Today on Blogcritics
Home » Reddest Letter Day

Reddest Letter Day

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I’m still kind of groggy and disoriented myself, but this is the reddest of red letter days, and one I will never forget. My wife and new son, Alexander Kirk Olsen, came home from the hospital – both are sleepy but very fit and healthy – AND the US forces captured the rodential former Supreme Baby Raper of Iraq as he cowered in his pit in the dirt.

We were disappointed yesterday that we couldn’t take Dawn and Alex home but very excited about getting them this morning, so none of us had turned on the TV or looked at the paper when Dawn called this morning:

“Have you heard the news?”

“There’s good rocking tonight? Alex took his first step?”

“No, smartass, they captured Saddam – now come and get us!”

“Wow – that’s great, on both counts.”

The shots of the bearded, wild-haired Saddam getting inspected for vermin – a beautiful metaphor – looking like the Unabomber on a bad-hair day, was so sweet I could taste it. Here’s your supreme leader, Baathist fuckplugs.

He didn’t take down the West, he didn’t repel the Great Satan invaders, he didn’t rise to rule again, he scurried from hole to hole nibbling hard cheese and shitting in the corner for nine months before being snagged, tagged and inspected. Nice blaze of glory, oh great scourge, you whimpering, despicable coward.

This closes the door on the former regime once and for all – it won’t come back, can’t come back, the new Iraq is now inevitable. This is a great day in my life, and a day to savor for every American, Iraqi, and lover of freedom the world over. We are one step closer to peace on earth – cynics, give it a rest today.

Powered by

About Eric Olsen

  • http://www.filteringcraig.com Craig Lyndall

    Being happy with today’s developments does not in any way obligate you to liking and/or supporting the president. Honestly, how can this not be a good thing given the circumstances in Iraq right now?

  • Eric Olsen

    The only way it’s not good is if you care more about hating America than you do about the future of Iraq, the War on Terror, and the security of our troops. Yes, there may be a death spasm of the old regime, venting their impotent, anti-human rage, but this makes it much more likely that Iraq will be pacified sooner rather than later, to the benefit of us all.

  • http://www.tekwh0re.net Ms. Tek

    Why give it a ‘rest’ today? Some one still has to be the voice of reason. Keeping in mind that Saddam isn’t what started this, and isn’t what is going to finish this is called being vigilant.

    And I am not Anti-American. Not by a loooooong shot.

  • Eric Olsen

    Vic, I guess you identify yourelf as a cynic on this. If by “this” you mean the War on Terror, then no Saddam didn’t start this round of it with 9/11, and of course we want and need to find bin Laden or evidence of his demise, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take our opportunities for gratification when we get them.

    Our forces have been looking for this stain for nine months, and now they have finally found him. Since we are in Iraq, this can only be a good thing.

    There is time tomorrow to worry about what comes next – sometimes it is nice to savor today.

  • http://www.iamrighturpie.blogspot.com/ jadester

    regardless of my views on the war in iraq and the dubiousness of links between saddam and al q’aeda, the capture of saddam is A Good Thing.
    Anti-war protesters who think otherwise are most likely anti-war for entirely the wrong reason/s

  • HW Saxton Jr.

    I am as happy as any other American can
    be regarding the capture of this walking
    waste of sperm & egg.I’m happy for the
    people of Iraq,the US military involved
    in the conflict(this has got to be one of the best morale boosters they could
    have possibly received),the fact that he was found cowering in a hole in the
    dirt(they should’ve capped him and just
    filled it in)and did not go down in a
    hail of bullets as a martyr but rather
    as the pathetic,wimpering dog he really is.I am especially happy that with this
    cretin out of the way,we can begin to
    focus on policy rather than personality
    in regards to the future of the region.
    No longer can the USA use his capture
    or I should say lack of,as an excuse
    (in part anyways) for all the continuing
    instabilities regarding the future of
    Iraq.With him out of the way I think
    that we are now,maybe more than ever,at
    a point where we really have to put our
    money where our mouth is. What’s next???

  • http://fando.blogs.com Natalie Davis

    Give it a rest? Why? And this isn’t about cynicism, Eric — it is about speaking truth. Sorry if the expression of alternate views is inconvenient to you. With all due respect, much of what most of you say is repugnant to me each and every day, and you folks don’t “give it a rest.” Why should I?

    So, whatever. They got Saddam. When do they get that other terrorist, the one squatting in the White House? It would be sooooo cool to see both of them, along with Osama and Rummy and all, facing justice in front of an international war-crimes tribunal. Hell, bring Henry Kissinger in too. Man, that would be sweet.

  • Eric Olsen

    I cannot, nor do I wish to be, such a relativist. All people may be worth the same in the eyes of God, but in the eyes of man there are better and worse – Saddam is worse, among the worst, and his capture is good for all of mankind. Such things should be appreciated as they are rare. It is morally obtuse to compare Saddam and Bush, no matter how much you may disapprove of his presidency.

  • http://fando.blogs.com Natalie Davis

    You and I will have to disagree on that one. Saddam caused deaths. Bush caused deaths. For that matter, Clinton caused deaths. Put him on trial too.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Natalie, you and Ms. Pitt certainly exhibit great blind hysterical and irrational hatred for President Bush, and no sympathy at all for the suffering of all the people that Hussein has killed and tortured over many long years, or their families living in fear.

    You can’t stand to be happy for them for even one day. I would have hoped that a descendent of slaves or a member of as many Officially Oppressed Groups as you would have some compassion, some rapport with the feelings of relief in the streets of Baghdad. You are filled with great outrage over the least hint of an American expressing personal disapproval of homosexuality- yet you display not the least bit of concern for real victims, such as survivors of the Hussein’s rape rooms.

    You don’t even begin to have just cause for the seething resentment that you mask as some kind of fake moral outrage against the president. Even if you don’t like the way he’s going about it, President Bush is obviously TRYING VERY HARD to protect the country from people actually trying to kill us all- including your ungrateful ass.

    I don’t particularly just love President Bush. I got beef. I didn’t vote for him, nor do I plan to again- but he’s not Satan.

    It is utterly willful dishonesty to equate George Bush, fighter of terrorism and liberator of millions with Saddam Hussein- murderer of a million to two million people. It takes a special choice of rational and moral blindness to equate Bush and Hussein as you wish to insist on.

    American forces have unavoidably hurt a relative handful of people in the process of trying to protect America from further unprovoked attacks and working to liberate 50 million Afghans and Iraqis from the yolk of tyranny. Saddam just flat out has murdered a million or more people and visited unspeakable tortures on many others simply in order to hold power- and often times apparently just because he could.

    Apparently you would rather have the people of Iraq suffer under the murderous regime of Hussein rather than see President Bush get the least ounce of credit for accomplishing even ONE good thing.

    Yes, you have a right to hold whatever opinions you wish- and you even have a right to insist on expressing dishonest positions or even to try to convince yourself of them in order to give your wicked resentments a facade of morality.

  • http://fando.blogs.com Natalie Davis

    Gotta break my rule one last time:

    Al, stop writing to me. You are aware that I see your byline and my name and stop reading at that point, right? With all due respect and concern, stop wasting your time.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    I’m posting these comments on this page, not sending them to you privately; I’m not writing to you. These comments are intended for the furtherance of the general public debate and discourse here, not so much for you personally. I intend that others should read our words side by side, then make their own judgements.

    You don’t need to read my comments if you don’t want to. However, you needn’t be spewing such wicked, irrational, hateful bile as you have here and then expect or demand that I not respond.

  • http://www.ubersportingpundit.com/hotbuttereddeath/ James Russell

    You are filled with great outrage over the least hint of an American expressing personal disapproval of homosexuality- yet you display not the least bit of concern for real victims, such as survivors of the Hussein’s rape rooms.

    So someone who gets discriminated against for being gay is a less “real” victim than someone raped by one of the Hussein boys? Hmm. I never knew such a sliding scale of victimhood existed. Thanks for the lesson, Al.

  • Eric Olsen

    People can say what they want, they can disagree, they can address specific things said by specific people they disagree with. I am always amazed by people’s amazement when other people disagree with them and say so.

    Blogcritics is essentially an open forum – this has good and bad properties depending upon your point of view: on your own site, or a site dominated by a particular perspective, you are going to have general agreement – that’s why people go to that site in the first place – but in a genuinely open forum such as this, there won’t be general consensus on ANYTHING, and the more emotional and closely held the topic – like war and peace – the more disagreement and confrontation there will be. How could it be otherwise?

    And for those who characterize the site as leaning one way or another politically: as long as we are attacked and vilified from all directions – and we are – then I know we are genuinely free and open and neutral en masse.

    Any and every member of Blogcritics – now around 400 writers – and any and every reader – around 7000 daily – are free to express themselves. Sometimes there is strong conflict of opinion and/or personality: how could it be otherwise?