Let's play: What's up with your kooky right wing web magazine.

First of all, what's up with the painting of a depressed-looking Uncle Sam in Rodin's "thinker" posture? His right elbow should be above his left knee, not his right knee. Look at the damned statue! If you can't get that right how can we expect you to get anything else right?

Let me get this straight: Communism is bad (I knew that) and democrats might as well be communists. The U.N is bad. Indian mascots for sports teams? Good. McCarthyism? Good. France? Bad. Israeli occupation of West Bank? Good. Death penalty? Good. Except when Kenneth Starr is against it, then it is temporarily bad to prove the liberals wrong about Starr: he's a good guy after all. Social security? Bad. The whole thing reminds me of the Birchers I knew as a kid with the anti U.N. bumper stickers. I knew they were dumb even when I was eleven years old.

The magazine is supposed to seem highly "intellectual." One article I saw even had footnotes. Funny, "The American Thinker" doesn't have articles by any noted conservative "intellectuals." It doesn't even rise even close to the level of Commentary or The New Criterion. Where's Gertrude Himmelfarb when you need her? Where's Judge Richard Posner? Hilton Kramer himself would be embarrassed by this shoddy site. Hugh Kenner and Guy Davenport would turn over in their graves. William Buckley would turn over in his grave were he not still alive. Where's the "thoughtful" reflection on serious issues that the zine promises? (By the way, it was the Christians who threw the Jews out of Spain, not the Arabs. Maybe if you read a book or two by Ammiel Alcalay you would learn something. He even edited an anthology of Israeli literature!)

Thank you for playing "What's up with your kooky right-wing web magazine."