Sometimes I wonder, when an evengelical lobbyist indignantly utters some inane and patently ludicrous charge against someone or other on television, or when a Catholic racketeer babbles on about some self-concocted injustice or imagined societal scapegoat, all famed within a moon-faced demeanour just lucid with a squalid, undeserved sense of accomplishment, I wonder, are they really to blame? Is it their fault? Are the slobbering goons on the Christian right physically capable of higher cerebral contemplation? Do they posess the cranial capacities for non-conformist thought or probing exercises in intellectual-delving, free inquiry, objectivist comparative analysis?

I seriously ponder, as they blathering charlatans and profiteers sputter about on their bully pulpits to their compliantly unthinking masses ripe with credulity, as they indiscriminately pontificate undiluted lies about people and idealogies of which they know nothing about, is it all rooted within a physical impediment? Is it a case of mental impairment that causes these dogmatic fools to say, be completely ungrasping on the abstract literary concept of irony?

This appears to be the only logical solution to the astronomically preposterous reactions the film adaptation of Phillip Pullman’s timeless overture to the His Dark Materials trilogy, The Golden Compass, has elicited from the usual suspects of the Bible Belt Brigade. The unscrupulous and ridiculous spectacle of a human being that is Catholic League president Bill Donohue has organized a boycott of the film, claiming that it seeks to undermine religious values and is essentially a heretical instrument of evil. This is to be expected, but whats more interesting is the reaction from United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, which suggested that, in lieu of a preferred boycott, good, intellectually nurturing Catholic parents can “talk through any thorny philosophical issues”.

Now, these preachments simply beg the question: are these regressivist Catholic scam artists mentally incapable of ironic perception, or are they fully aware of the implications of their words, and are actually intending to emulate the fascistic, demagogic theocratic magnate the Magisterium whom seeks to abolish every last spark of inquisatorial thought or scholastic independence that threatens to break their hegemonic stranglehold on the minds of their beleagured and brainwashed populous, which is all depicted in the fantasy canon they are shamelessly attempting to censor?

The former is perfectly comedic, the optimal recipe for a delicious realpolitik farce, the latter truly insidious and horrifyingly sinister, yet requiring a degree of intellectual aptitude that these hate-mongering propagandists are obviously not equipped with, although it would appear that the revolting Ann Coulter is actually attempting to mirror the life of the series fictional villain of the same name, Marisa Coulter. If this demented aspiration is intentional, she’s succeeding in this regard, and I certainly wouldn’t see such an sociopathic stunt past the deranged Christianist broad.

I’ve seen the film, and its quite a marvelous piece of work. The CGI effects are just pristinely gorgeous and exumed artistic mastery, the all-star cast acted with commendable virtuosity, and the performance of the young newcomer Dakota Blue Richards in the protagonist role was especially impressive. As the antithesic inverse corollary to C.S. Lewis’ distinctly Christian Narnia series, its rather fitting that this film was quantum leaps and bounds ahead of The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe film in every aspect. I’d even go as far as to say its in many ways on par, if not superior to The Fellowship of the Ring, and that is quite a magnificent feat to accomplish.

The film contained no overt mention of religious organizations or dogmatisms, contrary to the books from which it is based, wherein the secularist argument is explicit and unconcealed in its message and sharpness. Some groups uncompromisingly faithful to the original works have criticised the film rendition for its dilution of the declaratively pronounced anti-religiosity agenda, and I can understand these charges.

However, considering that New Line was running on a hefty $180 million budget, and the film was to be fashioned in such a way that it could be appreciated by children and the populous at large as a financial blockbuster, it can be forgiven that some of its more fierce literary components were toned down. But its a wholly fatuous proposition to suggest that the film relenquished the anti-religious tradition of its namesake; it just pursued it in a more incipient, subtle, philosophical way, juxtaposing the ideals of free choice and free thought with unquestioning obedience and suspension of disbelief, all cerebral vibrations which, while not overtly framed in the language of secularism, undoubtably gravitate children towards the ideals of reason and inquiry versus totallitarian mysticism. Director Chris Weitz also stressed his ambition that the film will inspire children to go read the books, another thing the Bible-bashing baboon spear-chuckers should be concerned about, and something the secularist corps should be positively ecstatic about. While I know some on our side are frustrated over some of the cuts, in the long run the release and success of this film is a great victory for the good cause.

Well, The Golden Compass was #1 at the box-office opening weekend, making it one of the most successful advertisements for an unapologetic anti-theocratic manifesto in recent memory, to the furious decries of the religious right. But thats such an over-used term, “religious right”, perhaps we can be more creative?

In the His Dark Materials canon, we actually exist in an infinite multi-verse, spanning an endless ocean of paralell universes. So ostensibly, the same entities exist throughout the worlds, with variations, but ultimately based off the same principle templates. So that being said, let it be hereby resolved and pronounced throughout the lands….

DOWN WITH THE MAGISTERIUM!

There are so many things just perfectly ironically funny on so many levels in regards to the left’s reaction to the latest National Intelligence Estimate briefing on the Iranian nuclear armaments program. But before we can ravenously divulge into the humor, a little primer on exactly what this NIE release capitulates is in order.

First and foremost it must be sternly recognized and established that the NIE’s findings are not pretexually grounded in empirical research, statistical evidence, or any other comparative logistical data. They’re opinions, and from what has been suggested by some analysts some of these opinions are maintained by people who harbor a specific, anti-hawk agenda. So while their pontifications are to be respected and contemplated, they’re not factual declarative pronouncements backed by the substantial staying power necessary to “end the debate”. If you haven’t already reached for the salt-shaker, do so now.

Moreover, even if we are to take their findings as full-proof and infallible, which they very well may or may not be, it tells us nothing. Basically the report claims that Iran suspended their atomic weaponry production frameworks in 2003. Thats about it, and as soon as someone hears this formulation, several essential inquiries should be immediately posed in response:

2003 marked the onset of the Iraq war, and the US was at the height of its “aggressive credibility”. Libya had just terminated their WMD program and the rest of the world knew America was a force to be reckoned with that could not be questioned, wouldn’t it make sense for Iran to put into stasis their already clear, irrefutable, and manifested atomic ambitions?

How does this in any way prove that in the half-decade since the purpoted “nuclear hiatus” and in the midst of a political climate far less favorable towards American global outlook and credibility that a messianic psychopath tyrant like Ahmadinejad hadn’t cunningly re-initiated the program, cunningly anticipating a report of this brand to emerge, consequently generating an aura of innocence around his apocalyptic machinations? Wouldn’t that be far more likely to any logical observer?

So already its quite evident that the NIE’s conclusions contain some serious logical fallacies at best, and are outright sloppy, geopolitically foolish and politically severely disadvantageous. But in a sense, it can be granted reprieve, they’re doing their jobs and reporting an event that may very well have transpired, however ultimately irrelevant or clumsy a foreign policy gesture it was to disclose it.

But what cannot be forgiven is the ludicrously truculent and hysterical reaction the report has incited from the left, whom have used the briefing as fodder for their long-held slobbering conspiracy theories and accusations of treasonous war-mongering they’ve charged against the neoconservative ranks for years. They cite the NIE’s report as definitive proof that the Bush administration was fabricating its evidence of a belligerent Iranian nuclear program, but this line of argument in itself functions as a staggering false antithesis. When Bush followed the universal consensus of global central intelligence agencies that Saddam posessed stockpiles of biological and nuclear weaponry, the left decried him as a liar. Now that he’s skeptical of far more dubious and fallible intelligence in regards to an Iranian nuclear program, he’s still a liar. This is contradictory stupidity that even a liberal could perceive after 3 seconds of thought, but maybe thats asking too much.

Furthermore, the whole basis of the anti-interventionalist liberal argument on the information provided by the NIE report serves as a huge non-sequitor genetic fallacy. As stated earlier, it doesn’t matter if Iran allegedly suspended their nuclear program half a decade ago. The non-rebukable fact of the matter is that they had a nuclear program, and have likely re-activated it as a response to evolutionary atmospheric political trends; the world is in a constant state of change and motion, and so is information. The fact that liberals can cling on to a single shred of evidence pertaining to the global climate 5 years ago and use it to proactively engage in serious debate on contemporary issues is just absurd and asinine, but again liberals generally aren’t sophisticated enough for multi-leveled, complex analytical thinking.

I’m not an Iran war hawk, it is my solid and impassioned conviction that the country posesses an extremely educated, secularized and youthful population that can be tapped into to ferment a serious insurrection and establish a pro-American democracy in its wake without the need for an invasion. However, anyone who believes that the Islamic Republic is not a serious threat is a delusional imbecile, and even more so if they actually believe that the threat posed can be casually truncated by a little bureacratic regurgitation. The left has to step out of its little fantasy bubble wherein Bush-Cheney is tantamount to the antichrist and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a beleagured renegade hero, this is foolishness that any actual Iranian could tell you, as well as anyone with an IQ over 60.

But then again, maybe that high of an intelligence quotient is a bit too high to expect from a liberal.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again. No matter who wins some circus-blitz CNN experimental “Youtube kiddie debate” hosted by a braindead sensationalist “political hipster” bufoon loser like Anderson Cooper, or who gets the elusive “Dick Morris vote”, or who’s nominated by the “moral moron majority” the final verdict is absolutely clear. Rudolph William Louis Giuliani is the only candidate in the running with the economic, domestic, and most imporantly foreign policy directive to lead this country forward and withstand oblivion.

This is a man with a virtually flawless record, whom pulled New York City out of the Gotham-esque mires of rampant violence and socialistic economic squalor, as well as disastrous turmoil on 9/11. He’s a more than formidable intellect and established politician with a titanium-solid record that makes his competitor’s rap-sheets pale and crumble in comparison.

So obviously you have to go after his family life. When you can’t beat em’ on policies, you beat em’ on marriage records, thats politics. Oh, and he’s not a Christianist Falwell-whore either. And up go the angry “grassroot Republican” placards.

Well, some of us are frankly too smart for this bile. I don’t consider myself a Republican, I don’t even consider myself a conservative. I’m a philosophical neolibertarian and a registered independent, and from this vantage point I can clearly determine Mr. Giuliani’s superiority to the cast of clowns both to the left and right of him. There really is no one else worth voting for at all on either side, and I hereby proclaim if Giuliani does not emerge as the Republican nominee, I will abdicate from the 2008 electoral process altogether. While the prospects of another Clinton in the White House is quite a bleak one, I couldn’t bring myself to vote for someone like Mitt Romney on the other side.

So the weeks are counting down now, Rudy, I’m rooting for you. Make us proud, give these amateurs posers hell at the primary.

And when you surely end up in melee against Hillary…

No fucking mercy.