The Good, the Not-So-Good, and the Really, Really Ugly

Far be it from me to hush my mouth concerning just about anything. So, I'll mention the fact I hardly watch TV anymore, especially the news. Dan Rather's a twitchy mental case, and Peter Jennings used to wear an earring. What did he think he was, a pirate? I don't need to absorb such things into my brain. I'd rather watch South Park, a much more effective news source. The last time I watched the news was 9-11. I don't waste my money on newspapers, either. I can get my Dilbert off of the Internet.

Instead, I get just about everything from the Web. Since there are close to four-and-one-half-billion Web pages, I've had to narrow the choices available. I've got it down to about ten sites, which I refer to as the Good, the Not-So-Good, and the Really, Really Ugly.

The Good sites are the ones that are almost always right, say about 99% of the time. These are, overwhelmingly and not surprisingly, the libertarian/conservative ones. These are the truly patriotic sites, the heroic ones that want to save America from the hubris of its neocon, neo-Jacobin enemies. The Not-So-Good sites are ones that have potential, but need work. The Really, Really Ugly sites are the ones that worship Satan. I have this image of the people running them falling on their knees and waving their arms up and down, like Wayne and Garth did toward Alice Cooper, saying, "We're not worthy! We're not worthy!" They're trying as best they can to emulate their Master, though.

In alphabetical order (so that no one can accuse me of playing favorites), the good sites are:

The American Conservative. While I don't agree with Pat Buchanan's protectionism, he's exactly right on the destructiveness of the American Empire to itself and the world. The magazine features one of my favorite writers on the Internet, the always funny Fred Reed, runs the always interesting, if aristocratic and tipsy, Taki, and has some of the best movie reviews around, by Steve Sailer. It is a true conservative magazine (meaning it's not Politically Correct at all), unlike pious frauds like National Review, which has become a shambling zombie of its former self.

Antiwar.com is the best site on the Internet for antiwar material. Basically run by two men, Justin Raimondo and Eric Garris, it also features regular columns by Alan Bock, Nebojsa Malic, Matthew Barganier, and Joseph Stromberg. It was this site that pretty much introduced me to the machinations of – ugh – the villains Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, two of the main incompetent architects/war criminals of the clumsy and counter-productive wars the US is now involved in. If I had my way, I'd give each a last cigarette and then slap the horses' rumps.

Free-Market.net describes itself as a newsletter. It takes what it considers the best of many other sites – from all over the world – and runs their articles. One fan said of it, "Freedom News cuts through the clutter...It's become an indispensable part of my daily routine." I'd have to agree.

LewRockwell.com. Bah, who needs college? I went to college. I graduated college. I prefer this site, which, if you read it for a year, is equal to a MS in Political Science. Running Monday through Saturday, it gives you Sunday off so you can sleep all day and start all over. The War Street Journal – I mean Wall Street Journal – referred to its writers as "denizens." I'm more proud of that than William Bennett trashing it. That was before he got his pudgy hand caught in a slot machine, hee hee.

The Price of Liberty is a fairly new site run by Susan Calloway, who was for years "Mama Sierra" over at the Sierra Times. Now this is a site after my own heart; the first paragraph of their mission statement reads, "The price of liberty is far more than simple vigilance. The price includes the integrity to accept complete personal responsibility for our lives, safety, property and welfare. The price that so many find hardest to pay, however, is the integrity to leave everyone else alone to do the same." That last sentence reminds me of the fact early American coins had "Mind your business" on them. We need those coins in circulation today.

Strike the Root is a thorough-going anarcho-capitalist site which takes it name from the comment by Henry David Thoreau: "There are a thousand people hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." And the root of that evil? Why, the ever-growing Blob known as "the government." Strike the Root merrily hacks away at the Blob seven days a week.

Now we move to the Not-So-Good sites, ones that have a lot of potential but need a lot of work. It cheers me to write there is only one major site in this category – WorldNetDaily.

Originally WorldnetDaily started its life as a very interesting and very funny libertarian/conservative site. Then came 9-11, and they went nuts and became warmongers. Recently, though, the place has started to realize its mistake and come out against the staggering incompetence of the intellectually challenged George Bush.

Big pluses for WorldnetDaily: they run Vox Day, Gordon Prather, Paul Sperry, and Col. David Hackworth.

Big, big, big minuses – Jerry "the False Prophet" Falwell, who writes articles about how "God is Pro-war." Sure, Jerry. It's ain't God talking to you; it's the Other Guy. And if Jesus does return, you're in big trouble, along with the rest of the crackpot Armageddonites who want Him to come back and rub out a lot of the world.

The talentless David Limbaugh, who as everyone knows, would be reduced to writing letters to the editor except for the fact he is riding on the coattails off his drug-addled, chickenhawk brother.

Ben Sharpiro, a little chickenhawk sofa samurai who appears to live in his parents' basement. There's a big, wide world out there, son, so quit practicing by kissing the inside of your forearm and find a real girl. This doofus isn't paid for what he writes, is he?

Now we move to the sites that now dwell in the Nether Regions.

Even though I don't think anyone takes it seriously anymore, I'll still include National Review. What a pitiful slide to irrelevance, straight from the Right to the Left (although I'm sure it still thinks it's Right). I used to have a subscription to this magazine, which ran articles by greats like Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn and Russell Kirk. Now, they run Jonah Goldberg, David Frum and Rich Lowry, all of whom appear not only ill-educated, but uneducated.

Has William F. Buckley gone senile? It appears so, considering all those awful novels he's written. The man should be ashamed of himself about how he's allowed his magazine to slide into almost complete incompetence. Does he not understand the irony of his magazine becoming that which he once despised? Is he now as blind as Mr. Magoo?

It is true The Weekly Standard is run weekly. As for being a "standard," that's misleading. People think a "standard" is for something good, a quality sadly lacking in this war-mongering, chickenhawk magazine. The place is so miserable it can't survive on subscriptions; it's supported by Rupert Murdoch, who in his early years of newspaper ownership made his money by running soft-core porn in his publications. Considering the quality of The Weekly Standard, he hasn't changed.

The editor of The Weekly Standard is one William Kristol, who, every time I see his picture, I can't help but imagine the mutated little mouse, Brain, superimposed over him. Both Kristol and Brain seem to be animated by the same philosophy: "What are we going to do tomorrow, Brain?" "The same thing we do every day, Pinky . . .try and conquer the world." Brain always conks his head, as does Kristol.

Now for the lowest of the low – the Fascists-R-Us site known as Free Republic. The site is a perfect example of Pareto's Law: 20% of the people have the brains and the other 80% are idgits who couldn't find their butts with both hands and someone directing them with a pointer.

The 80% idgits believe Americans torturing Iraqis is okay because it wasn't as bad as what Saddam Hussein did. They also think Hussein mulched hundreds of thousands of people in shredders, and that he was behind 9-11 and the Oklahoma bombings.

As for Iraqis fighting back, the typical Freeper thinks we should level any town that opposes us, including using nuclear weapons. Of course – need I say it? – none of the posters at the site have any intention of making their way to the front lines. Isn't that the perfect definition of a chickenhawk? "You play; I'll stay on the sidelines and tell you were to throw the ball"?

I used to wonder about the psychology of someone who became a Nazi, or a Communist, or a Fascist. Now I understand. Read Free Republic, and you will, too.

All of the people at the Really, Really Ugly sites have two things in common: they are chickenhawks, and they don't understand what "hubris" means. Concerning the first, they remind me of Sam Spade's comment to the gunsel Wilmer in The Maltese Falcon: "The cheaper the punk, the gaudier the patter." Concerning the second, it's obvious they have no understanding of the Bible or the Greeks, the two main influences on Western civilization.

They also remind me of the line from Yeats' poem, "The Second Coming" about the worst being full of "passionate intensity." I know all of them believe they are marching toward Bethlehem; in reality they are slouching towards Alley Oop.

There is an old saying (Chinese, I suppose, as all these sayings seem to be): "The least warlike are the best warriors." The opposite side of that coin is: "The most warlike are the worst warriors." In other words, all mouth, no cojones. Chickenhawks.

I know I missed a lot of good sites. I wish I could read them all, but if I did, I wouldn't have any time to work. Who knows? Maybe someday I'll win the lottery. Even if I don't, I still have the consolation of reading sites that know the difference between right and wrong . . . unlike some.