Big Lizards:Blog:Entry “Weasely Winners”

« Shock and Awe: a NYT Iraq Article That Gets It Right! | Main | The "Surge" - Which Hasn't Actually Started Yet - Is Petering Out! »

May 11, 2007

Weasely Winners

Hatched by Dafydd

The Council hath hisseth, and here ith the hith...

For the emirs of the Council of the Watcher of Weasel

Does America Elect Defeatists?, by Big Lizards.

If you're bothering to read these words, then you likely already know what the post linked above was about!

Barred from voting for myself (as are we all), I cast my ballot for the ticket of:

"The Greatest Scientific Scandal of Out Time", by Cheat Seeking Missiles;

I Know What You're Against, But What Are You For?, by Bookworm Room.

The first (which came in second -- I Don't Know's on third) describes a fascinating paper by an eminent scientist rejecting the fundamental premise of politically driven anthropogenic global-warming theory... or "globaloney," as we call it here.

The second amply demolishes the atheist argument that there is nothing more destructive than religion... Bookworm suggests the anti-religious state as one counterexample.

For effendi not privileged to sit in judgment of their fellows

"Better a Thousand Israeli Invasions...", by Michael Totten.

I liked this piece (about the Olmert government of Israel's wretched mishandling of the recent war against Hezbollah in Lebanon); but I voted for a different pair of nominees:

The Gatekeepers' Gambit, by Protein Wisdom;

It Takes Two Sides to End a War, by Winds of Change.

"The Gatekeepers' Gambit" takes off from "a Rasmussen poll 'finding that 61% of self-identifying Democrats either believe George Bush knew of the 9/11 attacks in advance or are not sure if he did or not'" and lands squarely on the conclusion that the elite media did not heap scorn and ridicule upon this poll result because they don't see anything particularly odd about the claim that the president of the United States was complicit in the greatest attack on American soil in our history.

"It Takes Two Sides to End a War" is short and punchy, drawing this final conclusion:

The Democrats' plan to "end the war" is really a plan to prolong it, increase its violence and bloodshed and raise the probability that the war will be brought to our shores in ways and lethality we cannot yet foresee.