The great conservative movie blog Libertas (now known as the LibertyFilmFestival.com) linked to a LA Times account of the script for Oliver Stone's take on the current president, "W." No one who has seen Stone popularize a wild, conspiratorial narrative for the JFK assassination, or savage Nixon, expects this film to be fair to George W. Bush. And we conservatives should be grateful that he didn't just name the film "Chimpy McBusHitler: The Rise of a Dangerous Moron." Small victory, I guess.

But the script — the script! It sends the unintentional comedy scale off the charts. Behold this excerpt from a scene that Stone imagines happened on the night when George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton:

Int. Houstonian Hotel–Suite–Houston, Texas–November 1992

[George Jr. turns off the TV. Sr. begins weeping. W looks at his father, jarred, never seen him so emotional, so broken.]

Barbara: The best person didn’t win, George. The best man did not win tonight.

Bush Sr.: It hurts. Hurts so bad. My pride … I don’t like to see those who wrote me off be right. But I was wrong and they were right….That hurts more than anything.

Barbara: He is so beneath you. He doesn’t deserve to be President. And wouldn’t be if it wasn’t for the liberal media, the New York Times, blaming you for Reagan’s mess.

[George Jr. puts hand on his father’s shoulder.]

Bush Jr.: Poppy, you were a great President. Great President.

Bush Sr.: Gave it all I could. Thought the war would have carried us. Guess I reached my level, son.

Bush Jr.: Nah. Maybe, if you had just clobbered the [SOB].

Bush Sr.: Huh?

Bush Jr.: Gone all the way. To Baghdad. Cleaned his clock.

Barbara: (sharply to Laura) Did he imbibe in something I don’t know about?

Bush Jr.: Don’t start that. I was talking about decisiveness. Finishing. What I’ve always been told.

Barbara: You’d better stop this. Zip it up, right now, you hear me.

[Jr. backs away, turns.]

Bush Sr.: (sharply to Jr.) I won that war.

Bush Jr.: ‘Course you did, Poppy.

BEDROOM - MOMENTS LATER

Laura: What was that all about?

Bush Jr.: Be damned if I know. Never seen him like this before. It’s strange.

Laura: It’s hard. He knows that this is the end.

Bush Jr.: If Atwater hadn’t died. If he had listened to me and attacked, attacked, attacked! Might have turned out different.

Laura: No. That’s not what this is about. His health, all the medications he’s been taking. He doesn’t have the strength, the fire he had before. He knows.

[Jr. sadly peers at the hunched figure of his father.]

Bush Jr.: Can’t bear to see him like this. Hurts too damn much to lose. [Then, resolute:] I’ll never let this happen to me. Never.

Ha! Is Stone kidding? As if such a scene of the Bush family is remotely possible. As if Barbara Bush would consider the Reagan years a "mess." As if Barbara Bush would hear her son talk and wonder if he had suddenly broken his many years of sobriety. Triggered why? Because "W" was mouthing war-mongering stuff (and doubtless clinging to such thoughts for later so as to avenge his father's "failure" in Iraq). As if "W" had planned to run for president even before his father's first term was over and three years before he became governor of Texas. And, frankly, as if George H.W. Bush — a gentleman, a battle-scarred WWII vet, and the former head of the CIA — would actually weep over losing an election that he spent months acting like he didn't want to win anyway. Oh, and, for the record, George W. Bush is not "junior," since he has a different full name from his father.

But put all that Bush Derangement Syndrome stuff aside. If that stilted dialogue is actually spoken on screen, I might just have to see the movie. It will be the comedy of the year. Josh Brolin as "W"! Richard Dreyfus as Cheney! Scott Glen as Rummy! Elizabeth Banks as Laura!

(Sigh). I have always admired Glen's acting. And Banks has been great in the Judd Apatow comedies. Oh, well. If they want to commit career suicide, that's their choice.

We have been told for years that Bush's reckless adventure in Iraq is hurting the morale of U.S. troops. That's one reason why Democrats feel comfortable talking about "bringing the troops home," and never about victory.

So what, then, do such people make of what occurred today in one of Saddam's old palaces? The photo above captures the largest re-enlistment ceremony in the history of the United States military. Said Gen. Petraeus at the ceremony, while noting that the ceremony sends "a message to friend and foe alike":

"[It is] impossible to calculate the value of what you are giving to our country . . . For no bonus, no matter the size, can adequately compensate you for the contribution each of you makes as a custodian of our nation’s defenses.”

Indeed. We'll see, though, if "friends" of the military get the message and advocate for what the troops want: Victory first, then home. Raise a glass at the barbecue for the latest generation in America's long line of those who fight selflessly for liberty.

(HT: Powerline)

Historian Victor Davis Hanson, as he does often, gives his readers some perspective on this Independence Day at a time when the media and the popular culture is trying to convince us that we are living in uniquely gloomy times.

By almost any barometer, the United States remains the most fortunate country in the world. We continue to be the primary destination of immigrants, who risk their lives to have a chance at what we take for granted. Few in contrast are flocking to China, Russia, or India. The catalyst for immigration is primarily a phenomenon of word of mouth, of comparative talking among friends and families about the reality of modern-day living, not of scholarly perusal of social or economic statistics.

... we need to give thanks this Fourth of July to our ancestors who created our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and suffered miseries beyond our comprehension as they bequeathed to us most of the present wealth, leisure, and freedom we take for granted.

Read the whole thing.

"If the men of '76, who led those small and vulnerable states, were willing to sacrifice their lives, fortunes and sacred honor for America's independence, what is the matter with us?" I don't ordinarily agree with Pat Buchanan, but it's a good question.

1. Never having to lower the damned toilet seat
2. Having the freedom to take a fat, steamy dump in the middle of the produce aisle
3. Peeing in bed nightly; changing the sheets monthly
4. Not caring if your "diarrhea comeback" happens in the middle of Sunday Mass
5. What? You said "being independent"? Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said "being in Depends". Nevermind.

Now go blow some stuff up, you free men of this great Republic!

I'd like to wish all the Monkeys a happy Independence Day -- is that the right greeting? -- and thank you for letting me come play in these parts.

We disagree about a few things around here. But I suspect those disagreements are grounded in a similar love of this country and its founding ideals, as represented in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. We're terribly fortunate to live in a country with such ideals, and it's our responsibility to ensure that the country and the ideals are passed to future generations in relatively decent shape. I like to think our disagreements are, in fact, part of how we do that.

Again: Happy Independence Day!

Dinesh D'souza -- the guy who would have us appease terrorists by hewing closer to their vision of the world -- once again demonstrates his utter wrongheadedness:

Are there any summer movies you’re looking forward to?
No. Maybe Hollywood is past its heyday, but can’t they at least make comedies as good as My Cousin Vinny?

Let's be clear about this: Joe Pesci's comic acting choices have been ... questionable, to say the least. Proof once again that you should never, ever pay attention to Dinesh D'souza.

I believe one can label this as misleading fearmongering:

The White House said Thursday that dangerous detainees at Guantanamo Bay could end up walking Main Street U.S.A. as a result of last month's Supreme Court ruling about detainees' legal rights. Federal appeals courts, however, have indicated they have no intention of letting that happen.

"I'm sure that none of us want Khalid Sheikh Mohammed walking around our neighborhoods," White House press secretary Dana Perino said about al-Qaida's former third in command.

Taken at face value, what Perino is saying is this: "We can't prove that one of the most well-known terrorists in the world is, you know, a terrorist." In other words she's conceding that the Bush Administration is staggeringly incompetent.

Because the court's ruling isn't about letting KSM go free. It's about ensuring that people the United States has chosen to imprison, indefinitely, actually deserve that fate. It's about ensuring that the government actually has a good reason for its actions. Many of the people at Gitmo do deserve their imprisonment. But some may not. The court's ruling is meant only to figure out who belongs in each category. Does our national security really depend on making sure we don't discover that a detainee is potentially innocent? If so, we're in huge trouble.

Then you'll love (or hate) this.

Brilliant. I love how the company is working on "The World of World of Warcraft, World of Warcraft realm."

Of course.

Eventually, I'll have an avitar hitting F9 and F10 and putting in blog codes for me. And, naturally, those "people" will be monkeys.

My friend Paul Bedard, author of U.S. News and World Report's Washington Whispers column, reports that Bob Costas is being floated as a permanent replacement for Tim Russert on NBC's prestigious "Meet The Press" chair.

TV executives, noting his steady and unbiased presentation of sports and news when he fills in for Larry King on CNN, say that he's got just the right temperament and approach for the Sunday newsmaker show.

Maybe so. But if it actually happens, let's hope he doesn't turn into another "used to do sports but now I do real news" moonbat like Keith Olbermann.

I suspect some Monkeys (especially Joel) is not happy about this news.

A federal judge in San Francisco dismissed a lawsuit Wednesday that sought to prove President Bush acted illegally in 2001 when he ordered the wiretapping of phone calls between Americans and suspected foreign terrorists without court approval.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker said an Islamic charity on the government's terrorist list could not use a crucial classified document — an accidentally released memo indicating the charity and its lawyers had been wiretapped — to show that it had been harmed by the surveillance program and thus had the right to challenge it in court.

From what I understand, the judge said the plaintiffs — Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation — were caught in Catch-22. You don't have the documents in your possession to present as evidence, so you have no case. The plaintiffs, it should be noted, is a group that appears to have provided material support to al-Qaida. From the U.S. Treasury website:

Background: The Al-Haramain & Al Masjed Al-Aqsa Charity Foundation (AHAMAA) has significant financial ties to the Bosnia-based NGO Al Furqan, and al Qaida financier Wa’el Hamza Julaidan, who was designated by the Treasury Department on September 6, 2002. Wa’el Hamza Julaidan, a Saudi citizen, is a close associate of Usama bin Laden. Julaidan fought with bin Laden in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Bin Laden himself acknowledged his close ties to Julaidan during a 1999 interview with al-Jazeera TV. As a member of the Board of Directors for AHAMAA, Julaidan opened three bank accounts on behalf of the NGO between 1997 and 2001 and continued to have authorization to handle two of their accounts as a signatory on two the NGO’s Bosnian accounts.

It should also be noted that The New York Times version of the story describes this group as merely "an Oregon charity" in its second graph. Typical.

Anyway, it seems that the terrorist-protecting lawyers have 30 days to re-make their case without the classified docs, which means the case is likely dead. Besides, as Ed Morrissey at Hot Air notes:

This will likely become moot next week. The compromise FISA reform bill includes a mechanism for telecom immunity for those companies who can show that they were assured of the legality of their cooperation.

One intriguing question about this case is whether Obama will vote for the bill — after first saying he wouldn't, then saying he would (which is becoming his typical M.O.) The Lefty Nutroots were already going ballistic at the prospect of an "aye" vote before this decision came down.

My guess: The Messiah won't show up so he can be on both side of this issue for whatever group he's talking to.

Well, for a bunch of complicated reasons I won't bore you with, I've decided to switch from DirecTV back to Cox. The biggest reason is that Cox+Cox+Cox for TV, Internet, and telephone saves me about $50 per month over DirecTV+Cox+Qwest. So, in order to remain safely cradled in TiVo's comfort, I ordered one of the new HD TiVo units about a week ago. I was tempted to save $100 by buying a factory refurbished unit, but I went whole hog and paid for a brand new one. My mistake. "New" appears to mean "not run through QA" in TiVo-land. Way back when I bought my first Series2 TiVo unit, I had the same experience: The new unit arrived, I hooked it up, and something that could have been caught back at the factory became immediately evident at startup. In this case, the unit just reboots. Over, and over, and over again. After 2-3 hours of troubleshooting myself, I called TiVo technical support, waited 30 minutes to talk to a human, and then performed pretty much the same tests with the technician. In the end, they agreed to send me another unit, which at this point probably won't arrive until AFTER Cox has been here to install the lines and CableCards.

Is it so much to ask, dear TiVo, for you to test the units before they go out the door?

Bad news for Monkey Ben. He owns a home in that blazing hell called Southern California's "Inland Empire." And according to LA Times real estate blogger Peter Viles, the whole region is turning into a big ghost town.

Over the last 12 months, median home prices have dropped 33.6 percent in Corona and 30.3 percent in Ontario. In Corona, where I was considering buying a house in 2006, the median sales prices fell $200,000 from May 2007 to May 2008. I really dodged a bullet there.

The market is so bad in the IE that one apparently can't even hire decent home-selling help these days.

"The homes all appeared to be empty, and there were no prospective buyers anywhere to be found. Surprisingly, the sales office was open ... but the woman working there had questionable English fluency. When asked how many homes had been sold in the past month she simply responded, 'Uh huh. Thank you. Yes!' and handed us some additional literature on the property."

Ugh. Last one out be sure to turn out the light.

My response to Monkey Rothbard's post on Christopher Hitchens pulling his waterboarding stunt for a Vanity Fair article was so long, I thought I'd just put it up as its own post. Here goes:

Rothbard was remiss not to include a photo of the spectacle:

On this subject, Joel asks:

After the short experience, [Hitchens] asks the question we should always be asking about torture: "What if they got the wrong guy?"

Ummm. He apparently lives. And gets his shirt as ruffled and wet as Ben after a walk to his car after work.

Our guys, as the article makes clear in the summary/subhead, undergo waterboarding as part of their training. If a stuffy journalist pulling a stunt can do it, I'd say it's not really torture. Not by historical standards, anyway. (C'mon, Hitch. You admit that you were in the wilds of North Carolina "preparing to be surprised by a team of extremely hardened veterans." Preparing certainly eliminates the element of surprise, eh Hitch? Who you foolin'? You tool.)

Hitch was also haunted by this clause in the contract he signed before his stunt:

“Water boarding” is a potentially dangerous activity in which the participant can receive serious and permanent (physical, emotional and psychological) injuries and even death, including injuries and death due to the respiratory and neurological systems of the body.

Yeah. And if I take any one of three dozen medications advertised on TV, I might also die of respiratory and neurological failure. Or I'll have a erection for a dangerously lengthy (heh) amount of time. Or I'll become sterile. Or I'll get rickets. Or, with some antidepressants, I might have suicidal thoughts (which is the definition of a failed antidepressant drug). Take that quivering passage by Hitch with a huge lump of salt.

I'm not saying that waterboarding is not unpleasant. But if waterboarding is the worst sort of "barbarism" our guys will meet at the hands of terrorists, they'd consider themselves quite fortunate. The methods of our enemy usually involve rusty scimitars, exposed necks and a video camera.

Oh, and Hitch is wrong about this:

But it was something that Americans were being trained to resist, not to inflict.

That is obviously not true. We do inflict it, on very select, high-priority captives for very specific purposes — to break them of their resistance training for the purpose of gaining valuable intelligence to save innocent American lives and protect this country. Sorry, not losing sleep over this one. Campy stunt, though.

John Kubicek has a quick post about where ANWR drilling won't be taking place if Congress gets off its duff and does something about high gas prices ($4.69 at the station around the corner from my house in Pasadena).

This is what John McCain, Barack Obama and other global warmists envision when they think about where we might drill.

This is where it would actually be drilled.

Oh, yeah. And only in the winter when there are several feet of ice on top of it. When the thaw comes, the workers and the equipment is shipped back out until next winter, and the only thing left to mark man's presence is a tiny building keeping the hole covered.

Nope. Definitely not worth it.

"Mausoleums, statues, monuments will never be erected to me.... Panegyrical romances will never be written, nor flattering orations spoken, to transmit me to posterity in brilliant colors." --John Adams to Benjamin Rush, March 23, 1809

John Adams, at last, is getting his due. Today, July 2, happens to be the day Adams thought Americans would remember as our day of independence from Britain. Well, Adams was right about a lot, but wrong about this. Nevertheless, I'm all for marking the occasion as Adams's Independence Day -- and not a day to "celebrate" America's mistakes. (Perhaps more on that tomorrow).

As should be the custom every year this day, we celebrate "the most memorable epocha in the history of America." Here is the text of John Adams' letter to his beloved Abigail on the occasion of the resolution to draft the Declaration of Independence. It's one of my favorite Founding writings, and one of the more moving moments from the Adams miniseries. The letter he wrote the evening of July 3 should be read and re-read by every American.

Philadelphia July 3d. 1776

Had a declaration of independence been made seven months ago, it would have been attended with many great and glorious effects. We might, before this hour, have formed alliance with foreign states. We should have mastered Quebec, and been in possession of Canada.

You will, perhaps, wonder how such a declaration would have influenced our affairs in Canada; but, if I could write with freedom, I could easily convince you that it would, and explain to you the manner how. Many gentlemen in high stations, and of great influence, have been duped, by the ministerial bubble of commissioners, to treat; and, in real, sincere expectation of this event, which they so fondly wished, they have been slow and languid in promoting measures for the reduction of that province. Others there are in the colonies, who really wished that our enterprise in Canada would be defeated; that the colonies might be brought into danger and distress between two fires, and be thus induced to submit. Others really wished to defeat the expedition to Canada, lest the conquest of it should elevate the minds of the people to much to hearken to those terms of reconciliation which they believed would be offered to us. These jarring views, wishes, and designs, occasioned an opposition to many salutary measures which were proposed for the support of that expedition, and caused obstructions embarrassments, and studied delays, which have finally lost us the province.

All causes, however, in conjunction, would not have disappointed us, if it had not been for a misfortune which could not have been foreseen, and perhaps could not have been prevented – I mean the prevalence of the smallpox among our troops. This fatal pestilence completed our destruction. It is a frown of Providence upon us, which we ought to lay to heart.

But, on the other hand, the delay of this declaration to this time has many great advantages attending it. The hopes of reconciliation which were fondly entertained by multitudes of honest an well meaning, though short-sighted and mistaken people, have been gradually, and at last totally, extinguished. Time has been given for the whole people maturely to consider the great question of independence, and to ripen their judgment, dissipate their fears, and allure their hopes, by discussing it in newspapers and pamphlets – by debating it in assemblies, conventions, committees of safety and inspection – in town and country meetings, as well as in private conversations; so that the whole people, in every colony, have now adopted it as their own act. This will cement the union, and avoid those heats, and perhaps convulsions, which might have been occasioned by such a declaration six months ago.

But the day is past. The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epocha in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations, as the great Anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp, shews, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations, from one end of the continent to the other, from this time forward forever.

You will think me transported with enthusiasm; but I am not. I am well aware of the toil, and blood, and treasure, that it will cost us to maintain this declaration, and support and defend these states. Yet, through all the gloom, I can see the rays of light and glory; I can see that the end is more than worth all the means, and that posterity will triumph, although you and I may rue, which I hope we shall not.

...has migrated to the new site.