Adam is twenty-one or twenty-two. Last time I looked, he was still unemployed and living with his parents. Not sure if he ever had much college, but I don’t think so. He took a summer course at Harvard a while back, and spent several months showing off the harvard.edu e-mail address that got him, but he seems to have given up on that.

Basically, the blog is all he’s got.

Oh, and the US thing? He’s been fascinated by the US for years, and by US power. Canada isn’t cool enough for him. He likes to talk about the US (and the US military) as “us”.

However, this fascination does not translate into — say — getting US citizenship and joining the US Army.

Doug M.

…oh, you did that already? Hmph. Oh, well…Never mind.

Whatever, A’da’m.

The media has sinned grievously –and now grievously must the answer for those sins.

I think this is more suport for the Risk hypothesis.

My God, man! It looks like Teresa Heinz Kerry after she discovered that the bolts in her husband’s neck weren’t tightened properly.

Woody Allen

I’ll run down to the bodega.

The bit you’ve picked out is actually a quote from these folks. They also have an interesting idea of what “disproportionate response” means:

and then the analysis collapses into the usual “disproportionate force� garbage. Apparently American liberal rules of fair play dictate that you should only fight a way if you’re pretty sure you’ll lose (that is, it’s unfair for a good army to fight a bad army). And if you actually have an advantage, you shouldn’t use it, so that you won’t run the risk of winning against the bad Army.

If I’ve correctly identified a problem, will it at least have the beneficial consequence of harming Democrats in November, when the American public starts thinking about whether liberals or conservatives will best be able to protect American interests in a changing world?

Uh, yeah, pal … and the American public – cleverly hidden amongst the three regular visitors of your blog – waits with bated breath for your next next “identification of a problem” to inform their decisions on everything from buying a new toaster to going with the Right Brothers over the Dixie Chicks in their iPod shuffles.

It’s late, so I’m going to leave my usual verbosity behind and, instead, simply say this: we need to attack the North Koreans.

They’re having fun at our expense. It’s time to show them that a terrible price must be paid for such insolence.

!!!!!!!

1. Yoshida posts infrequently, but like Gavin says, when he does, it’s always a doozy.

2. “Somewhere out there, someone is thumbing their nose at us, their Western masters!” … has got to be one of the most revealing reasons for advocating nuke ‘em all pwnage by a wingnut. But then Yoshida really is the blogging id of the Right. Others kind of dance around how they really feel about not-America … Adam wades right in and vomits up his deepest reptile urges.

“War Slut™” would be more apt, but the rightards have already co-opted that one — it’s their favorite epithet for Christiane Amanpour. Besides, the concepts “Yoshida” and “slut” do not belong in the same sentence. Evar.

“War Wanker™” has a nice ring to it.

Does anyone really believe that Howard Dean would not use nuclear weapons to purify the Middle East, and claim that he has made perpetual peace on earth?

Oh yeah, and Markos wants to be ruler of the Levant after the Lebanese and Israelis kill each other off.

And it’s Hollwood’s fault.

And the proof is that Clinton was a draft dodger.