Increase in terrorism = stretch marks of democracy

So, the New York Times released an NIE report claiming that the War in Iraq has caused more terrorism and made America less safe. Well, first of all, we all know that the people who work at the New York Times are a bunch of Macacas. And second of all, the increase in terrorism is just one of the burdens we must bear as we spread democracy. When that scuffle erupted between Israel and Hezbollah, Condie explained that "what we are seeing" were "the birth pangs of democracy." Well, the rise of Jihadism and anti-Americanism are merely the stretch marks, or hemorrhoids, if you will, of freedom.

Bush learned alternative interrogation techniques from Mom

I can't be sure, but I'm pretty convinced that Barbara Bush was the inspiration behind the "alternative interrogation techniques" used on prisoners.
As Bush explains, these techniques "were tough, and they were safe and lawful and necessary." This is, I suspect, how Barbara described her own "alternative parenting techniques."



This isn't the only lesson Dubya had to learn from his mother (the hard way.) Barbara also showed Bush how lucky these detainees really are. When, after Katrina, Barbara visited the Astrodome in Houston, she observed, with great insight so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this, this is working very well for them."

Well these people are underprivileged too. And they're lucky to have the shelter, food, tropical weather, and neon orange clothing provided free of charge.
Sure, innocent people who have never been charged with a crime are being held indefinitely. Sure, some detainees have been drugged, beaten, sexually abused, hung from their hands for days at a time and subject to water boarding and electric shocks. But they're probably the guilty ones anyway. And if not, they shouldn't have been in Afghanistan, or anywhere in the Middle East for that matter, anyway. (Nationality and place of birth are no excuse, by the way.)

These detainees were geographically underprivileged. And just as the flooded, stinking astrodome was a major step up for the poor people of New Orleans, the tropical paradise that is Guantanamo Bay, is a major step up from the middle east. But don't listen to me. Listen to the universally trusted and respected Secretary of defense/ climatologist Donald Rumsfeld: "Guantanamo Bay's climate is different than Afghanistan. To be in a eight-by-eight cell in beautiful sunny Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is not inhumane treatment."


And I'm sure the secret prisons in Romania and Poland, while not sunny, have their own eastern European Communist architecture charm.

God spoke to me

I have to admit, I have always been a little scared of Al Franken. After all, this is a man who my hero Bill O'Reilly diagnosed as having "serious emotional problems." So when we started talking about having Laughing Liberally, Screening Liberally, and Drinking Liberally host a post-screening happy hour, I was understandably nervous. But then, God-- the only man I trust more than Bill O'Reilly-- spoke and told me that the collaboration seemed a good fit-- that the film and our organizations had similar missions. The tagline of the film, Taking back America one laugh at a time, kinda sorta has something in common with Laughing Liberally's motto, "Saving democracy one laugh at a time." God also told me he had my back in case Franken tried to smote me or anything.

So, On Friday September 15th, with fear in my heart, I attended a sold out screening followed by a Q & A. I was too frightened to go alone, so I was flanked by my body guards, Drinking Liberally's Matt O'Neill, and Screening Liberally's Wendy Cohen and Leigh Wollinsky.


The film was fun and inspiring, and Al seemed pretty emotionally stable. I thought his deranged behavior must have been edited out of the film, but he was equally normal during the Q&A, which was great, although I wish Bill O'Reilly, Anne Coulter, and Sean Hannity had attended to provide some fairness and balance. (Obvi, Staurt Smalley would have been there to moderate if things got ugle.)


Audience members were obviously moved by the film: One woman described her "visceral reactions" to certain characters on the screen. My entire row shook in anguish as scenes brought back the repressed memory of thinking we were really going redefeat Bush in 2004. An American citizen of Iraqi descent told a story about being locked in a plane bathroom because he wasn't blond-haired and blue-eyed enough for the flight. (He was let out of the bathroom when he proved his patriotism by cursing in fluent American English.)

Asked "what can we do?" Al urged the audience to check out Tim Walz, who is running for congress. During a touching moment of bipartisanship and empathy, Al explained Bush's stance on the treatment of detainees: "We just gotta be able to torture people."



After the Q&A, we moseyed over to the IFC bar for the happy hour. It was a typical liberal shindig, where we plotted to overthrow the state, burned flags, married gays, drank soy organic lattes, ate sushi and read the New York Times. Audience members, people from Drinking, Laughing, and Screening Liberally, and people from organizations like The College Democrats of New York enjoyed chatting with each other and talking with Al, Nick Doob, Chris Hegedes and Frazer Pennebaker. They all "got pinned" with Drinking Liberally buttons. (We don't have Screening or Laughing Liberally buttons yet, but we know we're in their hearts.)

Even in person, Al seemed really normal and down to earth and I finally began to doubt O'Reilly's medical diagnosis (he's usually so on target!)


Let's keep our fingers crossed that Al runs for the Senate so that we can take back America one seat at a time. And so we can see Bill O'Reilly spontaneously combust.

Bush's question

Defending his tough love prisoners plan, the President explained

“I have one test for this legislation. I’m going to ask one question as this legislation proceeds, and it’s this. The intelligence community must be able to tell me that the bill Congress sends to my desk will allow this vital program to continue.”

If that's not a good question, I don't know what is?

Bush's historical thesis

Everyone loves to pick on Bush's unconventional use of the English language. The other day, when he explained his reading list was "epileptic," America-haters had another chance to make fun of our commander in chief. But anyone with any critical reading skills and any knowledge of real literature knows that Bush didn't misspeak. I knew what he meant: that the books are so exciting, they're downright seizure-inducing. And if you've read The Stranger,
you'll know what I'm talking about. I think I speak for all sophisticated readers when I say Camus gives me the shakes.



But even liberals have to give credit where credit is due. And when Bush described terrorists today as the " successors to fascists, to Nazis, to communists and other totalitarians of the 20th century," can anyone really challenge his analysis? Say what you will about our president, he has a keen understanding of the terrorist mind-set, ideology, and even religion. At a meeting with Iraqi Americans in 2002, the president was confused by the distinction between Sunnis and Shiites. A lesser president might have pretended to understand the conversation and waited until after the meeting to ask Dick or Condy,What's all this Sunni Shiite mumbo-jumbo. But Bush is a straight shooter, so he said, "I thought the Iraqis were Muslims." After understanding that there are Sunni and Shiite Muslims, understanding distinctions among islamism, fascism, Nazism, communism and totalitarianism is a "cake walk."