Surreal simpleton Senator Andrew Bartlett doesn't like the idea of liberating Iraq, because "Australia is now diplomatically and militarily handcuffed to the United States. We will be unavoidably now part of Mr Bush's new world order."

Yeah, a world order that involves the removal of children-gassing, women-raping, dissenter-shredding brutes. Sounds like a damn fine thing to me.

Like most fluffs Fartlett has an extremely selective moral code and despises Western values. Yet he's a "Democrat"? Gawd. That's like saying Ted Bundy's a friggin' feminist!

(Er... actually that was probably a bad analogy. Some feminists were actually pleased as punch with the slick lady killer because he blamed smut for his murder spree.)

I'll try again: Yet he's a "Democrat"? That's like saying Phillip Adams is an intellectual.

Ah, that's better.

But back to Fartlett. Not only does he ignore man's inumanity to man when it suits, but he's more upset about man's inhumanity to ham. Some Republicans may be chicken hawks, but Fartlett's a chicken chook. His whole philosophy can be described thus: "If in doubt, pullet!" Have a look here and you'll see how fowl his reasoning is.

The interview is a real quack-up. It includes a classic photo of him dolled up with a hen (probably his significant other). Susan Sarandon's conservative mother (last post) says she has to tread on eggshells around her daughter. But if she ever lobbed at the Fartlett household, she'd have do that literally as well!

What a silly cock-head he is.

Gawd! Lenora Tomalin, mother of uber-squit Susan Sarandon, is actually pro-Bush! Perhaps there's some serious Freudian shit going on there underneath Sarandon's regally oblivious exterior? Would be nice to think so. But I doubt it. I don't think she possesses a subconscious. Years of living in Tinseltown with other sanctimonious, over-rewarded egomaniacs would have removed any psychological complexity she may once have possessed.

Tomalin describes the discomfort of visiting her daughter's house. She says she has to "tread on eggshells". I know the feeling. Whenever I'm around fluffs I'm forever biting my tongue (sometimes to stop myself from laughing at their arse-about reasoning and/or ignorance, but usually because they're already spitting foam over some petty point or other and I don't want to rile them even more with dissent). This cracks me up, since conservatives are so often portrayed as unreasonable and overbearing!

Gee. Some Smothers do 'ave e'm!

Hello again readers (or should that be singular?). Sorry for the absence. I've just been flat out like a lizard drinkin' for several weeks. Many times recently I resolved to resume blogging. But other things came up. Today I saw that I hadn't done so for almost a month. Thought it was just a week!

Amazing how the older you get, the quicker time seems to pass. Why is that? I read somewhere that your neurotransmitters get all out of whack, causing a shift in time perception. But I don't buy that. I reckon there's a purely mathematical explanation. See, when you're a day old, one day is your whole life. When you're two days old, it's half your life, etc. By the time you're forty, then a day is around about one fifteen thousandth of your life. See what I mean?

Remember the immortal lines from that classic Seppolian soapie? "Like sands through the hourglass so are the days of our lives."

Piss off! That should have been: "Like droplets of water from a high pressure hose (which is increasing in pressure at an exponential rate) so are the days of our lives." But then, that's ungainly, and a tad depressing. The housewives watching at home wouldn't have liked that.

But back to the task of blogging: Here's a great article by Sophie Masson. She writes that "the US and Britain launched a series of air strikes on Baghdad on December 16, 1998. These were intended to be only of limited range - regime change had been rejected, as much as a full-scale war."

So they weren't serious, full-scale attacks. But surely many innocent lives were put at risk, if not snuffed out altogether. Yet the appeaseniks were mostly silent, and remained fully clothed the whole time. I don't recall so much as a righteous nipple or a brazen pube flashed in defiance back then.

Why the double standard? Well, it's obvious. Appeaseniks are just suckers for star-power. They don't understand or respect anything but pretty faces, pretty pictures, pretty sounds and pretty words. They were star-struck by Clinton, fellow traveller and celebrity prez. Just like metaphorical Monicas, they kneeled down before him and indulged his whim.

But Dubya? No way. No figurative fellatio for him! He has a moral code he's serious about. He has a spine, and a mind and a heart. To the po-mo appeaseniks that's just not sexy. And if he's not sexy, he must be evil.

Dumb fucks.

Scary thing is these pinheads seem to be multiplying. Yep, there's a leftie born every minute.

Some thoughts on the mindset of the fluffy wuffy demonstrator: The thing that has always amused me about many habitual placard-wavers is not the intensity of their commitment, but the lack of it. They go along to demos much as people go to the footy: because it's a ritual, all their friends are doing it, and they get to shout a lot and let off steam.

I remember once bumping into this Fremantle fluff on a train, whom I'd previously met at a party. We made a bit of small talk about non-political subjects. I'd expressed nothing to suggest -- either then or at the party -- what my political views were. Completely out of the blue she told me that there was an anti-development demo on the weekend. "If you're not doing anything, you might want to come along."

I felt like saying, "Well, I'll have a read about what's happening. If I decide I sympathise with the demonstrators' cause, and think that jumping around chanting some silly slogan will do any good for it, then I might show up."

Of course I didn't. I simply politely refused. She shrugged, and we changed the subject.

The thing that amazed me was the casualness of the suggestion. She clearly had no real emotional or intellectual commitment to it. She was going to lob there because, well, that's what you're supposed to do. It was an automatic, conditioned response, kind of like the staff at Macca's saying, "Have a nice day!"

I've often encountered this automaton-like behaviour amongst lefties. The reason they don't understand other opinions is because they don't know that there are any other opinions. I doubt they even truly know what their opinions are either. They've never really thought about anything much. They're just like lumps of seaweed, swaying back and forth with the tide. If this woman's friends were Nazis (er, real ones, not mere wannabes like me) then I'm sure she'd be doing the goose-step in no time at all.

Of course the foam-spitting ferals are a different kettle of filth. They are deeply committed to their nasty, idiotic ideology. They can't see reason because they're terrified of it, and are trapped in a constant state of fear and loathing.

This is why we non-fluffs shouldn't be too worried by the huge turnout against the war. I think most of the people who lobbed belonged to the two groups described above -- they were either air-heads or rumble-gutses. They weren't people who'd thought long and hard about the subject and finally, calmly decided to become appeaseniks. Still there's obviously a huge social problem to contend with when there are so many people out there who are that friggin' dumb.

Have a look here and you'll see how deep the fluffy wuffy cancer is in the country. I can imagine the staff at the SMH assembling this group of photos with a real sense of pride, confident that it shows what a kind and humane lot we tolerant, peace-loving Sydney-siders are. But I find it truly creepy.

Have a look at the pregnant chick in the bottom left hand corner. Her sign reads, "Power is in giving life." Well, I have no argument with that. But has it not occurred to her, and to the many bong-suckling barbarians in beanies that marched alongside her, that getting serious with the Butcher of Baghdad is not a contradiction of the sentiment she's expressing, but a confirmation of it?

By disarming Saddam (forcefully if necessary) we will be preserving and improving the lives of the oppressed citizens of Iraq, and protecting the lives of people in the West and Israel and other states in the Middle East. And if the UN comes along for the ride, the coalition of the willing will also be preserving any last vestiges of dignity and authority that institution retains. Surely she should be in support of that, if nothing else.

As a feminist (and I assume she is -- any appeaseniks who aren't?) she should also be aware that Iraq, like some other barbaric shit-holes in the region, isn't exactly chick-friendly. If she were to lob at an anti-government demo in Baghdad Uday and his mates would soon have her guts for garters (literally) and her tongue for dog food. Her head would probably be nailed to her front door just for good measure.

There's also the irony that this woman, or at least most of the women there, would be defiantly pro-choice. Peace rallies full of right-to-lifers? I doubt it. They're all "right-wing loons" aren't they?

So a more thorough encapsulation of the appeasenik position on the life-giving paradigm would be: "Power is in giving life... er, unless that life is deemed inconvenient to me. Then I'll pop into the nearest abortion clinic and have it ended pronto, and the body that contained it sucked out and spat into a bucket. My body my choice!"

Hey, bimbo! Why not just hold a sign reading, "Tyranny rocks, dude!"

I've long found the UFO phenomenon fascinating, mainly because it's so wacky -- particularly the whole abductions caper. But I've always looked at it from a very rational point of view, and never believed any of it. Lately, however, my fascination is becoming less detached. I keep looking at the sky, hoping to see a flying disc. I watch alien abduction docos repeatedly, and find myself thinking, "Maybe there's something in all this... I mean, these people really seem to believe this happened to them!"

Gawd. It's disgraceful. Why am I feeling this way? I reckon it's to do with all this anxiety about terrorism. When you're scoring dangerously high on the angstometer you keep yearning for some sort of certainty, a spiritual Prozac pill to calm your troubled psyche. If you're an atheist, you can't turn to some old bearded bloke up in the ether. You have to settle for a bug-eyed, spindly-fingered, dome-headed mega-midget from Zeta Reticuli.

I really hope that this Saddam-Osama problem is solved quickly. Otherwise the angst will take its toll and I'll soon end up being one of those credulous boneheads hocking Roswell conspiracy theories! With my brain sufficiently softened, I'll be sucked in to all this anti-American hysteria that's been going on of late. Gawd. I might even end up at some anti-WTO demo, babbling bilious bullshit with a friggin' tea-cosy on my bonce!

So, I dearly hope that Saddam complies pronto, or gets comprehensively thwocked in the shortest time possible. That will be a giant step towards saving the world from terrorism. It will also save my mind from complete and utter disintegration.

Gawd. Derek Sapphire has just accused me of ruining his blog. What a crock!

Hey, Derek, you jasmine-scented super-wanker! Considering all the bullshit you've been spinning over the last few months, have you considered your blogging troubles might be the result of bad karma?

Oh no, of course you wouldn't have. Whenever smug lefties and New Agers have it rough, it's never their fault. Then it's oppression or persecution. But whenever anyone else cops it, then it's cosmic punishment for wrongs the victims have committed.

Hey Mr "fellow traveller", I hope your PC catches that "Sapphire worm" that's crashing computers all over the joint. Hell, it's got your name on it.

Fluffy wuffy arsehole.

Was that Whacko Jacko doco full-on creepy, or what? I didn't watch all of it, but I saw enough to make me feel both disturbed by and sorry for the poor prick. I mean, he's known by bloody everyone in the entire world, yet he's completely and utterly alone. Watching him lope dopily around the joint pursued by legions of gawking, prodding fans he reminded me of John Merrick, the "Elephant Man" -- except that Merrick wasn't a mega-deluded, psychosexually twisted friggin' nutbar, of course. (Er, and his nose was in better shape, too.)

And re all them creepy goings on in the Jackson bedroom: Of course the Whackster's stubborn refusal to understand interviewer Martin Bashir's horror was cause for alarm. But what about the complicity of the kids' parents or guardians? Either they're being paid to let their children stay there (a possibility) or they're completely under the spell of his celebrity. Either way that's a bigger worry. I mean, it's sad enough for an abused, lonely, neurotic multi-millionaire to seek refuge from reality in Neverland, but it's worse when lots of "normal" people indulge his bizarre fantasy by offering him their children.

For people interested in the turmoil in Zimbabwe, here's a good collection of articles. It includes a story published in The Oz (it's the fourth one listed) about an interesting doco made by a former resident of Zimbabwe called Chloe Traicos. Not only is Chloe a film-maker, but she's also an actress and playwright. Yet she's only in her mid-twenties! Keep an eye out for her.

Anyone who thinks that the United Nations possesses a moral authority greater than Seppolia's should have a squizz at this great article.

Another fictional character is causing offence. Apparently a bunch of Moscow silks are a tad shat off about the character of Dobby in the latest Harry Potter fillum. They reckon he looks too much like their leader, Vladimir Putin.

Here's Vlad. Here's Dobby. You decide.

Apparently an MTV cartoon called Clone High has caused a ruckus. It's all about a school chockas with the clones of famous people throughout history. Gandhi is presented as an out-of-control horn-dog. Understandably, the people of India aren't too happy about that!

The irony is that the characterization probably isn't too far off. Gandhi was a class-act, of course, but he was still human. And look at the lives of other gurus like Koresh, Jones, and Bagwhan Shree Rajneesh. All of them used their power to extract sexual favours from women (and sometimes children). In fact, I suspect that's why they set off on the "spiritual" path in the first place.

And it's well known that Gandhi loved the company of spunky young babes. He would get them to spend the night with him, starkers, so as to test his ability to resist temptation. He was getting his rocks off, by keeping them on! Don't know about you, but that seems extremely kinky to me.

Dirty bastard!

More silly squittering from Susan Sarandon. Now she's carping about Tony Blair's position on Iraq. But why was she speaking publicly in the first place? To promote The Banger Sisters, a silly, mediocre and inconsequential fillum about a couple of superannuated tarts!

Gawd, she should make up her mind about whether she's an actress or an activist. If she does settle decisively on the former career, then the ol' bimbo should start choosing better scripts before she loses all her hard-earned cred in that area, too.

This fillum Confessions of a Dangerous Mind looks interesting. It's based on a dodgy autobiography by Chuck Barris, visionary creator of early reality TV shows like The Gong Show. This piece makes a few interesting points about how what was seen as decadent, degrading and shocking then would be deemed tame now.

Makes me wonder what reality TV will be like a few years hence. I reckon we'll see desperate bachelors lining up for blind dates with goats and chickens and the weekly loser on Big Brother being slaughtered and eaten by all the other inmates. When people complain the defence will be the same: "Oh come on, the show's all in fun. We all know that. Don't be such a kill-joy."

Gawd. Now stalking is considered a "cultural" issue. The West today is a relativist's wet dream.

I'm a bit of a net and blogging newbie, so please don't roll your eyes when you read this. But I've just found this amazing page on Google which maps all the searching trends. This is fantastic, because not only can I learn about the contemporary zeitgeist (love that word, don't you?) but I can also use it to get more hits for my site.

For instance, some top searches for early January were "Iraq", "Clonaid" and "Joe Millionaire". So, if I keep whopping in these names, I'll get my hits up. The problem is, how do I put them all in the one post (er, aside from merely listing them like I just did)?

Give me a while to think about this, I'll get back to you...

This story, about a SNAG slowly discovering his inner lech, is an absolute classic.

If you thought that the man-hating feminazi is merely an invention of appalling misogynists cop an optic of this. It's a story about Mary Daly, serious advocate of the "gendercide" of men. She's just the kind of bizarro creepoid this tosser would adore, I reckon. Needless to say she's way cool amongst the twisted sisterhood.

Good to know that Dubya is sticking it to tiny-minded tyrants at home as well as abroad.