Steven Den Beste has an amazingly in-depth piece on why the French & Germans are acting the way they are, all given with the backdrop of a short history of the last few hundred years. It may appear that Chirac’s statements to the eastern Europe nations (that they missed an opportunity to shut up) is merely pompous. But the socialism that continues to creep into European politics has roots in immediate post-World-War-II American benevolence, and that has it’s roots in the errors of post-World-War-I reparations, and that has its roots…

Well, take the time to read the whole thing. Once again, a good understanding of history trumps “No War” placards. And Den Beste understands it.

We can now thank anti-war protestors for directly contributing to the possibility of war.

President Saddam Hussein’s government, apparently emboldened by antiwar sentiment at the U.N. Security Council and in worldwide street protests, has not followed through on its promises of increased cooperation with U.N. arms inspectors, according to inspectors in Iraq.

The lack of anti-Saddam rhetoric from the anti-war crowd, and the presence of exclusively anti-American chants and signs, continues to indicate that it’s not war they’re protesting, it’s America.

I mentioned earlier about the EU giving Hussein his last last last chance. Well Taranto’s “Best of the Web Today” for February 19th, goes even further than that, giving us a good history lesson on “last” chances.

This Is Your Last Last Last Last Last Chance

“Hussein will be given ‘a last chance to comply before he gets clobbered,’ The New York Times on Monday quoted an unidentified U.S. official as saying.”–CNN.com, Jan. 27, 1998

“Annan Admits Iraq Trip Could Be Last Chance for Peace”–CNN.com, Feb. 18, 1998

“Clinton: Iraq Has Abused Its Last Chance”–CNN.com, Dec. 16, 1998

“The White House suggested Wednesday that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has missed his ‘last chance’ to disarm.”–CNN.com, Dec. 18, 2002

“Future European Union members endorsed a joint declaration Tuesday warning Saddam Hussein he has one last chance to disarm.”–Associated Press, Feb. 18, 2003

Aren’t five years worth of “last chances” enough? It’s time to cut the nonsense and rush to war.

In the aftermath of the record-setting blizzard in the northeast US, who are the big heros, getting hospital workers to work and bringing family members of dying patients to the bedside? SUV drivers. Not exactly fitting the “self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their neighbors and communities” picture that Keith Bradsher’s book attempted to paint them as.

Tony Blair delivered a speech to the Labor Party’s Spring Conference in Glasgow on February 15. The Observer exerpted his speech, titled “The Price of My Conviction”. Best part:

If there are 500,000 on the [Stop the War] march, that is still less than the number of people whose deaths Saddam has been responsible for. If there are one million, that is still less than the number of people who died in the wars he started. So if the result of peace is Saddam staying in power, not disarmed, then I tell you there are consequences paid in blood for that decision too. But these victims will never be seen, never feature on our TV screens or inspire millions to take to the streets. But they will exist none the less.

I heard a comment on the radio yesterday in a similar vein. Where were all these protestors when Saddam was killing his people and others, but the UN did nothing about it? If they really aren’t anti-American, they’re at least not anti-Saddam. And of course it’s a matter of record that ANSWER and groups like them who have organized the anti-war protests have communists at their foundation who have absolutely nothing good to say about America (in spite of their freedom to express those ideas in this country without reprisal).

At some point, this is anti-American. If you don’t know or don’t care whether it is, it ought to be your business to know.

The EU has given Hussein his last last last chance today. >yawn< Wonder if they mean it this time. The good news is that the EU is suggesting that the buildup of troops in the area has forced Saddam to cooperate with inspectors, but the question then is, why did it take troops to do that? If Iraq was fully cooperating…oh, you know the drill.

Birth of the “Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy”: The NY Times is reporting (free registration required to read) that a group called “AnShell Media L.L.C.” and subsidized by big Democrat supporters Sheldon and Anita Drobny, is planning on creating a whole slate of liberal radio shows to combat the likes of Rush Limbaugh and FOX News Channel. Well, there are so many angles to this story, it’s hard to decide where to begin.

The obvious point is that it’s amazing how over-the-top liberals react when confronted with even the smallest of opposition. FOX News Channel is one of a number of TV news outlets, the vast majority of which ignore or underreport the conservative view. Liberal bias is considered “balance” by those on the left, of course, and no dissenting voices will be tolerated (which, coming from the allegedly “tolerant” left is a telling response).

Listen to how they plan to counter Rush Limbaugh:

“This side has failed by going at Rush, and trying to be Rush ? you’re not going to beat him at his game,” Mr. [Jon] Sinton [CEO of AnShell & radio executive] said. “What really makes this work is tapping into Hollywood and New York and having a huge entertainment component, where political sarcasm is every bit as effective as Rush Limbaugh is at bashing you over the head.”

Do you see the difference here? Rush combats ideas with ideas. His show certainly does have its entertainment aspect, no doubt, but his main thrust is the triumph of ideas, not comedy, over other ideas. The liberal answer to him will be comedy and entertainment, where typically complex ideas are oversimplified and errant thinking is lost among the laughter. Liberals continue to prove that they must appeal to your emotions rather than your intellect in order to make a case. When they try the latter, they get failure (e.g. the article mentions Jim Hightower and Mario Cuomo as aborted attempts).

Al Franken, who is being considered as one of the satirists for the group, explained how his approach would differ from Limbaugh’s. “I think the audience isn’t there for a liberal Rush, because I think liberals don’t want to hear that kind of demagoguery.” This from a man who titled a book “Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot”.

The main reason I think people tune in to conservative talk radio is because they’re finally hearing ideas that they already believe in but aren’t being equally reflected in news and opinion in the mainstream media. I think that if the TV networks and the newspapers were actually fair and balanced, Rush wouldn’t be as big a hit as he is. I think the reason FOX News Channel is beating CNN is because it does, in fact, present both sides far more fairly than any other network. (I do have to say that I believe the folks on FNC are more conservative than liberal, on the whole, although Rivera and van Susteren certainly are no right-wingers. Sometimes I wish Sheppard Smith wouldn’t let his leanings spill over so much in his interviews, but FNC’s other personalities do far better keeping their personal beliefs in check than on your random major broadcast network, and asking questions that challenge both sides.)

The rise of so-called “conservative media” is not because it’s packaged better or is more combative or more outrageous. It’s because it provides something the mainstream media has been ignoring. In that sense, it’s the exception that proves the rule of liberal bias everywhere else.

“You’ve been blogging since April, where are you going now?”

“I’m going to Disney World!”

See you later, I’ll be back Monday.

Jonah Goldberg has responded to Mary McGrory’s change of heart. Actually, he seems convinced that it’s more a change of heart than head.

This is a woman who writes a regular column for The Washington Post, and not one of her reasons has anything to do with the actual facts at issue. She doesn’t like Bush. She doesn’t like his advisers. Comments about Bush’s intelligence seem to be the lynchpins of her opposition to war. When she says that “among the people” she knows, “nobody was for the war,” she sounds like Pauline Kael, the New Yorker writer who famously said in 1972 that Nixon couldn’t have won because, “I don’t know a single person who voted for him!” Ultimately, McGrory says she’s convinced because Powell’s on board with a war and she likes Powell. She deserves credit for publicly changing her mind, but that is what’s so damning about the knee-jerk opposition of so many anti-war liberals -it’s based in animus, not logic.

He’s got a point, one that I’ve made for a long time: liberal arguments for so many things are based on emotion and feelings rather than facts or reality. The points in McGrory’s article that I excerpted earlier weren’t really all that new. We’ve known that Hussein has had chemical and biological weapons for years. But when Colin Powell says the same words, suddenly it all makes sense.

As Goldberg says later on, it’s nice to have her on board, but we wish it was because she realized it’s the right position to take rather than because she feels better about it now. That kind of support dries up and blows away with a change of wind.

I’ve always heard the adage that Hollywood makes R-rated movies and throws in all the sex it can get away with because that’s what sells. But that’s not true according to the box office numbers.

WorldNetDaily has been covering this story for years, and each year the results are the same; the vast majority of top-grossing movies don’t have an R-rating, sex or excessive violence. In fact, the top 29 grossing movies of all time are rated G, PG or PG-13.

Worth considering.