose just for the shock value. Howard Stern seems to be stuck there.

38. Michael Savage. Another pseudo-Conservative, Savage is well-named. He rips into anyone who disagrees with him, not just making fun of their views (which is acceptable) but actually displaying hatred towards them as a person. He told a homosexual caller once that he hoped the man would get AIDS and die and called him a pig. Not a good rap for Conservatives everywhere. At least when Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh lose their temper and rant, you don't get the idea they really hate the liberals, just the liberal ideas. This guy is giving us all a bad name.

37. Gray Davis. The ex-governor of California deserves this slot due to his role in making the largest state in the Union the worst place to live. Also, he obviously lives the old maxim that "the end justifies the means" as he lied through his teeth about the pathetic state of California's government, energy and ecosystem to try and get re-elected. Fortunately. it didn't quite work the way he planned.

36. Alice Walker. This well-known author wrote in The Village Voice, following September 11th, that America should respons lovingly to the attacks, writing of Osama bin Laden: "What would happen to his cool armor if he could be reminded of all the good, nonviolent things he has done?" Osama? Are we still talking about the same guy? Tall, skinny, dark beard, wears a towel on his head? I wonder what she was referring to. Senator Patty Murray says that he builds orphanages. Well, with all the orphans he has created, it's really the least he can do.

35. Matt Lauer. This Hardball host is only "hard" towards Republicans. Definitely displays bias in the news media.

34. Jerry Springer. If you have to ask, you'll never understand.

33. Ron Reagan, Jr. Barely waited till his father was cold in his casket before ricoheting off to fraternize with his father's political enemies. Couldn't even mourn decently at the funeral but aimed a salvo at President Bush from his eulogy platform: "Dad never made the mistake so many politicans make, of wearing their faith on their sleeves for cheap, political game." What a jerk. To hear him tell it, Ronald Reagan was a regular John McCain. Ann Coulter has put it as nicely as possible, terming him "the world's living testimony to the limits of genetics."

32. Peter Singer. What can I say about a man who not only endorses infanticide and euthanasia but the murder of the retarded and use of handicapped humans for medical experiments? He would have been at home in Germany in the 1930s.

31. Gloria Steinem. Another feminist failure. While her conservative counterpart, Phyllis Schlaffly was going to law school, singlehandedly taking down popular constitutional amendments, writing hundreds of pamphlets, influencing the Republican Party's platform and electing Ronald Reagan, Steinem's magazine bombed and she had to find a rich guy to sleep with to bail her out. Her latest books tell how depressed she is over her life. What a winner.

To be continued tomorrow....

Over the weekend, I read "100 People Who Are Screwing Up America" by Bernard Goldberg: a list of people whom he really believes are making America worse simply by being who they are. In the end, he invites his readers to make their own list so in the interest of commenting on another conservative NYT bestseller, I have decided to do that. Since I am not really "in" enough to list 100, I will make a list of "50 People Who Are Ruining America," and as you suspected, many of them will be liberals. We'll start from the back.

50. Pat Robertson. It might seem funny that I would start off with a so-called conservative but Robertson just takes the cake. In order to protect his business interests in China, this supposedly pro-life politician actually defended China's mandatory abortion policies. If he hadn't founded Christian Coalition, he'd be feted in the NYT as a "moderate Republican," giving Republicans everywhere a bad name.

49. Mario Cuomo. Deserves this place for "dumbing down" the historical profession even more than it already has been. Who else would write an entire book about Abraham Lincoln, whose only thesis was, "Abraham Lincoln wouldn't have invaded Iraq." He might have invaded South Carolina but not Iraq.

48. Pat Buchanan. His conservative credentials are undeniable; what he needs is common sense. Instead of coming into the real post-9/11 world, Buchanan remains in the past Cold-War era world. Sometimes he seems to go even further back than that, arguing for isolationism like a pre-World War II Republican. Needs a reality shock.

47. Jennifer Anniston. I probably shouldn't single her out like this and I like Jennifer Anniston (all her swearing at Bush to the side): she's cute and she's a good actress. But I wonder...having seen her on TV, who would want to get married? She seems to have just as good a life as a single mom as any married person. This should probably be for Brad Pitt as well.

46. Norman Mineta. If you've read this blog much at all, you know why I think he's ruining America.

45. Tim Robbins. Two words: drama queen.

44. Catherine Baker Knoll. Pennsylvania's lieutenant governor who showed up at the funeral of a Marine killed in Iraq and started handing out business cards telling the mourners, "The state of Pennsylvania does not support this war." Can you say stuck-up, arrogant witch? She even tries to look like Hillary Clinton.

43. Michael Schiavo. Anyone who kills his own wife should probably be nearer #1 than this but I think he's merely a symptom of the way things are these days. At any rate, Michael has taught us all that inconvenient spouses can be gotten rid of if only you have a good lawyer. Not really a great thing for America I'm thinking.

42. Jane Fonda. Her backing of John Kerry and her opposition to the war in Iraq destroyed her supposed newfound conservative credentials. She's as bad as she was when she was Hanoi Jane.

41. Ted Turner. The founder of CNN deserves this honor for telling his people that, rather than report the news as it happens, they ought to be exposing politicians.

to be continued tomorrow.