Free Saddam!?!

Driving through (where else?) Berkeley the other day I saw the first "Free Saddam!" grafitti. I have been waiting for this.

To tell you the truth I would much rather have Saddam free than Leonard Peltier or Mumia Abu Jamal, mainly because both Peltier and Abu Jamal got completely fair trials and are assuredly guilty as sin. Saddam, on the other hand, was a bastard, but there are two mitigating factors here: One. Saddam, while definitely a genocidal psychotic, was the best Arab leader out there. Two. This court has absolutely no validity. It is a show trial worthy of 1930s Moscow. There is really no way out of this situation besides the death of Saddam (unless he could be retired to house arrest in Southern France, which would not be so bad, because then there is no killing of anybody, and you would have him around for information AND you prevent him from being a martyr, because in keeping him you allow him to age and say silly things from time to time), and it should have been done earlier, as a military action or an "accident" while taking him into custody. Putting on a show trial sends a terrible message to the Arab world, and putting up judges who have had about three weeks of training strikes me as a bad way to go.

So, while I cannot endorse the sentiments of "Free Saddam" I certainly am opposed to this kangaroo court.

Today We All Wear The Union Jack

We Europeans, and I include North America in the number of the Europeans, might have our internal disputes and rivalries. We might even do some bloody awful things to each other, some of them even undeserved. However, let no supporter of Western Civilization, be he Irish, French, German, Italian, or Spanish, refuse to stand in solidarity with the people of England today.

Too long Europe has slumbered in blissful ignorance of the dangers of the age old Enemy. Too long have we allowed hard-fought settlements to our own sectarian disputes to be applied to a vicious, alien faith that puts its own conquest and our destruction ahead of all concern for Truth, Goodness, Decency, and Honor.

It is time for Europe to wake up. Liberalism is a sin we can no longer afford.

My Beloved Colleague in The Food Criticism World...M. Chirac!

It's sometimes tough to be a bigot. I suppose the key is to be a very selective bigot: perhaps an anti-Lapp bigot or something. Claim to have discovered the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Reindeer Herding" and wage a campaign to have all the Lapps deported to Canada.

You become a monomaniac, with one driving quest. It makes things simple. Rid the continent of the hapless Lapp (or Lappless Hap?) and the reindeer will return to their rightful place of glory!

So, pity those of us broad-minded bigots who take on just about everyone as part of our complicated web of prejudices and snobberies. Sometimes you get an overabundance of good when two peoples on your list fight each other: no matter who loses, you win! But there is a cloud in this silver lining: you have the prospect that one of them will also win. So you win one, you lose one, but there is always the hope that there will be much sulking on both sides.

So, when the President of the Franks takes on the Anglo-Saxons, why, what am I to do? Of course the fact that the French and the Englisch are at each others' throats again is one of those great signs of stability in the world. The fact that the French are resting on their laurels in the kitchen is also one of those great signs of stability in the world.

So I must rejoice. Chirac unknowingly makes an ass of himself (the food in England has gotten really good, in fact I bet that it is easier to find a good croissant in London than in Paris, where patisserie is at an all time low. Although he is right about the Finns. Must be the Lapps), the British get their noses out of joint, and those of us cisalpines get to giggle and titter at the hijinks of the barbarians. French food/Englisch food, what difference does it make? When either one of them really want to get down to business they hire Italians for the kitchen anyway.

Happy Fourth of July!!!

I like fireworks. I like barbecues. I like to see the Englisch lose.

Not too keen on Freemasons and various French Endarkenment ideas though.

Hmmm.

Since it could have been worse: we could have had an idiot skinhead lawyer like Mohandas K. Ghandi leading our independence movement, then I will say that I am all in favor of the Fourth.

Now, since we have determinde that independence can be worthwhile, will someone please scrap that "indivisible" crap from the Pledge? Or howzabout the whole Pledge? Don Jim Tucker has a great commentary on that. I agree, this is idolatry, pure and simple. I don't say it. Period. "Under God" is the only part that is not objectionable.

Indivisible. That is supposed to mean that the Great State of California is forever attached to West Virginia? No thanks. Although if someone were to chain our Senators up to theirs and toss the lot of them in the sea, well, maybe we could talk.

Here is a much better Pledge:

I pledge allegience to God,
His Holy, Apostolic and Catholic Church,
And His Vicar, the Bishop of Rome,
And promise to serve Him faithfully.
Insofar as any civic government
Adheres to this goal and provides for the authentic common good,
I will uphold and defend it
In accordance with the teachings of the Magisterium.

This is a good one, as it can be said by people of all nations.

As I always say, a bit of Catholic Triumphalism never hurt anyone, unless they deserved it anyway.

Eat grilled meat!
Blow things up!
Listen to Sousa!

A clarification

I realize that the last post was a bit cryptic, but blame Dick Nixon for that. I should clarify my position on the latest decision from the Supreme Degenerates:

1. I have no problem, in theory, with the seizure of private property for the public good, so long as the property owner is justly compensated. I am, when push comes to shove, more inclined towards Big Government Euro-style than I ever am towards Libertarianesque deregulation. Sorry, but we Falangists tend to go that direction (and yes, other than Roosevelt, Kennedies, and Truman, I probably am much more of an old-time Democrat than a Republican of any time). Bad regulations can always be slowly and slightly modified, but when you let the cat out of the bag, good luck stuffing the hapless thing back in there when it turns out to be a monster.

2. I can even allow the seizure of private property to allow other private interests to have it, in extremely limited cases, in which the transfer is ALWAYS from larger interest to smaller interest (so, yes, I can get behind, in theory, very limited land reforms of the Latin American variety, but they must be handled very carefully).

However, the notion of seizing private houses to build more Walmarts, or to destroy an established organic neighborhood in order to build some sterile ticky tacky development is terrible. And this is exactly the flood gate that this awful decision has opened.

Here is a case where my centrist, authoritarian, pro-regulation, pro-common good creed must be relaxed in favor of a balance in the direction of property rights, because the only outcome we can expect in this day and age is the very worst exploitation of the weakest members of society, the various forms of local government corruption (not that that is high on my list of problems to worry about - seriously, I have seen too much good come out of corruption), and the destruction of interesting architecture in favor of the bland and the sterile.

Basically we can expect the worst trends of modern planning to be magnified, for the cities barely hanging on to any character to lose it, and for the elderly and marginal to lose their homes.

Good work Souter, Breyer, Kennedy, Stevens, and Ginzberg! You have just, again, made the world a little bit of a worse place.

I knew it!

Ghost of Richard Nixon here.

I finally got into this blog without having to go through the little demented mind of the blogduce. Thanks to my team of plumbers, I can now write directly to the blog, and I have to say: it feels great.

At least much better than my little cell down below, where I have to listen to that jackass Roosevelt bleat all the time. He earned his place in Hell, but me, it is an injustice that cries out to Heaven, if Heaven weren't obviously controlled by commie stooges (you know, they tell me that even God's Son is a Jew, which just goes to show you the infiltration these people have. G. Gordon, please see that God gets a thorough IRS audit this go around).

I repeat, I am not a crook. It was a misunderstanding, and I will be vindicated in the end. I will come out of my trials in Hell all the stronger for it. Me and my Checkers.

Oh, that's another thing. Why am I lower than Roy? Do you know what that man did with other men? I bet he used his Jewish connections. I did get a kick out of watching him dance on the hot sand. Funniest damn thing I ever saw in my life, to tell you the truth. The look on his face as he said, "help me, Dick, get me out of here!" Just precious. I was laughing very hard, but then they dragged me down, and you know that SOB, who used to work for me, actually grinned?

Now, don't get me wrong. There are plenty of fellow Quakers here. In fact, most of them. I was just talking to Bill Penn, and he said to me, "Dick. Thou hast made a mistake by bombing Cambodia." Even my own people are infected with the Peace movement!!! It is really easy to see why most of these people are down here, but I was given the bum rap. I shouldn't be here! Certainly not as low as I am.

But you don't want to know about Hell, at least not yet. You came to read (what, one of that nut Keilholtz's recipes?) my take on the latest Supreme Court Decision.

Now, I think I should have been more involved in City government...Hey! Stop that! I will not leave! I am not a crook...

Phew. Say goodbye to Milhous.

Bye, Milhous

[fading] well, you won't have Richard Nixon to kick around anymore....

Too bad, but he is right. Hey, Dick, take a bite out of Roosevelt for me, will ya?

Anyway, Richard took advantage of my own inner Milhous to break down all order on the blog. I was contemplating a run for city politics, so that I could isolate my enemies by seizing their constituencies' property, giving it to friends and allies in the name of "renewal" and building massive blocks of Keilholtz supporters, all under the glowing eyes of the Supreme Court.

It will be perfect, because if the enemies are forced out, and the Court backs it, they can be forced out of areas where they can vote me out. Then, with careful politicking among neighboring cities, we can build a power coalition and can run the cities for our own personal pleasure, with the Supremes smiling on.

Do you know how much a Fascist dreams about stuff like this?

Why, I could run Oakland as a personal fiefdom... My own isle, Don Quixote!

HAH! Now that that pesky Keilholtz is lost in his reveries of power...

I'm Back! Like a bad nightmare.

Anyway, it just dawned on me that I haven't seen Spiro around. I was sure he would be down here, but no. You know Greece is pretty close to Israel. He probably went to confession and sang.

Nothing makes me redder than some weakling who confesses.

So, boy, I wish we had these Justices back in 1972. If they were in, I would still be in power.

But, you'll see. I'll be back.

Deep Throat

I am really the only one qualified to comment on Deep Throat, because I am the only one who really could be Richard Nixon*. Pat and G. Gordon, Chuck and Jeb ** might have worked for him, but they really can only hope to ascend to top stoogedom. People like them serve people like me, and that makes them terribly useless as commentators on situations like the current one.

Deep Throat did the right thing in entirely the right way. You heard it from Richard Nixon***, folks.

You hear the convicted and unconvicted stooges talk about going through proper channels, which is just rhetoric borrowed from the heady days, when the late great Spiro Agnew**** was giving free advice to college students. Work through the system. Play by the rules.

No, if the number two man at FBI had attempted to work through proper channels he would have been dead, and the investigation would have ended there.

Wait, you say, CREEP never killed anyone...

Well, they didn't yet, but didn't I tell you that I have all the potentiality of Richard Nixon. Look at the trajectory we were on. Let's see, it started with criminal burglary and went down from there. This is in the administration of the man who ordered the completely nonstrategic bombing of Cambodia. Murder? Well, you know, if it is in the interest of state security, and anything in the interest of the president is in the interest of state security, and if you don't think so, G. Gordon would like to talk to you late at night, well, then, rules can be bent, broken, ignored, etc. If you still persist in complaining, then you can be bent, broken, ignored, etc.

Deep Throat had no choice but to go the route he did.

Those of us who really, deep down, understand Richard Nixon know what we would have done if he were in our administration and went to a grand jury. Brake lines would be cut, fires would break out, accidents would happen. And I would still be in power today!

Actually I probably go beyond Nixon in that way, as I would never have resigned. Impeachment hearings would have ended with martial law. And I would be ruling from Erikkeilholtzstadt, D.C. to this very day.

*Yes, I fully admit that if I were president, while I might aim for a noble administration like that of Franco, Salazar or Dolfuss, I would most probably find my comfort level around the likes of Nixon, although I would not have bombed Cambodia. Enemies Lists, Plumbers, Saturday Night Massacres, that is the sort of thing that I could easily see myself slipping into. Ah, cruel temptation.

Especially if I were a sociopathic Quaker from Arizona. Just drop thy bombs any old where...

**OK. I kind of like G. Gordon Liddy in a sort of noir fiction way. Sort of like Vic Damone with balls. Pat Buchanan is a third rate turd and a crypto-Nazi, and I don't trust Prottie heresiarchs like Colson and MacGruder. Oh, they are going to lecture us about integrity?!? Give me a break. If I started listening to them I might as well start reading C. S. Lewis and Ian Paisley. Two peas from the same rotten Ulster pod. Only C. S. Lewis should have known better.

***You don't know this, but Richard Nixon met with me secretly in the parking lot of the San Onofre Power Plant and gave me the authority to speak for him, right after he looked at the domes of the reactors and said, with a twinkle in his eye, "you know what those two domes over there remind me of, whenever I drive down I-5?"

****Ah, Spriro. They sure don't make 'em like that any more. I would trade a hundred John McCain's for a single Spiro T. Agnew.

What, you don't like him, you impudent corps of effete liberal snobs, you nattering nabobs of negativism? Feh!

Speaking of To The Point

Since we mention being to the point as well as the particular comment that inspired this great motto, let us explore the point(s).

First, however did modern society, in the name of women's liberation, accept concubinage as an acceptible lifestyle?

Second, and more importantly, is this:

The Schiavo case is an extreme, which helps and hinders the exploration of the issue at hand. Obviously most men are not 'enry VIII or Duke Bluebeard. Most attorneys are not George "the impaler" Felos. Most judges are not... well, that is the third issue, since I am afraid most judges are like the weenies (technical term) that have handled this case at every level.

But, have you ever wondered what the young trophy wife is thinking when she "marries" the old coot who left his wife of thirty years? Does she think that she will have thirty years before she is set aside (and hopefully with a generous alimony settlement)? Does she think that this time will be different?

The first explanation is the depressing one, because it shows a willingness to be used as a concubine (and I don't care what the rental fee is, so naturally I apply this explanation for the floozy who thinks, "gee, the old coot will kick it soon anyway"). The second one is naive and misguided, but at least it takes the view that marriage is really something for life (if only every little circumstance is perfect and no little snag comes up at all. ever. Hah!).

I really cannot imagine what Mr. Schiavo's current fling is thinking, but I don't understand it either in the many cases of Mr. Successfulbusinessman who lets his wife raise his children and then goes and "marries" young Miss Peroxide. Does she think that her looks and novelty will be forever? Does she think that the man has changed? I don't understand how the friends of the family are at all surprised when the kids turn to dope and cults, either (of course I have known perfectly sound families that still had a child turn to dope and cults. Such is the way of original sin).

It seems that in either the extreme or the all too normal situation, the problem lies in viewing human beings as things with uses. Everyone knows that things get discarded when they no are no longer useful.

Humans, on the other hand, are worth more than that.

From the Florida State Song...

Ez a Kékszakállú vára!
Nincsen ablak?
Nincsen erkély?

An Open Memo to Mr. Schiavo's Concubine

So, what happens when Mike is tired of you?

Sleep well at nights?

"Conservatives"

Thanks to the Summamamas, I read this article on how so-called "conservatives" and evangelical (we must assume Protties here) are opposed to government intervention in the state-ordered murder of Terri Schiavo (on a side note, I am insisting on the proper Italian pronunciation of Schiavo: "skee-ah-vo", as Mr. Schiavo has proven that he cannot be trusted in any matters whatsoever, let alone the pronunciation of the Italian language).

I have to say that I am not surprised one iota. These are the people who were opposed to government intervention in the case of slavery, fer cryin' out loud. What do you expect? They holler for "states' rights" when their states don't do their own part in upholding basic human rights, and I have no use for their blather.

The Subsidiarity argument fails here for the same reason: Florida has failed to protect the life of one of its weakest citizens, and has thus abdicated its rights in the matter. The Federal Government must take decisive action, keeping in mind that the courts do not have police powers.

If the Federal government fails, perhaps Fidel Castro has some crack troops to send in.

What. You are laughing? Fidel Castro protecting innocent life in the United States?

Think of Terri Schiavo next time you get all gung-ho on bringing democracy and free markets, I mean, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to some hapless savages in the far flung corners of the world.

Because if Terri Schiavo dies in her starvation bunker, the last vestige of credibilty for our legal system vanishes (not to mention the last vestige of credibilty for Republican pro-life credentials).

UPDATED TO ADD:

Here, go read this story (and take a look at the picture). This lad was arrested for trying to bring a glass of water to Mrs. Schiavo. It seems that Judge Mengele Greer has ordered that Mrs. Schiavo not be offered any food or drink orally, either.

Because, you know how eating and drinking are really extraordinary life support systems...

I am thinking about officially boycotting Florida, but it would be pretty useless. As a loyal Californian I already would rather eat wheat bran than allow the juice of a Commie, East Coast orange to touch my lips.

I just got my annual summons to Jury Service. I normally get sent home immediately after I tell them what I think of our justice system. I bet I set a new record this year.

More on Body Burden Story

One thing that I forgot to mention in the post about ANG's upcoming "Body Burdens" story is that it is a three part series, running on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday.

Also, my concerns about whether or not this story was going to be a propaganda piece for the California Body Burdens Campaign were brought up to the editor, who has assured my inside sources that the piece is going to be balanced, not just a panic piece about "chemicals."

I have not read it yet, but can't wait.

Just today I encountered another bit of "chemical" paranoia. It makes me think of the oldest people in just about any old printshop: the linotype guys. It always struck me as funny that the fellows in the industry who seemed to live the longest were the guys who played with pots of molten lead all day long (and this back in the days when safety concerns were much lower than today).

Watch this become the next fad: lead as longevity enhancement. Perhaps it had something to do with the potato (inside remark. For those of you who never experienced linotype, there was a practice of tossing a chunk of potato into the pots of lead. It was supposed to remove the impurities from the used slugs. I have no idea how it did this, but potatoes were always a part of the typesetting arsenal).

I really do miss the days of hot type. Those machines were magnificent. They were loud and had a bit of the Rube Goldberg look to them. My godfather made a recording of a linotype in operation. Last time I was at his place in Fiddletown, we sat sipping port and listening to it with the intensity that is normally reserved for The Art of the Fugue. Beautiful stuff.

Chemicals

The Oakland Tribune is doing an interesting piece on accumulated chemicals in our bodies. It will run this Sunday (also in the Argus, the Daily Review, the Alameda Times Star, the San Mateo County Times, the Tri-Valley Herald) in the Trib. Basically the author has been following a typical East Bay family and has found some surprises in the chemicals in these people.

There has been quite a buzz about the story and it should be quite interesting. I am pretty confident that the writer has dug deeper than simply repeating what he read in the California Body Burden Campaign's press releases.

You can even go to Inside the Bay Area to take the test (then come back). Of course this version does not really test your blood and all that, but uses statistical means to determine how much stuff you are carrying around in you.

This is an issue that is difficult for the public, because on the one hand it deals with measurable science: yes, indeed, this person or that person has X amount of this or that chemical in his body.

But on the other hand, even words like "chemicals" are fraught with emotional charging.

One thing that drives me absolutely batty is the use of the word "chemicals" as some sort of currency for an immediate reaction. There really are folks who think that all "chemicals" are ghastly acids that ought to be kept in stored vaults or else some hapless child will stumble on them and immediately turn into a Republican or something else.

Going beyond the notion of chemicals as being inherently terrifying, we run up to the notion that somehow synthetic chemicals are the bad ones, because we all know that natural means good, right?

Oh, sorry, I wasn't listening. Sucking on a hemlock stock. What was that?

Ah, yes, natural is good. Synthetic is bad. Fine, just as long as you don't make me ingest any chemicals.

But seriously, scientific illiteracy is rampant in this country. Talk to someone about DDT and they start throwing out vaguely remembered statistics that actually were about lead anyway.

Now, in spite of my general cynicism towards Naderites and their ilk, I am aware of the dangers of certain accumulating compounds. As a painter I have to be very aware of this, because I use a lot of lead, cadmium, and various toxins that make lovely greens and have cyanide, aresenic and copper compounds in them (for those of you wondering, lead paint is still available for artists, just not for house paints), not to mention various solvents, synthetic and natural resins, solders, glues, inks, dyes, and oils. Add to the fact that I use these things around heat and power tools (including such things as using a router on finished wood and the like), and it comes down to a pretty significant exposure.

Artists' materials have been pretty well studied. We know which metals are the dangerous ones, which solvents are neurotoxins in which concentrations, etc. (OK, peanut gallery, I'm waiting). So far I have not had any symptoms, at least any of the short term symptoms, but I tend to be careful. You have to be when you use some of the stuff I use.

When we get into the topic of household chemicals, the jury is out. The way to find out is to measure and observe, but there is a problem. There is a significant malicious bunch of folks out there who have an agenda (and a not very hidden one, really), and they know that all they have to do is throw around some buzzwords and the scientifically illiterates will climb over each other to bring in new regulations and to ban new things (hydrogen hydroxide anyone?).

They take advantage of the fact that people really don't know what dosage means, so they say, "look, seventy percent of all toddlers have measurable amounts of X in their system." We are supposed to panic, to climb over ourselves worrying about the X that is leaching into the water table, even as we speak! Especially if X is something that we have heard of in some negative context (often in the form of a totally different compound, but to the chemically inept, that means little).

Sure, there may be some long term consequences to the accumulation of fire retardant in our bodies (although it could come in useful for many folks later on), and, quite frankly I would not be surprised if we found some pretty nasty connections between some compounds and some diseases. I would also not be surprised if those connections were between naturally occuring compounds and said diseases. Furthermore, I would not be surprised if the connections were revised several times.

Human life is complex. We live in a land that is powered by a gigantic hydrogen-bomb reactor, a world full of stuff that will kill us. We take some of that stuff and make it into other stuff. And then that stuff is mixed with still more stuff and then taken to different environments and so forth and so on. The control part of the experiment gets trickier and trickier to manage. Unfortunately scientists are subject to the same hubris as psychologists, so pronouncements are made that have to later be retracted, revised, or taken out back and shot.

So, while we certainly should be measuring and studying this stuff, the way is fraught with wolves in sheeps' clothing who have already come to the conclusions that they want (second hand smoke, anyone? How about DDT? Oh, you are too busy suffering from malaria to think about this stuff? Hug a liberal. When West Nile Virus reaches epidemic proportions in California's Central Valley this summer, hug a liberal).

Expect more from me on this topic, as I predict that it is going to be the tobacco-battle of the next ten years.

Time for a rousing speech...

Our fight is a crusade in which Europe's fate is at stake. That is why since the beginning Russia has taken her place unconditionally on the side of the Spanish Republic by sending tanks and a thousand war-planes, and by mobilizing the undesirables of all Europe to fight for the Red Army. Our triumph is immense, in spite of the difficulties of the enterprise. No difficulties have prevented the rescue of over three million Spaniards from Red barbarism during the second triumphal year.

I beg your affectionate remembrance of our brothers who are suffering from the effects of lawlessness in the Red zone, and your prayers for the martyrs of our cause. I pay tribute to those who have fallen far from their own countries - the natives, the volunteers, the legionaries who left their home to enrol in the forces of the crusade and to demonstrate in Spain the fullness of their countries' identification with the cause of firmness and friendship professed by them towards Spain.

The Reds assassinated over 70,000 in Madrid, 20,000 in Valencia, 54,000 in Barcelona. Such crimes are the work of the Comintern and its agents Rosenberg, Marti, Negrin, Del Vayo - all servants of Soviet Russia.

Spaniards have a duty to remember that Christian charity is boundless for the deluded and the repentant but they must observe the dictates of prudence and not allow the infiltration of the recalcitrant enemies of Spain. Those proceeding from a politically infested area must undergo quarantine to avoid the contamination of the community.

I denounce the new Red campaigns of those posing as defenders of Spanish independence against foreign invasion. The foreign invasion came through the Catalan frontier, whence entered the undesirables who sacked and destroyed Spanish towns and villages, looted banks, destroyed homes, and stole our patrimony of art.

The Reds who pursued these treacherous tactics in the Nationalist rear, in attempting to destroy our unity, will continue these tactics after the war, when our vigilance and our care for the purity of our creed must increase. The Nationalist movement has ousted the old political intrigues and is guiding the nation to greatness and prosperity.

Spain was great when she had a State Executive with a missionary character. Her ideals decayed when a serious leader was replaced by assemblies of irresponsible men, adopting foreign thought and manners. The nation needs unity to face modem problems, particularly in Spain after the severest trial of her history.

Separatism and class war must be abolished and justice and education must be imposed. The new leaders must be characterized by austerity, morality, and industry.

Spaniards must adopt the military and religious virtues of discipline and austerity. All elements of discord must be removed.

Francisco Franco, statement (18th July, 1938)

Rocco Buttiglione

There are few leaders in recent history who I would have followed without hesitation, by which I mean that if said leader walked into the room and said, "come on, let's go, there is work to do" I would click my heels, salute and follow. Generalissimo Francisco Franco y Bahamonde is one, obviously, as I consider him the greatest statesman of the twentieth century. Antonio Salazar, Engelbert Dolfuss, and Winston Churchill are just about the only other ones (I am probably forgetting someone, though). These are all men who, though I might disagree with a thing here or there, I could trust as leaders not just as politicians.

Most other leaders I would have hesitations and reservations. On the mostly positive side would be Benito Mussolini. If he came in giving orders, my response would be to see what he was up to. In the end I would probably Believe! Obey! Fight! but not without looking to see what was up his sleeve. On the mostly negative side would be someone like Carter or even Bush, who would really have to sell the case to me. So, yes, I do suppose that it means that I would more willingly invade Ethiopia than I would Iraq (it runs in the family, after all. I did have relatives who served in the Abbysinian campaign).

However, until now there has been only one leader who could command a Franquista style obedience from me, only one in the past thirty something years who was a real leader with cojones verdad. Lech Walesa, Vaclav Havel and Juan Carlos all showed promise, but ended up weak, not able to really lead their nations.

But there was one who sparkled as a leader. That was Nelson Mandela. Like Churchill, I do not see eye to eye with him on all matters, but his integrity and leadership abilities are amazing. Let's put it this way, if I were a black South African living under Apartheid, and had to be told that Boers with their Dutch Reform Church were the master race, as soon as I got the upper hand there would be mounds of dead Boers. I think it is that way with almost all of us. We might say, oh no, I would want to rebuild, calm, rational, blah, blah, blah, but the truth is, we would all have an incredible impulse to roast some wild Boer.

But mounds of dead people who used to talk like the Katzenjammer Kids is not what we had in South Africa. Not even prison camps and land seizures (the latter would probably have been pretty calmly accepted by lots and lots of folks outside South Africa, too). No, Nelson Mandela created Truth Commissions just to bring everything out in the open. Given the justifiable rage of the people and the example set by the folks in Zimbabwe and Angola and Mozambique and... Mandela's achievement was remarkable. His ex-wife, the deranged murderess Winnie Mandela, certainly would not have shown such restraint and leadership. She would have created an amazing boom in the world used-tire market, but South Africa would be much worse off for it.

But other than Nelson Mandela there have been very few leaders that really are leaders. However, Rocco Buttiglione has consistantly shown his colors as a leader. Right now the Ghibilines are in charge, with their EU and laughable smoking restrictions, but a Ghibiline triumph always results in a Guelph rising, and Buttiglione is the man for the job.

If Buttiglione walked in the room today and said, "come on, there is work to do, let's go" I would click my heels, salute (Roman, natch), and say, "Yes, Duce!"

Believe! Obey! Fight!