The Alleged Mental Case ... (bolt)

Once again, thoughts on Christmas morning ...

2008-12-25T06:17:00.001-06:00

... lead me to one of my all-time favorite Christmas songs, for it truly (and beautifully, in three-part harmony) illustrates my Reason for this season.

Heaven came to earth, in a small package
For a Child was born, a Gift to many
Yes the living Light came to the darkness
Wore the harness of mankind

Gave His life away, so we could find Him
Changed our night to day, so we'd live in light
Yes the living Light came to the Darkness
Wore the harness of mankind

This morning Light of love
Still shines and shines
We buried Him, within our sin
But He rose again.

Laid His body down, to be sin for us
Gave His earthly crown, so we'd live light
Tore the veil, between the light and darkness
Wore the harness of mankind

This morning Star of light
Still shines and shines
We buried Him, within our sin
But He rose again

Let our hearts rejoice, in Christ our Savior
Let us come before, His throne with praise
Let us pray for peace, so we'll break the harness
Melt the hardness of mankind.

... written by Annie Herring
... performed by Annie Herring, Nelly Greisen, and Matthew Ward
(aka The Second Chapter of Acts)

A joyous Christmas to y'all ... especially to the sheepdogs who stand and defend us, and your loved ones.

A prayer for Election Day 2008 ...

2008-11-04T04:31:00.004-06:00

Father ...

... first, please forgive me where I have not lived up to Your standards.

Thank You so much for putting me in a nation that still does "hold these truths to be self-evident", acknowledging that our most fundamental rights are Your endowment to us, and that while governments can restrict, and even deny, our access to and use of them, not even democracy can override Your executive decision and remove them from us.

Thank You for putting me in a nation that gives birth to Men and Women who volunteer to go into harm's way on our behalf, in such numbers that conscription would actually impede their ability to combine violent resolve and Your compassion to secure those rights, not only for us, but for ALL MEN -- since, as our founding citizens acknowledged, those unalienable rights are not the exclusive property of Americans.

May we, with Your guidance, realize that, in the highly-interconnected world, the defense of the unalienable rights of "the other" is not only right ... not only noble ... but wise; a prudent response that also serves to further secure our own freedom. As we have seen time and again, without freedom and the respect for it, peace is just an illusion ... but where freedom is respected, people don't have the incentive to foment violence upon each other, and therefore a sustainable peace is attained in these places and nations. Please act to let that spread, Lord.

May we, with Your guidance, realize that, analogous to what You have inspired others to write with regards to our spiritual life, becoming a "citizen of the world" even in the temporal sense ... in a world where many of its leaders still do NOT "hold these truths to be self-evident" ... is neither prudent, nor wise if it means subordinating "these truths" to the collective will.

Thank You for putting me in a nation where knowledge not only can be found in great abundance, but where men and women have the freedom to both acquire that knowledge for their own edification ... then leverage that knowledge through innovation, rendering their thoughts into various expressions of ordered dynamism that they and others can use to not only make a profit, but make their lives easier and/or more productive ... and sometimes, save them from harm and even death. We are a nation of problem-solvers -- 300 million problem solvers.

May we act in ways that empower them, and not impede them in this process.

And may we also be inspired by You, to realize that knowledge, academic/professional credentials, erudition, even intelligence itself -- none of these are the same as WISDOM, nor do they have the same value, nor are they prerequisites to this attribute of humanity -- an attribute You inspired the writer of Proverbs to write so much about.

May we realize that those who possess wisdom often do not appear erudite or educated as our culture has defined it, and are therefore ignored when not mocked or ridiculed ... but they still express truths so profound, we ignore them at our own peril, and to our detriment.

Father, We the People need wisdom ... Your wisdom ... more than ever today.

Today, we complete the process of choosing those who will lead us for the next two to four to six years, by exercising our right to vote for our leadership.

We face the choice of leadership teams that embrace two highly-divergent worldviews ... neither of which is in full accordance with Your worldview.

Our ability to discern the best choice has been obscured, not only by political and popular-culture hyperbole, but by the "faulty intelligence" published by those who supposedly are objective observers/reporters, but see themselves as "world changers" with the right to color their reporting under the cloak of perceived objectivity, to further the adoption of their worldview. Give us the vision to see through the fog.

Guide our hands, that we may choose wisely who will lead us.

Guide those charged with conducting the election process ... so that there will be no doubt that the choices made are truly the choices of We the People. Help us to avoid the turmoil and doubt of Election 2000, that has poisoned political discourse over the past eight years.

After today passes, if those we have chosen carry the day, remind us to not be arrogant ... and empower us to consistently hold them to account for the good and the bad they render during their time in office.

And if those we have chosen do not carry the day, remind us that "the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord", and that You are in control ... and empower us to consistently hold them to account for the good and the bad they render during their time in office, with a level of respect commensurate with their office and their conduct, in a way that will reflect well upon Your leadership of our individual lives.

All this I ask, in the name of Your Son ... as we head toward the voting booths, which are today the "front line" of multiple conflicts, from the War on Terror to spiritual warfare ... for our decisions today will profoundly and perhaps irreversibly affect the battle on every other front line, from Iraq and Afghanistan, to Washintgton DC, to our local congregations of believers.

It is time to heed the words you said to Joshua so long ago, and "be strong and courageous" ... and wise. It is time to act ... so I conclude this prayer not with an "Amen", but with the words of a fellow believer, who found himself with 39 others on the front line seven years ago ... Men and Women who, on that day, exhibited far more strength, courage, and wisdom than we are called upon to exhibit on this day.

Let's roll ...

Parable of the Lighthouse Keeper ...

2008-06-09T00:39:00.006-05:00

... soon to be set to music ... for those with ears to hear ...

I keep this old lighthouse, and I will stand alone
if it means keeping ships off the rocks and the shoals.
I'll keep the light burning, and keep the glass clean,
So the ships of this world have the guidance they need.

************************************************************

This lighthouse was built, and endured the night
in the time right before they built Montauk Point's light
This light welcomed ships and men both slave and free
Watched as they sought freedom and prosperity.

The light here was almost destroyed in the roar
That descended upon her in a hard Civil War
Then the signal was joined, by Miss Liberty
To welcome the immigrants who joined slaves now free

She saw the Men come and go over the shore
As they fought in a war meant to end further war
Then two decades later, she saw still more Men
go over and wage war in the same place again

Through both of these wars, and one undeclared, cold
Her keepers saw clearly that her light must stay bold
And cut through the night, so no one could doubt
The track to safe harbor, upon that they could count

************************************************************

So I keep this old lighthouse, and I will stand alone
if it means keeping ships off the rocks and the shoals.
I'll keep the light burning, and keep the glass clean,
So the ships of this world have the guidance they need.

************************************************************

But others who thought themselves bright in their day
Thought the brightest lighthouse was found on Turtle Bay
They saw it as energized by the whole earth
And diminished in their eyes my lighthouse's worth

They thought they were bright, thought that meant they were wise
They were anything but, for if they had wise eyes
They'd have seen the cracked walls, and the worm-ridden wood
On a base whose stability's not very good.

Still others threw out all our trustworthy maps.
And set course with new ones out through the whitecaps
That led them on strange courses, then they found next
They'd been led to dark shores covered with splintered wrecks

And others put trust in pilots rough and rough
To carry their cargo through wave swell and gust
They thought they had deals with them honestly made
But yesterday's pilot can be pirate today

************************************************************

So I keep this old lighthouse, and I will stand alone
if it means keeping ships off the rocks and the shoals.
I'll keep the light burning, and keep the glass clean,
So the ships of this world have the guidance they need.

************************************************************

Now not a few say we should set sail no more
Instead be content with our homes on the shore
We're not welcome over there across the seas
We should mind our own business now, sir if you please

And a worse thing I see, that has come to pass
All these others have persuaded both lad and lass
That the lighthouse I serve, that has stood here so long
Leads many to sail in a direction that's wrong

They say that our strong light is too bright to use
It overwhelms other lights, dazzles the crews
And we're only here to serve the yachts of the rich
While they swamp smaller boats and scratch their greedy itch

If we'd just dim down, put ourselves in our place
Just another light shining on some coastal space
Then the yachts and the warcraft would not sail again
And our dim state would be seen as so enlightened

************************************************************

It would be so easy, to live life by day
Extinguish the light, and go on my way
Forsake solitude, join the gaggle of men
Who without light run aground again and again

But then I remember the number of souls
That were guided by this light away from the shoals
European, and Asian, Arab, Israeli
American, African, still sailing free

Without the assistance that such light provides
These souls would be wrecked and just drift with the tide
At the mercy of pirates who'd consign them to die
And then plunder their cargoes to threaten my life

Though it seems that I am but one of a few
Who maintains a light that is still bright and true
For the sake of those souls, for the sake of my kin
I'll stay so that each day this light shines again

So I keep this old lighthouse, and I will stand alone
if it means keeping ships off the rocks and the shoals.
I'll keep the light burning, and keep the glass clean,
So the ships of this world have the guidance they need.

************************************************************

These rhymes were composed for those with ears to hear
But if you need a hint 'bout what I describe here
My lighthouse is my nation -- now I leave the rest
To put your knowledge and wisdom and heart to the test

Folded Colors UPDATED!

2007-05-28T08:15:00.001-05:00

UPDATE 9 Sept 2007: The MP3s (low- and high-bitrate) are (finally!) up at GarageBand.

This is the first example of the "new tactics" I referred to a couple of posts back, in a continuing effort to change (or reinforce) the thinking of as many people as I can about what this nation needs to be doing.

The urge to write this was triggered by this post, from my Bash Brother, Subsunk ... and you can see why, by the first two comments I left in the thread.

My intent was to have it recorded (just me and my accoustic guitar) and up on Garageband.com by now for download, but work and family needs have delayed that. It will be up there, soon (after all, if Greyhawk can strive to get 'er done while in the Sandbox, this cake-eater can get 'er done on the sandspit known as Long Island).

Hope this brings some good to you, on this Day of Memoriam ...

As I watched as my grandfather was laid to rest, having served in World War II
The flag of our nation was placed over his casket, showing him the honor he was due
Then those colors were carefully folded and gently, placed into my Granny's hands
As a token of thanks to them for serving our nation, so long ago in foreign lands

I have seen that ritual, again and again, and each time it makes me catch my breath
At the sight of presenting that folded flag, to the one left behind by death
It's especially hard, when the one being honored just fell by the enemy's hand
It makes me ask what can I do, so not so many, die so young to defend this land?

Let me stand up
Let me stand strong
so that not so many folded colors
have to pass from the hands of a grateful nation
to a young wife, or to a mother
Let's reserve the flags to cover our brave people with honor
when elderly and weathered
they pass from our grateful nation to rejoin their mothers
and fight no more forever

It's tempting to think that we could slow this down, by just simply walking away
Just lay down our arms, extend an open hand, talk things out to a better way
But I've yet to see those who are totally bent on, stealin' life and liberty
Make the choice to stop that stealin' all on their own, unconfronted by those who'd be free

It comes down to this, just because we might say, that we're going to fight no more
Doesn't mean that the enemy will agree, but instead will keep on waging war.
Except that it will be waged, on the enemy's terms, and they'll prove again it's a lie
To say War's Never The Answer as, again and again, they take our bravest young ones' lives.

Let us stand up
Let us stand strong
so that not so many folded colors
have to pass from the hands of a grateful nation
to a young wife, or to a mother
Let's reserve the flags to cover our brave people with honor
when elderly and weathered
they pass from our grateful nation to rejoin their mothers
and fight no more forever

If you say that America should not even be there,
then I say if not us, then who?
The thugs will keep on spilling the world's innocent blood,
unless we stand and defeat these fools.
We've seen that nations that respect the rights of their people,
don't threaten us any more
If we're gonna live free 'til there's a better answer,
such nations are worth fighting for

Not everyone's meant to wear the uniform, or go into harm's way
But we need everyone to keep this nation strong, and make wisdom her basis today
Whatever your power or wealth or intellect, when you add wisdom and humanity
We get a powerful force in the Home of the Brave, to keep it the Land of the Free

You could be serving by doing the job you know best, and preserving our prosperity.
And by reminding your Congressman, along with your neighbors,
what it's gonna take for us to stay free.
You could serve as an Angel to our uniformed heroes, or maybe buy one lunch at the mall
Or making sure past and present they will be respected, by taking a watch at The Wall

Will you stand up?
Will you stand strong?
so that not so many folded colors
have to pass from the hands of a grateful nation
to a young wife, or to a mother?
Let's reserve the flags to cover our brave people with honor
when elderly and weathered
they pass from our grateful nation to rejoin their mothers
and fight no more forever

Copyright 2007, Richard G. Casebolt

A new message for Congress ...

2007-05-15T22:26:00.000-05:00

"Anbar Rising" -- GOOGLE IT!

This is now in my magnetic sign-holder, on the tailgate of my pickup.

What I am talking about here.

(still working on the "new tactics" ... first effort planned to be out before Memorial Day. Watch this space ...)

Mining the Model

2007-04-09T11:23:00.000-05:00

Hey ... I'm back.

Once again, life's gotten in the way of these chronicles ... between a heavy load at work, preparing for a concert at church .... and rolling the boulder over at Blackfive/keeping tabs on the Indepundit ... I didn't have much time to mine my own mind for gems to drop here, lately.

In fact, I am in the process of changing tactics when it comes to rolling the boulder -- being that there are more boulder-rollers now, from what I see, who are willing to provide a logical counterpoint to the screeching of the parrots. (Could that be because, with the success so far of our new ways of doing business in the Iraq theater, we have more new material to both work with, and encourage us?) ... and because the crushing of Leftist parrots has virtually left only those who won't be crushed, until the truth bites their beaks off.

Watch this space for the changes ... I think you will enjoy them.

For now ... I've found myself going more and more often to visit Iraq the Model. The good brothers there are making our MSM look like typists for the tabloids, when it comes to reporting the facts-on-the-ground.

And in the comments of their latest post, I found the following gems:

From commenter steve-o:

10 Reasons It's Not A Civil War

1. The two main factions alleged (by those who wish it to be true) to be fighting a "civil war," the Sunnis and Shias, are still serving in Iraqi government positions, working together in the halls of government.

2. Neither party has withdrawn from the government to form a rump, competing, or rebel government. The Sunnis would be the logical party to withdraw, since they are in the minority.

3. Sunnis and Shias recently attended a mass funeral procession together for victims of AQ violence.

4. Millions of Sunnis and Shias are happily intermarried in Iraq, especially in Baghdad.

5. Suicide bombings of innocent Iraqis by AQ is not a civil war. It is a failed attmept to start a civil war which so far has failed.

6. So called sectarian violence, which in some cases is actually the killing of AQ members and/or supporters, is not a civil war. Such killings have decreased. This will not end yet, some Shias have 30 years of oppression to avenge. This is not civil war, this is vigilantism.

8. There has not been a single instance of a pitched battle at even the platoon level between Sunnis and Shias with both sides organized and fighting under commanders, etc. There is no area under control of "rebels" who have announced a rump government.

9. The Sunnis greatest fear is that the USA will withdraw from Iraq before a political reconciliation is accomplished. Why? See below.

10. Sunnis can't fight a successful civil war when they only number 15% of the population (down from 20%, due to death and fleeing of the country).

Conclusion

If the USA withdraws, a civil war of sorts could begin. It will be short and bloody, and the Sunnis will lose. That war would be a humanitarian problem, and a geopolitical problem if other countries become involved, which is likely. AQ and its' backers are a geopolitical problem. This gives the USA three good reasons to stay for now.

An aside: It's not an occupation when a government has forces working in a country at the invitation and consent of the two major parties within an elected government of the host country. Neither the Sunni nor the Shia contingent of the Iraqi government has made any move to ask the USA to leave. The Shias will be first to do so.

The best refutation I've seen yet of the whole "civil war" canard.

Then, there's this little gem from commenter Brian Hall:

BTW, am seeing lots about Mookie's March in the MSM, but nada about the anti-terror demonstration. The bias is getting far worse. Park has it right: the Western Left is determined to push moral equivalence to the ultimate conclusion by denigrating everything positive and glorifying the rotten until they meet, indistinguishable, in the center.

I never heard the objective of the Left put quite this way ... but I can't argue against the characterization!

Money for Nothing ...

2007-03-10T07:58:00.000-06:00

Well, life ... from work schedules, to commenting (and not keeping up with STTP's), to the most wonderful Christmas present my family could give me ... has gotten in the way of my chronicles here, for many weeks. No longer.

The other day, SMASH posted this retrospective on Ann Coulter, in the light of her recent comments at the CPAC conference. I pointed out (in the comments) that if the use of the word "faggot" was so utterly and irredeemably offensive to someone, they also need to exothermically divest themselves of any Dire Straits albums in their posession.

Then, my warped mind went into spin-cycle (as it often does) and it hit me ... you could combine the work of Dire Straits with the facts-on-the-ground, and come up with an even funnier -- and more hard-hitting -- criticism of Edwards and his fellow-travelers, than what Ms. Coulter delivered at CPAC:

Now look at them shysters thats the way you do it
Shillin' for clients there on your TV
That aint workin' thats the way you do it
Two-thirds for you and one-third for me
Now that aint workin' thats the way you do it
Lemme tell ya them guys aint dumb
Get money for a blister on your little finger
Get money for a blister on your thumb

We gotta sue everyone with deep pockets
Lay it on thick for every jury
We gotta win big in litigation
Then collect our contingency fee

See that litigator with his perfect TV makeup
A Breck boy, thats his own hair
That metrosexual gets his own jet airplane
That ambulance chaser is a millionaire

We gotta sue everyone with deep pockets
Lay it on thick for every jury
We gotta win big in litigation
Then collect our contingency fee

I'm glad I learned 'bout twistin' the law
I'm glad I learned 'bout litigation
Look at that judgment, we stuck 'em with a big tab
Yeah man, it sure is fun
And look up there, whats that? Trans-fat is evil!
There's more to get from McD's than hot coffee
That aint workin' thats the way you do it
Two-thirds for you and one-third for me

We gotta sue everyone with deep pockets
Lay it on thick for every jury
We gotta win big in litigation
Then collect our contingency fee

Now that aint workin thats the way you do it
Suckin' the life from our economy
That aint workin thats the way you do it
Two-thirds for you and one-third for me

Two-thirds for you and one-third for me ...

I want my ... I want my ... want my contingency ...
I want my ... I want my ... want my contingency ...

STTP -- 27 November 2006

2006-11-27T06:43:00.000-06:00

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/11/charlie_rangel_.html
(Stunad is ...)

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/11/who_exactly_is_.html
(... as stunad does ...)

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/11/jack_army_in_ir.html
(... to the morale of this guy ...)

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2006/11/25/#007182
(... and when we fail to learn, we repeat ... just like elementary school ... only here, failing grades lead to filling graves.)

Bonus link (no comment from me, yet, but a good question ...)
Forget Waldo ... where's SMASH?

From the blogosphere, I (again) give thanks ...

2006-11-23T09:40:00.000-06:00

... for being endowed by a loving, personal Creator with such inalienable rights as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ... and placing me in a nation where the most fundamental principle of its government is the preservation of these rights.

... that people like me can exercise those rights "because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf" -- by land, by sea and from above -- both at present, and in the past -- and that even these "rough" Men -- and Women -- have within them a great compassion that simultaneously tempers that roughness, and motivates their willingness to be rough when called for.

... that such great compassion -- and wisdom -- and courage -- is shared and reinforced by many who do not, or no longer, wear the Uniform, but are heroes in their own right.

... that I have the right to question, and even challenge the government, its leaders, and our social elites of my nation, in both word and deed.

... that even those who stridently disagree with me still have the same voice in the affairs of this nation that I do. I am thankful that we all have the right to say even things that are recognized as idiotic ... and that we all have both the authority and responsibility to declare them idiotic, when the facts support that conclusion.

... that the free flow of information ... and the analysis of same ... through multiple media systems is structurally protected by our nation as vital to maintaining our freedom -- and that the blogosphere itself has taken its place as an essential tool for the maintainence of integrity within that flow ... even if it means going into harm's way to do so.

... that, even in time of crisis, we can still "dream big", soar like eagles, and reach for the stars.

... that there are others in our world -- indivduals and nations -- who share our values, stand by us, and could even serve as our refuge if our nation ever goes bad.

... that there are even people who, working with us, are turning bad places in this world into good ones ... even as they realize what it meant to our own Founders to pledge "their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor" to the effort.

... that even those who care for the smallest Gnat can be recognized for their greatness ... and maintian a realism and humility about them that makes them reluctant to acquire greater power.

.... and, that, finally, all these virtues are shared by a multitude that is almost impossible to number ... a sharing made graphically evident during our times of tragedy ... and by the acts of ultimate courage, from ordinary, yet extraordinary Men and Women, in response to such tragedy.

Enjoy the holiday ... and do remember the reasons for this season.

Re-shaping my battlespace ... (Updated)

2006-11-19T14:10:00.000-06:00

With the Mrs. visiting friends and family in Dallas this weekend, I took the time to do some updating here ...

First, I have reorganized and updated The Nuts & Bolts Index. Check out the second post below this one ... or click on the link near the top of the (right) sidebar ... for the nuts-and-bolts of my thinking.

Next, I have updated my blogroll ... not just stylistically, in keeping with my role as The Alleged Mental Case, but in substance, by adding these new links:

Soldiers' Dad -- who is arguably the best blogger out there in terms of documenting the real -- and substantial -- progress of the effort, by both Coalition forces and Iraqis, to bring peace in Iraq. Way better, than anyone in the MSM.
Dadmanly -- an OIF veteran who is a straight shooter, on and off the battlefield.

And, I added a link to Milblogs in the roll -- even though you could already "get there from here" by clicking on the "Friends of Milblogs" graphic to the right. This multiple-author site is a picture window on the whole milblogosphere. It has become a favorite of mine ... and if you believe (as I do) that "a wise man has many counselors", this will become a favorite of yours, as well.

Now, for the biggest change of all ...

... the introduction of what I am calling Squat 'n' Thrust Trackforward posts, or STTP's.

If you have ever visited here more than once, you know that my posting can be sporadic.

That is primarily because I find commenting on other, more-highly-read blogs -- what I call "cybersquatting" -- mutually fufilling ... and symbiotically worthwhile in terms of the dissemination and defense of sound principle ... to the point of almost compulsive behavior. (Milblogs, Blackfive, and Indepundit are my primary blogosphere hangouts in this regard.)

However, I also value your willingness to stop in here, from time to time (particularly in response to a comment I have left at one of the other fine, intellectual (as opposed to mental) institutions in the blogosphere, like those listed above), and I want to make sure you continue to consider a visit here as worthwhile.

So, in addition to what original material -- and particularly good comments -- I can publish here in their entirety, I am striving to generate an STTP post every day or two, that will list links to all the blog posts where I have left comments, and/or are updated and/or still showing significant comment activity.

One ground rule in this, in order to preserve context, is that these links will actually be permalinks to the original blog posts ... not the comments threads themselves. It will be left to the reader to access the comments thread associated with the original post.

They will also not be "pretty" -- probably a list of "raw", non-embedded links (though I might add brief comments, next to a link, if I am compelled to do so).

UPDATE: I have another addition to the blogroll ... a philosopher-prince of the blogosphere: Grim Beorn. I have found that his calm, reasoned -- and steel-reinforced -- expression of his viewpoint lives up to the tagline of my own blog, sometimes even better than my own. That is why he is listed among "My Shrinks", even though he has worn the camouflage coat in his past.

UPDATE 2: I have added two buttons to the sidebar, so we remember ...

... who is paying the ultimate price to protect our liberty. They are not just numbers ... these Men and Women have names ... and loved ones left behind ... and a legacy.

... who paid the price for our myopia and INACTION in the past, and that -- to prevent others from paying that price again and again in the future -- our enemy cannot be ignored ... cannot be accommodated ... cannot be appeased ... but WE must see to it that our enemy is decisively DEFEATED.

In this time, when more and more of our nation's leaders and citizens are showing signs of going wobbly, to remember is more important than ever.

Thanks to Blackfive, for getting the word out about They Have Names ... your reporting inspired me to add the link to They Have Names, and the link to 2996 as well, to my sidebar.

So I will remember.

(First STTP is just below this post ...)

STTP -- 18 November 2006

2006-11-18T17:02:00.000-06:00

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/007085.html
(humorous!)

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2006/11/18/#007126
(ominous ...)

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2006/11/17/#007115
(precision-guided ruthlessness?)

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2006/11/16/#007103
(odious ...)

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2006/11/15/#007093
(oblivious ...)

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2006/11/15/#007083
(focus on the simplest ...)

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/11/zoomie_strong_t.html
(guard the nest ...)

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/11/protesting_noth.html
(dumb protests ...)

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/11/iran_and_nuclea.html
(wish we hadn't stopped our tests ...)

All for now ...

The Nuts and Bolts ...

2006-11-18T15:00:00.000-06:00

... of my thinking.

Here is the latest update of the Nuts & Bolts Index.

These posts are my "basic thinking" on today's issues. They illustrate the fundamental principles -- the "nuts and bolts" -- that fasten my thoughts together.

WHY WE FIGHT (and rightly so) ...
Putting an end to ANOTHER kind of fillibuster ...
Be careful what you ask for ...
Cybersquattin' -- It Bears Repeating ...
John Brett Cahill ... in the Web of Trust
In the simplest of terms ...

... and why I do, what I do:
Sorry for the long absence ... (Your protests, my friends ...)
Boulder ... hill ...

The Greatest Errors of Our Age:
Condi-sternation over a needed paragidm shift
Leftist SCUDs incoming ... Launch Patriots!
The money quote ...

The Global War on Terror:
Why not place our faith in the multilateralism of the UN?
Threat assessment in the 21st Century
Themes that I am afraid will be recurring ones ...
Does this make me a Great Mind?
When will this war end?
The one essential element our troops need ...

The Global War on Terror -- Iraqi Theater:
Why Saddam & Sons ... and not Osama ... First?
Everything you need, BUT the stockpiles ... (my take on the Duelfer Report)
Iraq for Moore-ons (and No-rons) ...
Down-ing that memo ...
Cybersquattin' ... in simple terms ...
Reposting the truth about Iraq ...

Of men, and Men:
Leadership personified

The MSM -- in a manner reminiscent of Joseph Goebbels?
Raspberry directs a raspberry ...
Breaking news ...

The American Condition:
This Keeps Biting America in the Butt ...
Nothing new under the sun ...
Talkin' 'bout our immigration ...
I'll think about that tax increase ...
Casebolt's Question ...
Fun with new toys ...

Many blood-sucking parasites (a.k.a. Poly-ticks):
Before you punch that chad ...
Great, kids -- DON'T GET COCKY!

The Clueless vs. Life/Liberty/Happiness:
One of the big lies ...
So, how do you turn a democracy into a dictatorship?
It's even worse than I thought ...
Frustration

The Clueless vs. Christianity:
The clueless (aspiring to) leading the clueless ...
A man's gotta know his limitations ...
Cybersquattin' -- WWJD?

War by Other Means (that "we the people" can engage in):
It isn't a dirty word, people ...
My "dream" ...

On a personal note:
From the blogosphere, I give thanks ...
A little personal aside -- (about Da Band)
Liveblogging -- my Thanksgiving blogosphere "cease-fire"
Thoughts on Christmas morning ...

Hit the link to this index, on the right side of the page, from time to time ... as this list will be updated periodically

In the simplest of terms ...

2006-11-12T22:55:00.000-06:00

... let me 'splain to you why it was necessary to invade Iraq.

The events of 11 September 2001 were perpetrated by a small group within a loosely-knit organization, using no more than a few dozen people for both operations and support, with a budget in the $1M-and-under range, and no sophisticated weapons or training ... let alone WMD.

That small-scale effort killed 3000 people, destroyed several hundred million dollars in aircraft, trashed several billion dollars of prime real estate, and delivered an economic blow to America on the order of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Now ... think about another small group of people ...

... a group, where it is clearly evident that they consider your life and liberty as expendible as the perpetrators of September 11 considered them ... a group that, while they may not share every (or any) belief Al Quada cherishes, has their own aspirations of expanding their totalitarian rule anywhere it can ...

... except that, unlike Al Quada, they have access to, and/or control of, a nation with vast and valuable resources, and a relatively-high degree of technological and military sophistication ... a soverign nation, where nefarious activity can occur out of sight of other, more responsible nations ... while at the same time, move within the diplomatic community to exploit the good faith of those other nations to gain a tactical and/or strategic advantage to further their expansion.

Think about how much MORE damage, such a combination of evil men and an exploitable nation could do to our civilization ... including America, even before the first body falls on its streets.

This is EXACTLY the situation we faced in Iraq under Saddam ... and could still face, if we do not do whatever it takes to assure that Iraq can no longer be hijacked for totalitarian expansion.

Forget WMD. We didn't need them to reasonably justify his removal, capture, trial, and sentence. We already had all the historical evidence we needed to justify the above, without the stockpiles, if we had been listening to sound principle rather than internationalist idealism, and/or a bias against our way of life.

Yes, I know that our President did not make this case ... that he brought up WMD, in particular, as justification ... and legitimately so, as virtually everyone in the entire world who relied upon more than Pollyannaish speculation for intelligence, agreed with that assessment of Saddam's capabilities.

Even though it was a legitimate case -- he shouldn't have had to make WMD the centerpiece.

That the lack of WMD stockpiles de-legitimizes the war -- and this President -- in the eyes of so many, says more about our lack of judgment as a people, than it says about the credibility of this President.

Especially if and when that viewpoint takes over the leadership of our Congress.

The money quote ...

2006-09-15T11:51:00.000-05:00

... from the President's speech this past Monday (with emphasis added):

We are now in the early hours of this struggle between tyranny and freedom. Amid the violence, some question whether the people of the Middle East want their freedom, and whether the forces of moderation can prevail. For 60 years, these doubts guided our policies in the Middle East. And then, on a bright September morning, it became clear that the calm we saw in the Middle East was only a mirage. Years of pursuing stability to promote peace had left us with neither. So we changed our policies, and committed America's influence in the world to advancing freedom and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism.

OK critics ... what have I been saying, again and again?

As I write this, I am listening to Rush's replay of the President's press conference on the legislation being developed to govern detainee treatment ... legislation that is in danger of being trampled by donkeys ... and a few RINOs in the Senate.

The remarkable thing about this press conference ... is the edge in the President's voice as he defends the legislation in the face of the usual media myopia evident in the White House press corps.

That edge, is what this nation needs ... especially when considering the difference between the viewpoints of senators like Dick Durbin on "torture" ... and the facts on the ground, as reported by Richard Miniter.

Mr. Miniter's article is a MUST-READ ... and gives the lie to those who demand moral equivalence between America, and her Islamofascist enemies.

Senator McCain is concerned that anything America does that could be construed as "torture" could be used to justify (in the eyes of the world?) mistreatment of our military men and women, should they be captured.

One problem with that position, however ... since when has our blind adherence to the most liberal interpretations of the Geneva Conventions protected our people from abuse, when they are captured? From Al Quada beheadings ... to the televising of beaten men and women by Saddam in 1991 ... to the murder of Leon Klinghoffer, and the beating and murder of Robert Stethem ... to the treatment of our US embassy personnel by Iran ...

... to the treatment of American POW's by the North Vietnamese ...

... our enemies have not shown one whit of consideration of our treatment of those we detain, in determining how to treat those they are imprisoning.

Senator McCain should know better.

John Brett Cahill ... in the Web of Trust

2006-09-10T12:26:00.000-05:00

It is not just the unseen heroes. It is the unseen, anonymous people that make this whole thing work ... armies of people, millions of people, get up and go to work every day to make sure that all of the transparent, unnoticed and unsung strands in this Web of Trust function.

...AN AMERICAN CIVILIZATION, Chapter One: The Web of Trust by Bill Whittle

John Brett Cahill was both supported by, and an integral part of, the Web of Trust that is our civilization.

I am sure that your own life has been touched indirectly by the fruits of his labor ... every time you have made a copy. For many years, John was a part of the company whose very name is synonymous with copying ... Xerox. Starting in the sales-training department way back in 1967, he rose to become a vice-president in Xerox's systems group ... and for good reason, as one of his colleagues, Robert Raithby, reported:

I knew John as my boss at Xerox Engineering Systems when he was General Manager of the European Operation during the mid-nineties. He was a great man, charming and caring as well as having the ability to manage such a diverse operation so well. He invited his first line managers into his Marlow home for the first Christmas he was with us in the U.K.. He and his dear wife, two boys and even the dogs made us so welcome.

A man with a passion for travel to begin with, John's career took him and his family beyond America's shores ... moving them, at different points in that career, to both the UK and Brazil, before returning to their native Massachusetts in 1999. John spoke three languages -- Spanish, Portuguese, and English -- and, in the words of his wife, Sharon, "realized the world was smaller than it seems".

He passed along his respect for others in this world to his children; in particular, his eldest son, Brett, who has taken on the study of French, Spanish, and German.

By all available accounts, John Brett Cahill was in no way the stereotypical "ugly American" that is often the target of envy, disdain ... or the kind of hate that leads one to kill.

However, from what I see, he was as American as you can get when it came to the pursuit of happiness.

At an age when many senior executives are well into planning their retirement to a life of leisure, John was instead planning his retirement from Xerox ... to run a new business he was starting, a consulting firm that (of course) was international in its reach, called MDI.

His family knew what the initials stood for ... "Mad Dog Industries".

"Mad Dog" was John's nickname, from his days as a student at Boston College, where he was described as a "good-time guy" ... and while he may have calmed down from those days as a result of the responsibilities of work and family, it is apparent that he still carried with him a zest for living that this writer can relate to. As Sharon describes it:

He just really had a passion. He had a sparkle in his eye and just could see the world as a glass that was half full.

John Brett Cahill was living the American dream ... not just the wife-two kids-house in the 'burbs one, but the dream of men long departed who, not too far from that house, came to believe that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were the birthright of ALL men.

For John, though, professional success was only one part of his passionate pursuit of happiness.

He was involved in his community ... part of a committee set up to deal with the problems of drug and alcohol abuse that work against the exercise of the birthright described above.

He loved his alma mater, keeping up with his fellow alums, tailgating at all the football games (as well as going to the hockey games), and also annually supporting BC athletes through donations to the Flynn Foundation.

His love for sports extended beyond the Eagles of Boston College ... it extended to his community, and especially to his two sons, Brett and Sean. From one-on-one basketball in the driveway ... to ski trips ... to membership in the Gridiron Club of their high school in Wellesley ...

... to something that both John and my own father had in common; making a point of attending their sons' sporting events.

Like the JV football game Brett was in, the evening of 10 September 2001, before having to rise very early, to travel across the country for his new business, the next morning.

-------------------------

John Brett Cahill was an integral strand in the Web of Trust ... his endeavors provided essential support to all around him, be they family, friend, or colleague. They all benefited greatly from that support.

Keep in mind though, that he also benefited from that kind of support ... for without the many other strands in that Web of Trust, he would never have been able to achieve the good things he did.

From the support of his wife -- and sons -- who went wherever John did in the pursuit of happiness ... to his colleagues and shareholders at Xerox, a fertile field that John cultivated for not only his own personal and professional growth, but that of many others ... to the personal friend on the West Coast he was visiting as part of that business trip that next morning ... to the business and government institutions that made sure the air travel John depended upon for his business, and enjoyed as he fed his passion for travel, was predictable, safe, and secure ... he was supported by many, many strands in that Web of Trust.

All this support, though, depended upon an old, simple principle ... do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.

The integrity of that entire Web of Trust ... our entire civilization ... depends upon both keeping men free to spin sections of that Web for the benefit of all, as John had been able to do ... while making sure no one with the determination to tear holes in that Web is left alone long enough to do so.

All of this intricate Web had worked well to support John, for well over five decades and tens of thousands of miles of travel ...

.. until that next morning.

-------------------------

That next morning, at 9:03 AM EDT, we watched as the Web of Trust was torn from under John Cahill ...

... as United flight 175 destructively merged, with lethal effect, with the South Tower.

At that moment, we saw that our civilization, despite all its advances, is still vulnerable to the machinations of thugs and fanatics, if they are left alone ... and that if we were going to keep that civilization and its Web of Trust, we were going to have to change our ways of protecting it, without destroying it in the process.

We might disagree upon how that protection can be achieved ... but only the most naive among us would say that acting to protect it is neither necessary, nor just.

All his life, John Brett Cahill worked ... and "played" ... in ways that brought advancement, enhanced enjoyment, and just made life better for all those around him, while he was part of our Web of Trust.

We need to be wise ... repair, reinforce, and expand that Web of Trust ... and make sure that it continues to support the ideas -- and people -- that John Brett Cahill nourished when he was part of it.

-------------------------

I wrote the above with a sense of trepidation, knowing full well that John's family may read this. I pray that I have lived up to the last paragraph, and that it is a source of support, comfort, and pride for them.

Below are links to source material used in the creation of the above post:

From Legacy.com

From The Heights (Boston College)

From the Dallas Morning News -- AP Sports Editors

From the Boston Globe

From www.september11victims.com

Finally, John Brett Cahill was one of 2996 to lose their lives that tragic day ... visit the 2996 Project to read and honor the rest.

Reposting the truth about Iraq ...

2006-09-09T09:51:00.000-05:00

This post, from this comments thread at Mudville, was in response to a persistent gnat-strainer whose stock phrase for President Bush was "Liar-in-Chief".

This particular troll has persistently polluted the milblogs I read regularly ... so I am reposting it here, so I can link back to it whenever he appears. That way, new readers in these blogs can see who is telling the truth ... and who is not ... without me taking up tons of their bandwidth.

You read it, and tell me who the real Liar-In-Chief is:

-----------------------------------------------------

The WMD story was manufactured. The al-Qaeda terror story was manufactured. The human rights angle was always a sick joke ... This was Bush's good ol' fashioned imperal war, circa 1900. You've wasted nearly 2,100 American soldiers killed; nearly 16,000 wounded; tens of thousands of Iraqis dead and wounded -- and for what? Nothing. Nothing at all.

Imperial war? Show me ... from any credible source, not your usual Leftist electronic-toilet-paper ... where we are colonizing Iraq.

And "for nothing ... nothing at all"?

> Finally, we can be assured that Saddam Huessein does not have the ability to either directly deploy WMD, or deliver it to terrorist surrogates ... a condition NO ONE, be they President, Senator, Head Spook at any intel agency around the world, UN Secretary General, or weapons inspector was able to achieve prior to this war. Consider this war a comprehensive weapons inspection for any WMD under Saddam's control ... the only comprehensive one, free of the obfuscation, obstruction, and shell-gaming of Saddam & Sons.

> We can also be assured that Saddam no longer has the ability to reconstitute those shelved WMD programs documented in the NON-PARTISAN Duelfer Report. Riddle me this, Boy Blunder ... just how were we going to stop those programs from restarting, once Saddam squeaked by one (non-comprehensive) weapons inspection and got sanctions lifted? Those were every bit as dangerous in the long term as any "stockpile" -- yet you parse words, simply because someone you loathe led the way in permanently stopping them.

> We are also assured that Saddam no longer has access to that 500 tons of uranium -- and that 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium -- for further processing into radiological, or even nuclear, weapons. Don't give me your BS about IAEA seals ... they are only as good as IAEA access to the sealed areas, which was under the control of who? Saddam. No reasonable person would place their trust in such a situation.

> We are also assured that Saddam can no longer stoke the fires of Palestinian terrorism, one $25,000 log at a time ... and we are assured that he can no longer deliver his usual material/logistical/training/medical services to terrorists, including shelter to all those "retired" terrorists who fled to Iraq, the 1993 WTC bomber, and a certain headchopper by the name of Zarqawi. We are also assured that those documented, casual ties between Saddam & AQ will never be turned into a full operational relationship. Of course ... keep in mind, this was always about more than Al Quada ... this is a TOTAL War on Terror, that is being intelligently fought ... with the recognition that not all of the Arab/Muslim world, even in Saudi Arabia, is our enemy.

> By "sick joke", Wilson, do you mean putting an end to the filling of mass graves by Saddam & Sons? Or do you mean the MILLIONS of purple fingers who are pointing the way to taking their nation back ... another FACT that gives the LIE to your assertion that this was "Bush's Imperial War"?

> Finally, if you had your way, Saddam would still be in power ... instead of being on trial, not for the pleasure of George W. Bush, but for crimes against his own people. ... with his successors, Uday and Qusay ... DEAD-AY

This list shows that the issues you say George W. Bush manufactured ... Saddam's dealings with WMD, his terrorist support, and freedom for the Iraqi people ... were REAL ... not "manufactured". And it also shows that George W. Bush ... who this independent is proud to call "my President" ... was good to his word, and addressed them, decisively, by removing Saddam & Sons from control of Iraq.

Keep in mind, Wilson, that all the above was executed, NOT IN YOUR NAME, but in the name of millions of people ... including the killed and wounded you and your fellow moonbats wave like a bloody shirt ... many of whom would, if they had the chance, spit on you for besmirching their sacrifice.

All the above truly is "someone else's fault" ... not yours.

Breaking news ...

2006-08-24T20:08:00.000-05:00

( ... that needs to be analyzed before my next original post!)

Pluto gets demoted from planetary to "dwarf" status.

My take on this?

I blame Disney.

This smacks of a conspiracy, designed to protect their profitable trademarks through covert, unethical influence of the scientific community ... perhaps via a potential mole, one Ludwig von Drake?

The NYT needs to get on this, and expose the money trails leading back from Ludwig, through wealthy financier Ebeneezer Scrooge, to this Mickey Mouse outfit.

I mean, what's next ... the entertainment world? Are Huey Lewis, Donald "Duck" Dunn, and the Chippendales now going to be compelled to change their names, too? For that matter, what about Ric Ocasik and his band ... the Cars?

Literature? Will 20,000 Leagues under the Sea be pulled from the shelves, lest kids deprive Disney of profit by finding another Nemo?

Is the food industry even safe from this assualt upon personal liberty? Will Peter Pan peanut butter have to become Peanut Pete, to escape the Disney lawyers?

For that matter, will even the renaming of this planet as a "dwarf" be challenged by Disney, as they have significant financial incentives to limit the number of publically-classified dwarves?

Incredible(s)?

Maybe ... but you have to agree, my theory is no more Goofy than the theories of others that the NYT makes common cause with.

A Grim undertaking ...

2006-08-18T06:16:00.000-05:00

... is why, even though I said I was back, this is my first post since then.

I have been following -- and contributing to -- a thread started by Grim over at Blackfive, entitled "On the Virtues of Killing Children" .

You need to get over your shock ... and read past the title. It is quite thought-provoking ... as evidenced by the longest comment thread (pushing 400) I have seen on Blackfive.

Unfortunately, some of the commenters stopped at the title, and started spasimodically jerking their left knees ...

This latest post of mine in the thread, summarizes my thoughts pretty well:

---------

Tom ... no one is saying that our soldiers shouldn't try to keep these children alive.

However, what Grim is talking about here is the choice between:

> Keeping the innocents directly in front of you alive today ... and placing many, many more innocents at risk by keeping the individual enemy alive in the process, while also giving the enemy, as a whole, the incentive to eschew honorable warfare and, while surrounded by still more innocents in his midst, attack the innocents in our midst.

> Realizing that all avenues to keep the innocents in front of you today alive have been exhausted, and the ONLY way to protect those many, many others I talk about is to risk (not intentionally target) the lives of the innocents in front of you, to kill the individual enemy ... eliminating the threat he poses to those many, many more (and perhaps even those today, if you are fortunate), while removing the incentive of the enemy as a whole to surround themselves with, or immerse themselves among, their own innocents.

One thing I have noticed ... while yours is one of the most thoughtful criticisms of Grim's position here, many of the other, knee-jerk critics miss the point.

It is the enemy that places the innocents in their midst at risk in this scenario ... something we have seen them do for real, everywhere from Saddam's lap in 1990, to southern Lebanon today.

Where is the condemnation of the enemy, from these critics ... or is it just easier, and/or more emotionally satisfying (accuracy be damned) for them to blame America and her current President for this evil?

Tom, this is directed -- not at you -- but at the knee-jerks:

"We see right through you and your calls for peace
Right through to your core of disdain
For the principles that have made America great
And the freedom you say you proclaim
If you really seek peace, then protest the terrorists
Who crash planes and slaughter men like lambs ...
Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind ...
Your protests sound much like breaking wind"

---------

Like I said ... thought-provoking.

As a teaser for my next post ... think "choose two".

Wonder where I've been?

2006-08-05T08:52:00.000-05:00

Well ...

... in May, we moved to a new, larger apartment ... which added about a half-hour a day to my total commute time.

... work has been absolutely hectic; major projects/highly-compressed schedules/unforseen complications ... you know the drill.

... the Mrs. has needed more of my attention, with her health problems.

Even my "cybersquatting" on the comments sections of other blogs ... an easier, more-instantly-gratifying task than writing original material ... has taken a hit.

But I'm back now ...

The one essential element our troops need ...

2006-04-15T12:25:00.000-05:00

... from us!

Get the message out ... in your blogs, on your cars, wherever ...

... for when we supply our troops, and their leadership, with an abundance of resolve to defeat our terrorist enemies, they will get what they need (as opposed to what some armchair general or "ex-spurt" THINKS they need) to finish this job, in the right way.

... for if it is not supplied, we will inevitibly lose this war ... for our enemies have an abundant supply of this, as well.

For us, it is an instrument of peace ... for our enemies, their resolve is a WMD with us as the targets.

Keep in mind, that sending more of our troops in can turn this war-against-thugs into a true civil war, by wrongly reinforcing the accusations of "imperialism" made by our enemies (who are themselves as imperialist and oppressive as you can get).

Keep in mind, that despite the assertions of the armchair quarterbacks, we are increasing troop strength -- Iraqi troop strength.

Keep in mind, that calls for a symbolic "sacrifice" on the part of the American people, can be counterproductive to supporting our troops in tangible terms, by gumming up the economic engine that sustains their efforts. Let's not cut off our nose, to make our face feel warm and fuzzy ...

Our enemies will be defeated, only if we OUTLAST them.

Get the messgage out.

Cybersquattin' ... in simple terms ...

2006-04-15T11:21:00.000-05:00

... let me spell out the link between 911 and Iraq.

Both operations were run by terrorists ... and terrorism in any form is an existential threat to civilization.

Full stop ... end of story.

Everything else ... the terrorist training camps in Iraq, Zarqawi's ability to move freely in Iraq before the invasion, the contacts between Iraq and AQ ... is icing on the cake. The fact that Saddam engaged in terrorism is sufficient for reasonable people to demand his takedown.

This is a War on Terror, of which 911 was our wake-up call ... to arms. The 911 hijackers, and even Al Quada, are not the only threat out there.

Stop the moonbat tit-fro-tat games ... a.k.a. the "law-enforcement" approach, where we only go after those involved in a specific incident ... and realize that we are in a war that is bigger than Iraq.

You want to know why we needed to take Saddam down?

Look at Iran.

Had we acceeded to your views, Saddam would be well on his way to emulating the Iranian president ...

... except that Saddam would not have a set of mullahs to act as a check-and-balance, but still had the rather-unique history of using WMD upon innocent populations.

He would have his own, dormant weapons programs (documented in the Duelfer report) running again, as soon as he squeaked by one non-comprehensive weapons inspection and the diplomats subsequently declared victory.

Or ... did you know, before the invasion, about the dormant WMD programs, and have a plan to stop those? I'd like to hear it.

(part of a dialogue with a regular Left-leaning commenter, here ... formatting added for emphasis.)

Cybersquattin' -- General Nuisances

2006-04-15T07:37:00.000-05:00

If six former generals, including the commanders of the 82nd airborne division, and the Big Red One, say that the situation in Iraq is a debacle and only removing Rummy will give us a chance to get out with a shred of honor, gee, I for one am willing to listen.

Well, if we are going to go beyond hearing, and actually consider the opinions of these six generals, I think that we need to know ...

... did these generals speak this frankly to the previous President and his SECDEFs, when that Administration REFUSED to act decisively to defeat terrorists (including Saddam, which Bill Clinton certainly talked about as an enemy and supporter of terror) and then win this War on Terror at a far lower cost in blood and treasure than what we are paying now?

I don't think so ... show me that I'm wrong.

If they did not speak with that frankness against that folly back then, their present statements ring quite hollow ... for they are not based upon wisdom.

They certainly could speak out in public about the missteps of the Clinton years now, just as they are doing about this Administration. Has the cat got their tongue?

Could it be that their statements today are based on political ambition ... book deals ... sour grapes ... and fighting the last war?

Hmmm ...

The conventional wisdom ... more troops/leadership changes/better (read: longer) planning, working to unify the non-unifiable (read: BDS sufferers) ... would not have, and will not, bring victory. In fact, it can be shown that such measures were and are COUNTERPRODUCTIVE to this war effort.

There is one essential ingredient for victory at this time ... RESOLVE.

We must not only defeat them ... we must outlast them, and prove to them that we will continue to forcefully oppose them, wherever they appear, in perpetuity.

That was the missing element in our foreign and defense policies ... even while these generals were serving this nation prior to 11 Sept 2001. If they were wise, at least they would have spoken up to correct this error as they were counseling our Presidents (past and present), with the same forcefullness they are using now in public. (If they did, let them speak up now and corrrect the record.)

Instead, who was it that brought RESOLVE to the table, after a long absence?

George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Condolezza Rice ...

... and Donald Rumsfeld.

The very people the critics are now villifying, brought the essential element for victory and peace to bear upon our enemies, once again.

That you critics do not acknowledge this truth is an indictment of the "wisdom" you possess ... and makes your criticism ring very hollow.

Cybersquattin' -- It Bears Repeating ...

2006-04-13T06:45:00.000-05:00

... again, and again, and again.

You'll see why, at the end

------------------------------------

Please, give me evidence that this war is worth fighting.

How about ...

... Saddam's history of significant support for terrorism in the name of Islam ... financial, logistical, and in terms of its human resources.

... Saddam's mothballed WMD programs, documented in the Duelfer Report (anti-warriors: what was YOUR plan to keep these programs from being restarted, since you didn't even know their scope until after we went in?)

... the fact that the only real deterrent to the conventional threat Saddam posed to the Persian Gulf, was our presence there ... a presence that would be pressured to leave, as soon as Saddam squeaked by one (non-comprehensive) weapons inspection and the resultant declaration of victory by diplomats worldwide.

In the light of the above, our strike in Iraq was, to the War on Terror, the EXACT equivalent of bombing a German munitions plant in WWII.

But wait, there's more ...

... the amalgam of capricousness, brutality, and mendacity that is Saddam Huessein, demonstrated for years upon Iraqis (Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd), as well as upon Iranians and Kuwaitis ...

... demonstrated in particular by all those mass graves ...

... and so typical in the light of history. Anti-warriors: name me ONE totalitarian regime with expansionist tendencies in history, who ceased expansion and/or gave up power voluntarily, in the absence of a CREDIBLE threat of force against them.

In the light of the above, what has happened in Iraq, was the equivalent of ending the Nazi regime ... in 1934 or 1935, instead of 1945.

Still more ...

... the fact that, until Iraq has a sustainable rights-respecting government, it will be susceptible to being hijacked and exploited by another Saddam wannabe, and/or by those paragons of freedom, the Iranian mullahs.

... the fact that the oceans no longer protect us. Technology has physically and virtually interconnected our world, to the point that any significant disruption of that interconnecton is a significant threat to the whole of civilization. Someone above suggested we should "protect our home FROM home". I have two words for you: Maginot Line. If a determined enemy is left to plan in peace, he will take his time and develop effective countermeasures to any defense you devise, then attack at a time and place of his choosing. You must deny that enemy that peace, by taking the fight to him.

... 40 years of negotiation, accommodation, and the moral equivalence that treated dictator and democrat with equal deference in international forums like the UN, led those who wish to impose totalitarian rule upon us to believe that we were not going to challenge them ... and they began to act upon that knowledge, starting with the exploitation of our open societies and good-faith diplomacy to better position themselves for war.

In the light of the above, what is happening now is a common-sense correction to 40 years of Utopian lunacy, where men whose actions liberated millions were villified by the so-called "peace-loving" as reckless "cowboys", while thugs were left to grow stronger and bolder.

Why did we suffer this lunacy?

Because to many of our "sophisticated" and "enlightened", the Unpardonable Sin is having confidence enough in your principles to act in accordance with them ... even when those principles have been validated by history.

The Iraqis have the same innate humanity as we do ... a humanity that transcends religion, ethnicity, and culture ... a humanity that responds to the opportunity to exercise their inalienable rights in a nation that structurally protects those rights ... and they will do so if we sustain our effort until those protections are there.

The benefit to us? Their nation and its resources will no longer be susceptible to hijacking from within by totalitarian thugs or fanatics, to plausibly be used against us or others who cherish freedom outside their borders.

Contrary to what some generals (who seem to be wanting to fight this war like the last ones, without regard to its asymetrical nature) may be saying, numbers -- and the heavy hand derived from them -- are not what we need.

What we need is the one thing that, when we exhibited it over the last four decades, led to the retreat and defeat of the greatest threats to modern civilization ... and whenever we did not exhibit it, far weaker enemies grew stronger and bolder, to the point that this present conflict became inevitible, harder, longer, and more costly.

RESOLVE.

We must outlast these enemies ... and convince them that we are NOT going away before they do ... even while we convince those around them that we are NOT going to oppress them by a gentle-but-firm presence in their nation.

Unprincipled criticism ... much of it based on that same Utopian lunacy that let these threats grow for decades ... undermines that resolve, while strengthening the resolve of our enemies. Don't think so? Ask Vietnam's General Giap. If your enemy can't defeat you directly (and they can't), watching you question your principles, villify your statesmen, and lose your resolve to oppose them is very encouraging to them. It does make them hang on, and fight harder.

We need RESOLVE ... not more troops, not WWII-style "sacrifice" (which would be counterproductive to the war effort), but RESOLVE ...

... or we and/or our posterity WILL be defending our home, FROM home ... against a stronger, and perhaps even nuclear, enemy ... with no other friends around to help us.

Cybersquattin' -- WWJD?

2006-04-12T05:59:00.000-05:00

To all those whose knowledge of Scripture seems to begin and end with "Where much is given, much is required ..."

IMO, Jesus wouldn't wait for the illegal immigrant to cross our border before He'd step in and help him ... He was always big on GOING to others and rendering aid -- and not just the Band-Aid of short-term relief that has the appearance of "doing something".

I don't see any of you lining up to go down to Mexico and do just that ... rendering aid not only by delivering physical necessities, but in confronting the corruption that is oppressing these people and forcing them out of their nation.

No, instead, it is always America that is either the cause of the problem (and therefore deserves to alone be burdened with its resolution), or the cash cow that alone must be milked to solve the problem.

We didn't cause this mess to begin with ... and there are more resources than ours that should be applied to rectifying it. I'll tell you where the prejudice is here ... it is the prejudice of those who persist in viewing America as a greedy nation, facts be damned, and therefore deserving of all the burdens being placed on it, and it alone.

BTW, that same Jesus also told us to render unto Caesar's, what is Caesar's ... and the way I see it, now that "we the people" have supplanted Caesar, that commandment carries extra weight.
Illegally slipping into this nation, and avoiding obedience to her laws ... including, but not limited to, her tax laws ... is not conformance to that commandment by any definition.
And if you want more reinforcement for this position, go read what Jesus' spokesman Paul had to say in Romans 13.

Finally, what makes y'all think that Jesus would approve of people speaking for him, whose socioeconomic worldview can be summed up as follows:

We'll guarantee your right to ...

... get stoned ...
... get your jollies ...
... get a free Band-aid ...
... get a check ...
... and "get by" ...

... by taking your right to get ahead, as we ignore your right to live

Read the parables ... Jesus had a healthy respect for both the profit motive and the work ethic, as long as it did not get in the way of one's relationship with Him. He also took a rather dim view of living like a libertine ... even in the case of the convicted adultress, He told her to "go and sin no more" as He protected her and forgave her.

And, regarding the war we are presently in ... the same God whose Son told us to turn the other cheek (which is quite different than forgiveness) gave us a total of four cheeks to turn ... and a brain to discern an alternative course of action, prior to running out of cheeks.

Fun with new toys ...

2006-03-26T23:36:00.000-06:00

In response to my Senator's commentary on immigration policy ...

(The implication ... how about "going" to Mexico and helping them get their act together?)

And, on a related note, regarding what may be the only phrase in the Bible Leftists consistently consider the Word of God:

And, just in case you think we are threatening "theocracy" ...

There is power in prayer ... and we need it!

Now, regarding foreign policy ... out back of the church ...

And a little more guidance on the subject ...

All this, brought to you by ...

(Hat tip to my friend Daniel ...)

Tell me there's no media bias ...

2006-01-19T05:38:00.000-06:00

... or at least an irrational moral equivalence among the media:

AP headline, 19 Jan 2006:

Iraq Asks U.S. to Release Six Female Hostages.

The article actually refers to eight female detainees, in conjunction with the kidnapping of a freelance reporter for the Christian Science Monitor.

Come on, people ... can't you tell the difference?

(tracked to Mudville Gazette's Open Post).

Tag! I'm It ...

2006-01-14T21:05:00.001-06:00

... at least that's what Daniel says.

I can't think of a better way to get "back in the saddle", so here we go:

Four jobs I've held in my life:

Detassler for a hybrid-seed-corn farm.
Service-station attendant (says something about my age).
Bread truck driver.
And of course, engineer, which has its own set of four:

> Radio frequency (AM transmitter design)
> Audio frequency (pro audio design)
> Line frequency (utility equipment)
> Zero frequency (batteries, chargers, and associated test equipment)

One could say that my career is one of decreasing frequency ... and it can't go any lower.

Four movies I could watch over and over:

Hellfighters ... starring John Wayne in a role where brains counts as much as brawn.
Apollo 13 ... where heroic high-tech rednecks abound.
Forest Gump ... which shows just how much one man "could" affect the entire world.
Armageddon ... golf balls, $25; oil rig, $8,000,000; using Greenpeace to judge your distance ... priceless!

Four places I've lived:

Springfield, MO (my birthplace)
Wilmington, OH (where I learned how to rock 'n' roll)
Highland, IL (where I raised my kids)
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX (where I became a Texan "by environment").

Four TV shows I love to watch:

Extreme Makeover: Home Edition -- wackiness for good cause!
The Apprentice -- and I thought MY project schedules were short!
American Chopper -- not for the bikes, but for the interpersonal relations.
Modern Marvels -- ok, I'm a nerd!

Four websites I visit daily (besides Daniel's):

The Indepundit (my blogdaddy)
Blackfive
Mudville Gazette
Froggy Ruminations

And of course, I leave comments at all of them!

Four of my favorite foods:

My father's corn bread (made in a skillet, with NO ... I repeat, NO ... sugar!)
Homegrown, half-runner green beans.
NY Strip Steak -- medium, rolled in coarse-ground pepper-based seasoning.
Outback's Bloomin' Onion

(now you see why I could be "viewed" as the conservative mirror-image of Michael Moore!)

Four places I'd rather be:

At 10,000 feet altitude, behind the controls of a Cirrus SR-22.
Dallas -- it is in the GREAT state of Texas, after all (and home of da Band)!
Quincy IL -- holding my grandaughters.
The White House

Four albums I can't live without:

Petra -- Beyond Belief
White Cross -- In The Kingdom
Newsboys -- Shine: Greatist Hits (2000)
Third Day -- Wire

(admittedly, my tastes might be considered rather "peculiar")

Hey ... Tantor ... Jeremiah ... MajorDad ... and the Greyhawks ...

Now You're It!

Thoughts on Christmas morning ...

2005-12-25T07:54:00.000-06:00

Liveblogging -- my Thanksgiving blogosphere "cease-fire"

2005-11-24T06:12:00.000-06:00

Welcome to all ... particularly you who came here through Mudville!

I have decided that today, I will execute a pause in my rhetorical battles.

I will use this day, as time allows, to reflect upon and illustrate the abundant, amazing grace of God that has been (classically, small-"l") liberally applied to my life and this nation.

This post will be updated throughout the day, as time and thoughts (and endorphin levels)enable me to post coherently. Do feel free to add your own thoughts, in the comments section!

All times are in EST.

0715: Just dropped a comment over at my friend Daniel's. It was my last shot before the cease-fire -- but not at Daniel.

Daniel's presence in the blogosphere is something to be thankful for ... thoughtful, considered opinions from someone who has lived in terror's bullseye, always delivered with an appropriate level of respect. He is no knee-jerk, in any sense of the word ... and a regular stop in my blogospheric rounds.

Time to make the turkey, now ...

0905: Pumpkin pies out of oven -- and stuffed turkey breast in. Removal ETA 1135-1205.

One of the great inventions of our time ... right up there with sticky notes, white-out, and hook-loop fasteners ... the turkey bag. Just load per instructions, and go ... no guesswork, no basting, no undercooked turkey!

As for the pies, they turned out OK ... despite having to remove the filling from the shells, right after I put them in the oven, because I forgot to add the evaporated milk! (Hey, if I was perfect, they couldn't afford to pay me for my day job!)

Now, the observant reader might ask ... why are you doing all the cooking, Rich? Why does your wife trust you ... on Thanksgiving, of all days?

Why ...

> There are only the two of us here today (Long Island is a little far from our kids and extended family in IL and MO -- and with the house sale {see below} and a grandbaby due to arrive around New Years', we have to keep a tight travel budget) ... therefore, she is sure my cooking will not make anyone else sick.

> On a more serious note -- my wife suffers from a number of chronic ailments, including arthritis. Add to that the stress (and culture shock) of our move to New York, and you can discern that she needs her rest.

Even in that regard, we still have several things we can be thankful for ...

> Our second grandchild, and the potential she represents.

> Our first grandchild, who is growing in stature and knowledge every day. More of a conversationalist every day, as well ... but my favorite word of hers is "Pawpaw" ...

> Our grand-doggies, Mikey (the hyperterrier) and Buddy (the canine Mr. Spock ... he tilts his head with a quizzical look from time to time, just like the Leonard Nimoy character).

> Our children and their spouses ... who are not sponging off of us at home, but are instead making their own lives (and learning about the pitfals of self-employment and home-building).

> My "new" job -- while I really appreciated the work environment and opportunities of my previous employer, I think that I have much more control over the security of my employment in my present position -- and it also gives me many opportunities to revive unused elements, as well as add new elements, to the "toolbox" of my skil set. Financially speaking, the new position will also allow us to enhance the soundness of our finances and retirement plans.

> On 2 December 2005, the sale of our home in TX "should" close ... removing a big financial weight off our backs and allowing us to proceed with the enhancements described immediately above.

I remind myself, from time to time, that I could be emulating the biblical Job ... and despite his losses and afflictions, he could declare that the name of the Lord was blessed.

The fact that I am not emulating him is a function of God's grace ... for despite the evil in the world around me, and the errors I have made, I still live free, and can still concentrate on the pursuit of happiness instead of being constantly focused from moment to moment on financial ... or physical ... survival.

Grace, courtesy of God -- in large part delivered through the efforts and sacrifice of men and women like these.

Be sure and check that link out ... and heed the advice of the Greyhawks.:

Today is a day for something different. If you have a moment you might want to leave a "thank you" in the comments section of these blogs - let these guys read you for a change:

I am.

More later ....

1002: SMASH points us to advice from Hugh Hewitt, regarding another kind of "cease-fire".

Don't have to worry about that kind of up-close-and-personal contact this year ... though finding a Leftist in my family requires a major reunion, just to gather the one or two within it.

1206: Turkey out, baked sides in, potatoes are boiling on the stove. Consumption ETA : 1300.

My parents called me earilier, from their home in MO. I could discern a bit of disappointment in my father's voice when I told him we weren't sure when we would be back ... we're planning be in the area either for Christmas, or shortly after -- after the new grandbaby arrives. But I am my father's son ... neither of us let our emotions override reason. He's even talking about coming up here ... which is a MAJOR change in attitude, given his objections to airport searches.

My wife has been awake for a little while now ... we've been watching my childhood favorite, the Macy's parade. Maybe next year, the weather will allow us to make a "live appearance".

Stuff to do .... more later.

1425: Consumption complete ... endorphins are kickin' in.

First time I had to wear glasses when carving the turkey ... as if that helped -- I made a mess of the stove when I punched through the turkey bag and holed the foil pan, freeing turkey juices to run over/d0wn/in the stove. (See earlier statement about perfection).

However, everything was edible.

I'll wait a little bit for the endorphins to kick off, before I attempt to write anything deeper than "mmmmmm .... turkey".

I see that MajorDad stopped by ... MajorDad, I add my good wishes to yours -- may you and your family have a joyous Thanksgiving (hope there's some Texas barbecue involved), and thanks again for YOUR service to cake-eaters like me!

I also see that Greyhawk took the poll results I posted in a couple of Mudville's comment threads, put them on the front page for all to see ... and gave his two cents regarding their meaning. It would be tempting to run over there and "reninforce his position" .. but a violation of my rhetorical cease-fire would actually be counterproductive to the achievement of that objective. So, I'll keep my weapons clean and my ammo dry ... for tomorrow!

Later .... buzzzzz.....

25 Nov 2005, 0900: Looks like the buzz was stronger than I thought ... just kidding.

Actually, my wife and I got very busy, taking care of various little things. Today ... not much shopping, but health and house-sale stuff for us.

Be sure to stop by and thank some of these people who protect cake-eaters like me.

Thus endeth the live-blogging ... and the cease-fire.

The boulder awaits ...

Let's roll.

Leftist SCUDs incoming ... Launch Patriots!

2005-11-19T06:45:00.000-06:00

I've been hanging around Mudville a lot lately, doing my part to "alleviate" an "irritation" in the Greyhawks' comment threads ... and now I see that Greyhawk has rolled the boulder to new heights.

You NEED to read A Brief History of a Long War (Iraq, 1990-2003) -- and then bookmark it for future reference ... Greyhawk states that this is a work in progress, so as good as this is already -- it's going to get better!

However, Greyhawk, I can see the incoming SCUDs* on my radar already -- how you left out that we were "in bed" with Iraq, that we "created" Saddam (like we "created" Osama in Afghanistan).

When they get closer ... shoot them down! Remind the SCUDs ...

... that when it comes to relationships with Iraq, ours was a mere conversation over coffee, compared to the whore's bed Iraq shared with France and Russia ... who did their best to keep Saddam in power (and in the case of France, one could truly say "no war -- for oil", given the huge oil contracts Saddam had with the French oil company ELF).

... WHY we played footsy with Saddam and other dictators in the pursuit of proxy warfare ... because of the strident Leftist opposition to ANY decisive use of American military force that didn't have, as a prerequsite, thousands of dead American bodies in American streets. This foolish, yet compassionate-sounding, knee-jerk opposition politically poisoned the well of prudent governance ... and directly led to our enemies' decision to perpetrate September 11, as well as stiffen their spines (from Saddam's time, to today) in Iraq.

The SCUDs dare to say the President "misled" us on Iraq, just because the stockpiles (not the WMD programs, not the talent to make them happen, not the dual-use percusors, not the ties to terror and even AQ itself) were missing.

Yet, it is they who led us down the garden path of peace through universal impotence ... for decades ... when in fact the cause of peace has been advanced in those same years, only when we ignored the Leftists and let the "cowboys" like Reagan and our present President ride freely.

Who's been lying, now?

Filth-encrusted, rusty, cast-iron pot ... meet the shiny stainless-steel kettle in the White House.

------------------------------
*SCUDs -- Stupidly Clueless Unamerican Dissenters.

Boulder ... hill ...

2005-11-15T05:59:00.000-06:00

... here we go again.

Why do I keep doing this?

Why do I take my precious time to do it, squeezing it in between my day job and the rest of my life, to the point that my wife rolls her eyes and sighs?

No, I'm not talking about blogging here, on this site ... given my rather-intermittent posting history, no one can say that I am truly "obsessed" with making The Alleged Mental Case the next Instapundit.

I'm not even talking about cybersquatting ... as I often do at SMASH's and Daniel's, with regular stops at Mudville and Froggy's ... and occasional stops at Blackfive and Tim's, as well as Radley's place when he had comments open. I've made several friends in these places ... friends I've never seen face-to-face, but friends nevertheless.

None of the above is so obsessive, that it incessantly drives my time-management decisions from day to day. If, as some say, insanity is defined as repeating what doesn't work in the hope of a better result, the case could be made that I am truly a Mental Case.

No, what I am talking about is akin to talking to a wall ... regularly engaging in heated debate with the most intractible of moonbats, returning their fire ... giving as good (if not better) as I get.

Why do I take them on, when it is quite evident that not only will their minds not be changed by my words (no matter how good) ... but they, in a manner similar to our Islamofascist and totalitarian enemies, will fold/spindle/mutilate the truth -- including my own words -- and attempt to use it against me and those of like mind ... including the man I am proud to call "my President"?

Like in this thread from my past ... and this one ... and even being accused of lying, and supporting torture ... just the most recent example of what I am talking about.

And of course, on several occasions, being subjected to the sobriquet of "chickenhawk", as if that instantly renders my opinions inert ... with total disregard for the value my own contributions to the war effort, as an engineer who designs equipment for the use of our warfighters in the practice of their dangerous but vital profession. At least I can answer such as these with my own sobriquet of "turtledove" ... as in, head-pulled-inside-shell ... and remind them that, if they are truly anti-war, they need to at least protest both parties in the conflict with equal stridency.

Why do I subject myself to such abuse ... and afterwards, go back for more? Why do I, when I read a post that promotes the Leftist viewpoint and denigrates my own, start looking for the next opportunity to answer it ... and am restless and unsatisfied until I do?

It's not because of those who are dishing out said abuse ... my attitude towards the people I interact with in the blogosphere is best exemplified by my final comment at The Agitator , the day Radley turned off the comments.

To those who seemed to see things as I do -- Dani, Michelle, James D, Michael, Danno, Rocket (love ya, but sometimes you need to temper the enthusiasm?) and others -- thanks for reinforcing my beliefs.
To those who were principled in their challenges -- Evan Williams, Joe Sims, Bernard, Wade, Joker and others -- thanks for challenging my thinking.
To those who seemed, by their choice of words or knee-jerk logic, to view me as evil incarnate -- thanks for the exercise, but as Dick Marcinko would say, "doom on you".

No, the reason I keep coming back to the bottom of the hill, to start pushing that boulder up, can be found earlier in that same post.

OTOH, I have no regrets for my persistence and energy in presenting and defending my views in this forum. I still believe that freedom of speech also comes with the responsibility to challenge published error, if fact and logic support that conclusion.

I take that responsibility seriously, because I have seen not only my nation, but the world, suffer for the wrong choices we have made.

Choices that were made, not from greed, or from a desire for violence, but from hubris ...

... a hubris borne of the belief that we are so advanced in our education and sophistication, that basic human nature -- both its capacity for good, and its affinity for evil -- is a trivial concern to us as we form and implement the public policy of our nation.

... a hubris that encourages us to particularly ignore human nature when it comes to evaluating the threat our adversaries present to mankind ... irrelevant to the point that the need to confront those so evil they would turn our good faith against us is totally ignored, until the bodies pile up in our own streets as "proof" of a threat.

... a hubris that tells us "it can't beTHAT simple", and compels us to analyze and pontificate on every "nuance" of every problem, and ignore the simplest ... yet true ... principles that apply to it.

.... a hubris that leads some to believe that humanity can completely and accurately perceive the truth of the universe, and encourages them to step beyond their perceptual limitations on their own ... into an abyss they do not even recognize in their hubris.

In short, a hubris that led to the outright promotion of falsehoods that sounded good to the academics and the chattering classes ... but collapsed under the weight of actual use by our nation.

Such hubris led to the $3 trillion stalemate of the War on Poverty, and the dumbing-down of our schools while calling it "progress". It produced the boat people and re-education camps derived from our Vietnam "experience", along with the killing fields of Cambodia.

This hubris let my great uncles ... and the rest of us, less directly ... sit in a nuclear bullseye far longer than necessary. It was behind the vociferous and obstructive opposition to the man who took them out of that bullseye, calling him a jingoistic cowboy who would get us into war ... when in fact, he ended the threat of that war, and freed millions of people from totalitarianism, by confronting evil.

This hubris paralyzed us and allowed the seed of Islamofascism to take root in Iran ... the seed of a weed, that sunk deep roots into our world, when it should have been pulled out early in its germination. This hubris fertilzed the Islamofascist weed with inaction and ineptitude on the part of our nation, letting it mature and spread its malevolent seeds all over the sandy soil of the Middle East -- with one seed mutating into the malignant Al Quada strain.

This hubris let another species of pest -- Saddam & Sons -- run free, even when we had them dead in our sights, with more than enough reason to take them out ... raising the cost immeasurably, in blood, treasure, and distrust, to finally trap these vermin.

Keep in mind, we live in a representative republic -- the men who embraced this hubris, crowded out those with common sense, and built the rickety scaffolds we built a lot of our society and foreign relations on since the 1960's -- were elected by us. "We the people" chose them ... because what they said, sounded good, and fair, and compassionate.

The results speak otherwise ... yet even when the "early" results were in, even with the light of past history to guide us, we kept choosing hubris over horse sense, because all the "right" people -- our academics, our media personalities, our leaders -- were promoting this hubris ... and those who knew better were crowded out of public discourse by the political and media gatekeepers (who, at their executive levels, also embraced the hubris). The gatekeepers were aided and abetted by a "modern" value system, where educated "expertise" was elevated far above simple wisdom.

For lack of a strong voice to the contrary, "we the people" heeded the siren song of this hubris ... and made decisions, in the voting booth and elsewhere, on the basis of falsehoods derived from self-deception regarding humanity's true characteristics.

We suffered for it.

Now, a new generation comes along to continue the tradition of haughty human hubris ... as the old saying goes, failing to learn from history -- even recent history -- they appear doomed to repeat it.

However, in this day and age, the lies they unwittingly (or intentionally) spread in their self-deception need not go unchallenged. Our public discourse is no longer dominated by the talking heads of major networks ... nor are contrarian voices locked out of the public discourse by the gatekeepers of the "old school".

It is with such as these, that I choose to engage in rhetorical battle in the blogosphere ... even though it is unlikely I will change their minds. But it is not for their sake, that I do so.

I do so, for the sake of many others who may never post a comment in a thread ... but will read the comments my adversaries post, and in the absence of an alternative viewpoint, accept their lies as truth ... and repeat history.

The task I voluntarily accept ... in the face of the flack, and the stubbornness of my adversaries ... is to make sure that we do not repeat that history in the decisions made this day... by doing what I can to assure, in the words of The Who, "we won't be fooled again!"

Consider it another part of "my" war effort -- an effort to make sure the cost of the inevitible confrontations of evil in the real world is reduced to an absolute minimum, by nipping problems like Saddam & Sons in the bud.

An effort to see our nation make the "return on investment" of terrorism so small, only the truly deranged attempt it ... and it becomes equivalent to garden-variety murder in terms of the impact upon our world.

An effort to assure, as much as humanly possible, that we do not send the signals of weakness that embolden our adversaries, motivating them to place us -- and all others who seek to peacefully interact with us -- once again in the position of unwitting target, or compel us to sacrifice our lives in last-ditch efforts to save others, by being backed into a corner ... or the back of a speeding airplane.

Boulder ... hill ...

Let's roll.

-------------------

(Now tracked to Mudville's Open Post -- with a hat tip to Greyhawk, for suggesting that I write on this subject. Also tracked to this post by SMASH, whose attitude appears to be a more-rational parallel to mine -- especially when it comes to the subject of democracy in the Arab world.)

Casebolt's Question ...

2005-11-12T09:44:00.000-06:00

This post over at Instapundit reminded me of what I call Casebolt's Question ... a question I have often raised in government-policy discussions, but have yet to see answered by those who believe that corporations dominate us all:

If corporations are so powerful, how did an Arkansas redneck like Sam Walton ...

(... or a college kid like Michael Dell ...)

(... or a college dropout like Bill Gates ...)

(... or some lawyer named Herb Kelleher ...)

... come out of nowhere and steal their customers so effectively?

As Glenn would say ... heh.

Anyone want to take a crack at it?

Great, kids -- DON'T GET COCKY!

2005-11-02T05:45:00.000-06:00

Looks like the conservative punditocracy is getting what it wanted, with the nominaton of Sam Alito to the SCOTUS.

I will say this ... based on what I am hearing about him, I'll back the guy. He definitely appears to be a strong candidate, with a more obvious pedigree than Harriet Miers in terms of his judicial philosophy.

And, if, as Froggy says:
"You know it’s a good nomination when all the right people are pissed
off about it. Just like voting for the California initiatives, looking at
the opponents is probably more revealing than looking at the
supporters."
Sam Alito is downright GOLDEN!

The meltdown is unprecedented ... from the statements of all the usual whiners on the Left (click Froggy's link above for examples), to the supposedly-unrelated (yeah, right ...) grandstanding of calling for a closed Senate session to discuss the investigation of our intelligence failures, the opposition is falling all over itself to regain control of shaping the agenda in the media after Alito's nomination (and Rove's non-indictment, and the recent successes in Iraq ...).

Harry Reid et. al. had better watch themselves ... for if they seek to return to Daschleesque obstruction as the order of the day, they will wind up just like ol' Tom.

Now, to reinforce my paraphrase of Han Solo in the original Star Wars, (and the reason I supported Harriet Miers in the first place) let me add another quote from that movie ... from an unnamed pilot, during the final attack on the Death Star:

Stay on target ... stay on target ... stay on target ...

If we conservatives try to spread this fight over the whole breadth of the conflict between Leftism and conservatism ... if we push Sam Alito only as one who will "vote right" on the various issues that are the focal points of that conflict (abortion, gun control, affirmative acton, even terrorism) -- we might win this battle, but risk losing the American people ... and the political war ... and even risk losing the War on Terror.

Keep in mind that MANY Americans (1) are comfortable with a measure of judicial activism and (2) are very uncomfortable with a fanatic pursuit of idelological purity -- from Left or Right. If this battle is not focused upon one central issue -- the issue that will, if set right, lead to the proper sequence of events for resolving all the issues listed in the last paragraph -- we risk a retreat of the American people from sound principle, and will see them return to the "comfort food" of 1960's idealism that weakened our nation and retarded real progress.

We must keep the debate focused on one thing, and one thing alone ...

.., do we want judges who respect the Constitution, and uphold the balance of power it establishes by not reaching beyond the role defined in it for the judiciary -- sharing the responsibility AND authority for the pursuit of justice with the other branches of our government, including changing the Constitution for changing times by the mechanisms it provides ...

... or do we want judges who believe that they must force "justice" (as they see it that day) upon every situation that comes before them -- even if it means the short-circuiting of representative government, and the Constitution itself?

*** STAY ON TARGET *** STAY ON TARGET *** STAY ON TARGET ***

(BTW ... to assist your targeting, I have added one more name to the blogroll today -- someone who often scoops everyone else when it comes to reporting what history will say about today's events ... Victor Davis Hanson.)

Trackbacks posted at Froggy's, SMASH's report on the nomination, the Greyhawks open post, and with Don Surber's "smart... comments".

Put another blog on the fire ...

2005-10-23T07:21:00.000-05:00

Three new entries on the blogroll today:

Don Surber was kind enough to blogroll me ... and we concur regarding the Harriet Miers nomination, though his reasons are different than mine (my support is based on more than trusting my President; it is also based on strategic/tatical considerations for this important political battle).

Jeremiah Stoddard was another kind soul ... and he reports on some planned "celebrations" that are downright DISGUSTING!

The final "entry", though, corrects an oversight that dates from the very start of this blog.

This blogger was already a household word in the blogosphere when I put down my first post here. Like me, he is not a professional journalist/writer (though he has published his writings) ... and shares my passion for flight (and has done more to feed it than I have).

He has a clear appreciation for just how good he -- and the rest of us -- have it here in this great nation ... and how vulnerable we are to the disruption of what makes it good, if we are not watching out for that nation.

Like I seek to be, he is already a voice for the intelligent common man ... deep thought based on common sense expressed in understandable explanation in common language. He implicitly understands those three rules in Murphy's Laws of Combat -- the important things are always simple ... the simple things are always hard ... the easy way is always mined.

While I am cognizant of his shortcomings, and always remember that he can err ... I consider him a role model when it comes to blogging. The highest blogospheric complement I could ever be paid, is for my writings to be considered the Readers' Digest version of what he has written.

Welcome, Bill Whittle, to the blogroll of The Alleged Mental Case.

Getting a little testy, are we?

2005-10-20T21:55:00.000-05:00

After reading about him over at SMASH's, I paid a visit to this post of the Bad Blogger and let him know my thoughts ... in typical Mental Case(b0lt) fashion, just like I do at SMASH's.

Well, look what the Bad Blogger had to say about me ...

Before he deletes my comment on this ... let me post it for you ...

If that comment is evidence that I'm a "shill", it's no wonder that you thought what you did about Indepundit. This is called full-contact debate ... and is common over at SMASH's place.

While commenting on another blog, run by one of the regulars in the Indepundit comments section, I stated that I thought there was the appearance of a (sound) mind under your bluster ... kind of like an adversary of mine over at Indepundit, Chris Alemany, with whom I regularly engage in this kind of debate.

After your response, I may have to apologize to Chris for the comparison.

Notice that, unlike you, I did not stoop to the gutter to get your goat ... and I will not respond in kind, for I believe that revenge is a dish best served cold, as in cold logic, cool reasoning, and cold, hard, fact.

Read my lips ... Valerie Plame had not been a covert operator for at least five years before her alleged "outing". That makes the statute in question ... a statute designed to prevent turncoats from leaving the country and outing ACTIVE operators ... irrelevant.

How this was good for our national security?

For one, it exposed Joe Wilson for the fraud he is ... it exposed his inconsistency, between what he told the NYT, reinforced during his tenure with the Kerry campaign ... and what he actually saw?

That was far more threatening to our national security that "outing" his wife -- especially when she was already "outed" in practical terms.

Not to mention the exposure of how Joe got the job ... good ol' nepotism. I thought only conservatives engaged in that ... and that those who spend their lives in "non-profit" pursuits are totally immune to that expression of selfishness.

No, regardless of the President, I wouldn't be screaming about this.

As for Rove ... so what if he appeared four times before the grand jury? The truth will come out ... eventually. I'm not even that upset over the waste of his time ... he is a politcal operative, not a public official.

Karl Rove is not the President of the United States ... and he is not being investigated for sexual harassment, the way Mr. Clinton was.

There was far more legal grounds for the sexual-harassment investigation of President Clinton than there are for indicting Karl Rove ... because the Plame situation does NOT FIT THE STATUTE.

All that is left is "did he lie?" ... and again, Karl Rove is NOT the President. In fact, when it comes to people under the shadow of scandal, this Administration has not caught up to its predecessor in numbers, much less what they are accused, or convicted, for.

Frankly, I find it rather ironic that Clinton was hoisted on the petard of his own party's obsession with politically-correct sexual-harrassment laws.

You simply cannot equate the two ... unless you're reaching for anything you can to tar the present Administration.

The Misunderestimation of the Harriet Miers Nomination -- UPDATED!

2005-10-08T08:36:00.000-05:00

ENOUGH ALREADY!!

Many conservatives are going dowright apoplectic over the nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court.

Some are citing her lack of experience as a sitting judge ... and ignoring her broad and diverse experience as a lawyer, presenting cases before such judges. I submit that her experience places her closer to the real-world consequences of flawed jurisprudence than other candidates ... she has a better feel for what's at stake when it comes to a decision, than those who have spent years in the ivory tower of unaccountability and judicial theory.

Besides, does experience get us that much more from our political leaders? We keep re-electing the same people to Congress for years and even decades ... and they never seem to learn from evident error (example: Democrats keep trying to equate compassion with funding, despite the wasteful failure of their Great Society/War on Poverty).

Now, look at the judicial activists who sit on our Supreme Court -- even with decades of experience, they haven't even figured out that their activism is wounding this nation, let alone tried to change it. In fact, the heavy weight given to the "experience" of legal precedent works against the acknowledment of the problems by the judiciary, delaying (if not denying) the resolution of those problems.

Could it be that our courts have become legally and intellectually inbred ... and we need people that have not spent their lives on the bench to revitalize our legal gene pool?

-------------------------

Other conservatives look at the Miers nomination as the avoidance of a fight they believe we need to have ... a battle in the culture war, to be waged in Congress.

I submit that some of these are looking for a judge who will "vote right" -- not in the sense of original intent, but in a conservative mirror-image of Leftist judicial activism. That is NOT what we need, and we need to be very careful we do not even LOOK like, much less actually be, seeking it ... to do so would be handing the opposition the ammo they need to thwart this and other nominations, on a silver platter!

If this nomination is perceived as imposing "right-wing" ideology through activism, or becomes a battle over the totality of Leftist vs. conservative viewpoints, we stand a good chance of LOSING ground ... not gaining it!

Unfortunately, there are large segments of "we the people" who, while they perceive the need for the rule of law and effective representative government, are comfortable with a certain degree of Left-leaning judicial activism ... it doesn't negatively affect them in their view, and it makes them "feel good" that the flaws in our representative government can be quickly "corrected" by bypassing the democratic process. Many of these are also uncomfortable with ANYONE perceived to be an ideologue ... Left or Right ... having power.

The Left exploits both of these characteristics ... they have been successful in shaping the debate over the years, so that (1) judicial activism is equated with "social justice", and (2) their ideology is sold (particularly in the MSM) not as Left vs. Right, but as "truth" vs. "greed". Thanks to the wealthism that the Left has historically infected many in our population with, judicial activism is seen as another way for the little guy to "get theirs" from the greedy rich right-wing guys -- and at present, their "theocratic" allies -- who "run everything".

The President is acutely aware of this problem, yet he also knows (as many of us on the Right do) that judicial activism undermines the proper checks-and-balances that prevent both an imperial judiciary and an imperial Presdiency, along with a Congress dominated by a "tyranny of the majority" ... something that is not clearly perceived by those infected with the wealthist virus described above.

He has ALWAYS stated that his judicial appointees will be "originalists" -- those who will apply the Constitution as written and amended, instead of viewing it as a "living, breathing" document that can be distorted at will to fit one's concept of "justice", with no need to submit it to the messy process of amendment.

Populating the court with originalists is the Left's greatest fear ... for they cannot impose their agenda through the ballot box and its derivatives -- laws that pass originalist Constitutional muster, and the amendment process. They DEPEND upon judicial activism, and they will fight the seating of originialist judges by any means necessary ... but not by a direct attack, for they don't want the truth about judicial activism, and the threats it poses to the rule of law and freedom itself, laid bare for "we the people" any more than it already has been by recent decisions like KELO.

By appointing Harriet Miers, the President is making this battle about originalist vs. activist judical philosophy ALONE. Unlike the other, allegedly more qualified nominees, she does not carry a shiny ideological axe ... just the shield of originalist philosophy. As a result, the President has put his opposition in a box ... "shaping the battlespace" to focus the debate upon the primary threat we face, and minimize the ability of the opposition to misdirect the debate ... and to do everything possible to assure that an EFFECTIVE nominee -- one who will act to thwart judicial activism -- will be seated on the Court.

If the Leftists try to oppose her on ideology, they are going to have a hard time making it stick without being exposed as ideological bullies ... and if they oppose her originalist philosophy, the dangers of judicial activism will be exposed even more -- and they will be perceived as ideologues who wish to short-circuit the Constitution to get their way.

If the President we support is to be believed by those who are comfortable with the present degree of judicial activism -- and win them over to a more sound philosophy of jurisprudence -- we must not give in to the temptation to demand he make things right through the appointment of "our own" judicial activists ... and while we still can have, and even need, to fight the battles of the culture war, we need to pick them carefully, so the skeptical become our allies, instead of pushing them to our opponents in the name of a so-called "purity".

Let's not shoot both him and us in the foot ... by misunderestimating him ourselves.

Don't perceive his actions as "weakness" -- IMO, what he is doing is deploying a political "smart bomb" here, for effect.

(Tracked to Mudville's Open Post, Wizbang's Carnival ... the linkfest at Stop the ACLU ... and the Indepundit's Morning Quarters.)

_______________________

UPDATE: Read my lips, TTLB -- I support the Miers nomination.

As I posted in the comments section there ...

The conservative punditocracy is seeking a knock-down-drag-out battle between the entirity of conservative and liberal ideologies, with the battlefield being the next SCOTUS nomination. (A few, deep down, may even desire a conservative judicial activist ... which is the height of hypocricy, IMO).

I believe this is a tactical error, because the American people will not respond well ot a battle-of-the-hardcore on the floor of the Senate. Instead of paying attention -- and learning about what is at stake here -- they will get disgusted and dismiss it as mere politics.

IMO, what the President attempted to do in the Miers nomination is focus the battle on the most significant issue -- originalism vs. activism -- by NOT putting up a name from the conservative "short list" of those who are carrying a bright, shiny ideological axe for grinding.

Had he been successful in doing so, the Dems would have been denied the use of their usual EvilConservative(TM) tar-and-feathers during the debate.

Instead, through their response, the punditocracy has given the Dems either (1) new talking points that are NOW harder for the President to defend against, and/or (2) hope for a party on the ropes.

If this nomination will have been blown, it will be by the punditocracy, not the President.

Sorry for the long absence ...

2005-09-28T01:10:00.000-05:00

... between the new job and moving, it has been a busy month!

To start things back up, and in light of last weekend's protest, I give you this little ditty from my past ... (video link -- cameo appearance in middle)

You said that this war is a war for oil
It's greed at the point of a gun
But if we really wanted to take that oil
We'd have stayed there in 1991
And I guess that you'll just have to deal with the fact
It's returned to the people of Iraq
Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind
Your protests sound much like breaking wind

You whine and you moan about right-wing neocons
That you say are demanding empire
When instead what we seek is to liberate men
And to snuff out the terrorist fire
If we wanted empire, then why do we see
That Iraq has its soverignty?
Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind
Your protests sound much like breaking wind

You say that corporations control the whole world
And for profit, your own life would sell
But if corporations are so powerful
Then why do guys like Walton and Dell
Come out of nowhere and steal customers
from those same corporations so well?
Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind
Your protests sound much like breaking wind

You say that not God, but the UN you trust
to watch out for your safety and peace
But it stands in the way of the defeat of thugs
'Till they drop our bodies dead in our streets
And frankly for a non-profit it's rather rude
To get rich off Oil-For-Food
Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind
Your protests sound much like breaking wind

You compare Bush to Hitler, say election's a fraud
You treat him like Attilla the Hun
But we see right through you, we know you hate Bush
'cause he acts and he gets the job done
and that he will not take from those who work to get ahead
and subsidize those who just seek "fun"
Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind
Your protests sound much like breaking wind

Yes we see right through you and your calls for peace
Right through to your core of disdain
For the principles that have made America great
And the freedom you say you proclaim
If you really want peace, then protest the terrorists
who crash planes and slaughter men like lambs ...
Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind
Your protests sound much like breaking wind

Your protests, my friends
Sound much like breaking wind
Your protests sound much like breaking wind

Frustration

2005-08-17T11:59:00.000-05:00

Recently, as I've listened to my new morning-drive infotainment, and have been checking Mudville's Dawn Patrol, it seems to me that those who wish to repeat the history of the last five decades -- a history where good and evil were turned upside down in the eyes of free men, opening the door for those espousing "traditional" totalitarianism (as opposed to the mythical kind allegedly derived from the PATRIOT Act) to grow in strength and reach -- seem to be getting louder.

Again, we hear how "this war was a mistake" ... "this war was started for the wrong reasons" ... "this war was for oil" ... in the MSM.

Apparently, it doesn't matter to such as these that, according to the Duelfer Report, Saddam was the one who lied -- to his own generals -- about the presence of WMD stockpiles, while STILL protecting the means to restart the R&D needed for WMD production.

You would think they would realize that the blindness within our intelligence appratus ...a blindness that they, in attempts to tie our nation down like Gulliver in the name of "peace" and "accountability", actively encouraged in government policy ... kept us from seeing through what Saddam was telling his own staff.

Given that blindness, then how ... once the inspectors had given Saddam a clean-bill-of-health, and we were told by the (now shown to be corrupt) UN to leave him alone and lift the sanctions ... do these critics suggest we should assure that Saddam didn't build on what he already had to get weaponized WMD?

They never seem to answer that.

And ... if this was a war for oil, why aren't we seeing evidence of Americans profiting from that oil, like we did with UN Oil-for-Food?

You would think they would understand the need for resolve, even in the face of tough going, if we are to stop a determined enemy (something we knew going into this). You would think that they would understand that September 11 was only "the end of the beginning" of a greater war, involving more than just Al Quada, that threatens our way of live with a terrible tyranny that will impoverish this now-highly-interconnected world in the short term, and oppresss billions in the long term, if left unchecked.

You would think that they would agree with me, that the way of life our enemies seek to impose on ANYONE THEY CAN is simply NOT morally equivalent to our way of life ... and in fact is diametrically opposed to many of the critics' "progressive" tenets.

You would think that those with the education the critics have could also show us even ONE instance where the negotiation and passivity they advocate has ever stopped a tyrant in the absence of confrontation with the CREDIBLE threat of force ... let alone show us were even ONE tyrant stopped expanding his empire on his own accord, in the absence of such "warmongering" confrontation as my President advocates.

You would think that history, since 1979 certainly, would show us that ignoring such tyrants is counterproductive in terms of promoting peace and security ... while confronting them leads to the liberation of millions, and the promotion of true peace.

But, they don't. Why?

I submit that, for many, it is because they simply cannot believe in a society that is based upon free enterprise. They simply do not trust America, in the face of history, to do the Right Thing ... ever ... because they believe that our respect for the profit motive will always distort Right into Wrong.

Now, that view, by itself, could be plausible (though still wrong). We have made our mistakes. Where the critics turn error into foolishness is when they gloss over the inadequacies ... and in a few cases, evil ... of societies/economies/nations other than America.

They wax poetic about Old Europe ... and the socialism that could only exist there by the continued presence of strong capitalist enterprises that somehow have resisted the choking creep of socialist ideology that has killed off smaller businesses and produced double-digit unemployment. (And, let's not forget 50 years of protection from the "hard rain" of Soviet socialism, under the American nuclear/military umbrella ... that allowed them to divert resources into social services with relative impunity.)

They see the democratic Israeli govenrment and the kleptocratic Palestinian Authority as morally equivalent ... and some even view such "peacemakers" as Hamas as freedom fighters instead of the thugs that they are.

They see Saddam & Sons as either being oppressed by the American bully, or too insignificant in power (despite their total control of Iraq's resources and infrastructure, and the nearby resources they could "annex") to merit the attention of our military ... or limit their consideration of the threats Saddam & Sons posed to conventional warfare, and claim that containment worked ... even though that was a very leaky bucket in terms of looting Iraq's resources, with some going to corrupt the international community, and some going to support terrorism, and some going into building unconventional force (i.e. the aforementioned WMD R&D efforts).

It is interesting that such as these will support, or at least tolerate, LIMITED military force, as was seen in Kosovo, on two conditions:

> America (though it provides the bulk of the force) must submit itself to the control of a "coalitiion" that will make sure it doesn't act in its own interest (right or wrong).

> There must be NO WAY that Americans can engage in profitable enterprise from their presence in such a conflict, or her motives will ALWAYS be suspect.

> The leadership that takes us into war, is on the same ideological track as today's critics ... and therefore the critics inherently trust them.

Other than that ... the planning doesn't matter, the provisioning doesn't matter, armor doesn't matter, troop strength doesn't matter, civilan casualties don't matter. Those aspects are no different in such a conflict than they are now in Iraq ... but because people like Halliburton MIGHT profit in Iraq, and/or progress in Iraq might validate to some degree the ideological viewpoint of conservatives, all these aspects are looked at under a microscope there, in stark contrast to the relative inattention given such details in places like Kosovo.

They are seeing a threat ... the wrong one. As I've often said, the critics are more concerned that America (and by extension, themselves) "might" look bad if one of our officials is in a position where he/she "might" shred paper ... than they are concerned that thugs, in control of vast resources that can be used to threaten today's highly-interconnected world, are ALREADY shredding people.

A not-so-stranger in a strange land ...

2005-07-25T17:35:00.000-05:00

... after three days of Interstate (interspersed with two-lane detours), seasoned with the consumption of mass quantites of diet soda and junk food.

... lunch with my parents in MO, a visit with my son in IL, and dinner at my cousin's house in OH

... a tiring search for a hotel room from OH through WV to PA, in the wee hours of the morning

... a three-and-a-half hour crawl over the 50 or so miles from Newark, across the Verazzano Narrows bridge, through Brooklyn and Rockaway Beach, past JFK to my final destination

... I HAVE ARRIVED ON LONG ISLAND!

One thing I expected ... many people noticed that I'm not from around here.

One thing you wouldn't expect -- Long Islanders are friendly folks, disguised by a New Yahrk accent.

So far, so good. First day on the new job went OK.

Only thing is, the new employer is a little stricter about "personal" use of Internet access (i.e. blogging on the company connection). So, until I get an apartment and Internet connection, me and Panera Bread (with their free WiFi) are going to be good friends.

More later ... starting with the recent actions of the British regarding the treatment of terrorist suspects during apprehension. You know what I am referring to ... or you would be so unaware, you wouldn't be reading this.

You got questions ... we got answers

2005-07-20T12:09:00.000-05:00

On this post at SMASH's, I found a particularly disturbing comment from "MickA". Since comments are presently down at SMASH's, I'm going to respond here

Because it doesn't matter what you believe. If you are unwilling to question what you believe or what you are doing then you are wrong. This is never more certain during wartime when propaganda is a given.

When an assertion like this comes up, the meaning of "question" seems to always go down a one-way street ... only questioning of the Administration is considered legitimate, but questioning the reasoning and motivations of its critics is still "off limits".

MickA, let me tell you something ... we have questioned and considered the course of this Administration, and its critics. I did so for years, well before my President of today came to power.

This nation has even conducted "trials" (a few of its own choosing, many forced upon it), all over the world, of both worldviews represented above.

And what we found, was that when those who perpetrate such evil as Islamofascism were accommodated (regardless of ideology), they didn't remain static ... instead, both their capabilities and their appetite grew .

OTOH, when such perpetrators were confronted with the credible threat of decisive force, they retreated into insignificance, either being turned -- or destroyed.

In other words, the results show us that the "give peace a chance" worldview gave us more of the peace of the graveyard and the silence of the gulag ... while the "warmongers" paved the way for the expansion of TRUE peace, in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.

The question is whether it is worth giving up you own society's values in order to fight them.

So, MickA, I'm going to ask this same question several times below ... so get ready: Please PROVE this assertion. What values have we given up? Justify your conclusions.

The first comment on the linked page quotes the former US Secretary of State saying that the death of 500,000 children under UN sanctions on Iraq was "worth it" to contain/punish Saddam Hussein.Do you agree? In deciding to do this have the nations which made this decision lost something themselves?

IMO, MickA, those 500,000 deaths were WASTED lives ... wasted because we listened to the "give peace a chance" crowd that now opposes the actions of this Administration.

Instead of taking Saddam out in 1991 (or earlier), we chose to leave him in place ... in large part, because we did not want to be considered "imperialist" or "warmongering" by the elites of other nations ... and impose the sanctions to form the (leaky) bucket of containment around him.

Yes, we did lose something ... but we lost it somewhere between 1950 and 1970, when our elites began to look upon the direct and decisive use of American force as inherently evil, and something to be avoided at ALL costs. Their influence upon our leaders led to the outcome you describe above.

Do you now question THEM, along with my President?

In fighting a regime which kills and tortures its citizens is it worh employing tactics which make your country a worse human rights violator than your enemy?

Please PROVE that America has degenerated to anywhere NEAR this level.

Is it worth sacrificing your own country's freedoms in order to spread these elsewhere in the world?

Again, please PROVE that America has denegrated to this level.

Is it worth spreading freedom to Nth Korea if it means you will have to be on a 3min nuclear warning for the next 10 years? Have you not given up your own freedoms in doing this if you fear to stray 3mins from your backyard bunker? Or if you have to carry a gas mask with you at all times and live in a duct-taped bubble in order to be safe from chemical attacks?

The fallacy you appear to operate under, is that NOT spreading freedom will spare us from having to live in this manner ... or live in subjugation to men like bin Laden or Huessein.

History shows us that the appetite of those who would deny others their inalienable rights to gain an advantage or benefit for themselves keeps growing, until they are CONFRONTED with the CREDIBLE threat of DECISIVE force.

Unless we confront them, they will keep coming ... we don't have a choice in that. Our realistic choices are:

Subjugation to tyrants ... with no protection of our rights to live free and pursue happiness.
Wait until we are "justified" in taking action, as measured by the presence of dead bodies in our own streets, to avoid the appearance of imperialism ... while the body count grows and grows and grows outside our borders, and more people inside our borders are threatened with death.
"Work the problem" NOW, before the enemy has the opportunity to grow both stronger and smarter ... even to the point of preemptive action. BTW, history has shown us RELIABLE ways of determining who the valid targets for such action are.

He (McNamara) asks in order to win a war should you incinerate 100,000 people in a night.

If many of those 100,000 people are conditioned to fight you to the death, at the command of a leadership who, if they win, will deny MILLIONS their inalienable rights ... yes.

OTOH, if they are willing to end THEIR nation's aggression short of that ... no.

In WWII, we had to do that ... but not today.

Today, we in our respect for human life have developed ways that are effective in taking out the military capabilites of a regime, while reducing civilian casualties to an absolute minimum.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

The Japanese wanted to win that war too you know, and the rationale that destroying US cities would have saved a whole lot of Japanese soldiers would have been equally true. Would it have been acceptable for them to have destroyed those US cities in order to achieve their goals?

You leave out an important consideration ... motive. It makes the difference between killing in self-defense and murder ... on an individual, and a national, scale.

One side sought to preserve the inalienable rights of people, inside and outside its borders ... the other side sought to impose its will upon all in its grasp, rights be damned.

That makes all the difference in the world ... and your argument reeks of the fallacy of moral equivalence, based upon results alone.

These are tougher questions. And keep in mind it is irrelevant whether you agree how well these things apply or whether they have occurred or will, the question stands: is it worth it. Because either you are willing to set limits on what you will do to an enemy or sacrifice of yourself in order to win or you are not.

MickA -- you need to ask one more question.

Who's going to set limits on the enemy ... and how?

Controlling our own actions, by itself, will not protect us against the loss you describe ... for it can be imposed on us, if we do nothing.

If you are not willing to even entertain the question then you there is no need to look elsewhere for dangerous brainwashed fanatics.

As I said above ... we have already questioned BOTH the Administration and its critics, looking at the merit of their viewpoints in the light of history. Problem is, the call for "questioning" is often used as a delaying tactic by those who oppose decisive action of any sort.

So, do we keep asking questions forever .... or should we apply what we have learned so far, make the necessary decisions, and excecute them?

This is not a comment on the US either, it is a universal truth. Your example of Hitler and Germany is a clear enough indication of this.

How about adding a few other countries to that list ... like say, most of the UN General Assembly members, who use accusations of American "imperialism", not to further peace, but as "war by other means" to advance their interests over top of others' rights.

Or, is the US the only focus of evil in the world today, in your eyes? Maybe you need to question YOUR assumptions some more ... after cleaning your glasses and clearly viewing the state of freedom in this nation today.

You canna change the laws of physics ...

2005-07-20T11:23:00.000-05:00

... especially those of human life.

There are three film/TV characters that, to me, embody the ethos of the engineer ... a drive to "work the problem" and solve it, regardless of its magnitude.

Chance Buckman ... the rough-hewn (and smart) oil-well firefighter played by John Wayne in the 1960's movie Hellfighters ... a character based upon the real-life guru of wild-well control, "Red" Adair, whose innovations are still being used today in places from Texas to Iraq.
Gene Kranz ... the no-nonsense flight director played by Ed Harris in Apollo 13 (my favorite quote: "Let's work the problem, people ... Let's not make things worse by guessing."). The role was based on the real-life Gene Kranz, who, IIRC, oversaw every one of the Apollo missions from the flight director's chair at Mission Control ... and it is one of my two favorite Ed Harris roles (the other being General F. X. Hummel in The Rock).
Commander Montgomery Scott, aka "Scotty", who saved Captain Kirk's behind (and beamed up the rest of him) multiple times in the various incarnations of Star Trek. He was played by versatile character actor James Doohan, who, like Lenoard Nimoy, became inseparable in the public eye from his character in this franchise. The most famous phrase directed at him ... "Beam me up, Scotty" ... even became part of the political landscape (sans the name), thanks to Jim Trafficant.

Unfortunately, even engineers with hero status are also subject to the laws of physics ... James Doohan passed away today, at age 85, from pneumonia and Alzheimer's disease.

Farewell, Scotty ... I hope your journey to man's "final frontier" is as satisfyingly exciting as you made our future appear to be, for me ... may it be, as you once said, "no tribble at all".

(My apologies for the sparse posts -- hey, I'm moving this week!)

Big changes ahead ...

2005-07-08T11:56:00.000-05:00

... yesterday, I gave my two-weeks notice to my employer here in Dallas.

I have accepted a new engineering position with a major manufacturer of portable-power products for the US military and other "harsh environment" applications.

This company has been one of "my" customers for years, and is probably the best customer I had the pleasure of working with in my soon-to-be-previous position. They are both technically sharp (whenever they called me, it was never a stupid question, but a real issue), and very professional in their interaction with suppliers ... never belligerent, but pleasently matter-of-fact. This attitude is reflected across the whole company, from what I see ... and is similar to the operating climate in my present position.

They are bursting at the seams with new orders and new projects to be designed ... and with my experience, I will be able to make a positve impact there, almost immediately. Instead of playing a support role to the marketing and product-design teams as I do at present, I will be part of the "core competency" of this new company, where I design the actual products the company sells. It also helps that "they made me an offer I can't refuse" ... in a positive sense.

Now for the culture shock ... my new position is located on Long Island about 35 miles or so out of NYC.

Even though I'm the progeny of a Kentucky hillbilly and an Ozarks hillbilly, and made Texan by environment, I can live with that ... not only is it a little less crowded than the Dallas metroplex (the real-estate term "zero lot line" is not known on Long Island, from what I see), there are REAL, TALL trees instead of mesquite ... and salt water is fifteen minutes north OR south.

There are downsides, of course ... from selling the house here (in a flat real-estate market, to boot), to leaving my colleagues here. A particular downside is ending my leadership of da Band (earlier readers will know who I'm referring to) and leaving my friends at Lakeway church. However, I do believe that God has a hand in this ... whenever He aggregates a large amount of "talent" in one place (as has happened at Lakeway), he usually follows that with a "scattering" of that talent, to places where He can use it for maximum effect.

So, Senators Clinton and Schumer, you had better look out ... me, and this blog, are about to become one of your constituents, so you could say that the Thunderbolt's about to roll on Long Island!

Be careful what you ask for ...

2005-06-30T06:35:00.000-05:00

This is chilling ... downright chilling.

Go here (today, before it gets moved off the page) and LISTEN to what retired General Thomas McInerney has to say about the consequences of pulling out of Iraq ... the alternative to our present strategy, recommended by not only MoveOn.org and others in the loony Left, but supposedly more rational people like a certain United States Senator (from The Indepundit). (There, you can also listen to commentary from Mary Matalin about a favorite, related subject of mine ... the penalty of INACTION.)

I have two great uncles who are farmers in west-central Missouri, about 150 miles due west of St. Louis -- about 60 or so miles east of Kansas City. My parents live about an hour south of them. If you had driven through the area adjacent to their farms before the early 1990's, you would have seen several areas that looked rather out-of-place there ... fenced-off areas about 50 yards square, out in the middle of some farmer's field, with power and a gravel road going to them ... but no buildings within.

If you were to get closer, you would have seen mostly gravel and concrete -- particularly, a large, hexagonal slab of concrete that looked two or three feet thick, with steel tracks sticking out from underneath it in one direction.

You would have also seen signs on the fence, declaring that the area inside the fence was the property of the United States government, trespassing was prohibited, and the use of deadly force was authorized.

If you haven't figured it out already, what you would be standing next to was a Minuteman missile silo -- the garage for a three-stage, solid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile with three independently-targetable nuclear warheads, each with over ten times the power of the Hiroshima bomb. That missile was kept there for one purpose ... to give the Soviet Union the incentive needed to NOT launch their equivalents at us.

The presence of these missiles put my uncles in the bullseye, for these silos would be the first targets in a Soviet first strike.

As I grew up and drove through this area on several occasions (particularly after watching the 1980's TV movie "The Day After"), I often thought about what it would be like to see those vapor trails going up ... knowing full well another set would be coming DOWN within less than thirty minutes.

************

Today, were you to drive through the area, you would see that these fenced-in areas are now either obliterated, or wrecked ... the results of Reagan-era and GHW-Bush-era arms negotiations with both the Soviet Union, and the Russian Federation that replaced the Soviets. That replacement, the subsequent removal of these silos as operational assets ... and therefore the removal of the bullseye from the homes of my uncles ... did not result from setting timetables, or even negotiation alone. These events were the result of the confrontation of evil by Ronald Reagan ... a confrontation that was both decried and politically opposed by that certain Senator above, along with his Leftist fellow-travelers.

History has proven their methods and geopolitical viewpoint wrong, time and again ... yet they persist in the same errors that brought down South Vietnam, prolonged the Cold War, and allowed the rise of a virulent Islamofascism that, as the General describes, desires the nuclear fire for its own brutal uses.

This week, my President said it best:

"We know that if Evil is not confronted, it gains in strength and audacity and returns to strike us again."

General McInerney is now issuing a prophetic warning ... if we pull out of Iraq now, we will be setting the stage for a remake of the Cold War, against a reconstituted Islamic caliphate that:

> Will be able to cripple the global economy through its totalitarian control of the Persian Gulf oil fields, which will not only replace progress with misery in the Third world, but will give the caliphate the leverage it needs to acquire the technologies that can light the nuclear fire.

> Will have the ability to strike -- not just with human bombs, but with ICBMs -- Israel, Asia, western Europe ... and eventually, North America.

> Will be far more likely to strike, than the Soviet Union at its most belligerent, for it lacks the rationality of the old Bear. Islamofascism instead has the irrational fearlessness of the fanatic, that is willing to not only kill others outside its borders, but is willing to see those inside its borders killed to further its causes.

> As a result, the United States and other rights-respecting nations will once again be caught with both a crippled economy and an arms race ... except that this time, Mutually Assured Destruction will probably not be sufficient to prevent a nuclear exchange, for the fanatic considers his life worth losing.

The Leftists often decry the casualties of today's American bombing as an atrocity ... despite the use of expensive precision-guided munitions and associted targeting policies that minimize noncombatant casualties while still killing the enemy.

If the Left gets its way, and we pull out of Iraq, those weapons and policies may be rendered useless ... and the casualties of today will be rendered insignificant in history's calculus.

We will then be boxed into two choices ... either SURRENDER (and the expansion of Dar-al-Islam and Sharia law, which does not embrace Leftist "tolerance" in any sense), or NUCLEAR DESTRUCTION OF THE CALIPHATE, as we suffer the same in multiple areas of the Western world.

Be careful what you ask for, MoveOn and Senator Kerry ... you might get it.

When will this war end?

2005-06-18T10:10:00.000-05:00

A common question these days ... some very misguided people even want to pre-define the end of our involvement in it, as if this war will dry up and blow away if we would just pull out.

What I say below was (as usual lately) a comment on a post at SMASH's:

Accept the fact that there will be no surrender ceremony on a battleship in the Persian Gulf to mark the end of this war ... in fact, it may not end even upon the eradication of Islamofascism.

It will end when the resolute rejection of terrorism -- by both action and word -- is so universal among the nations of the world, there will be neither a safe haven for the terrorist, nor a return on his lethal "investment" in terms of forcing political change that is sufficient to justify his effort and risk.

Until then, others will be tempted to emulate Al Quada ... inside and outside Islam. And, we are only at "the end of the beginning" ... for too many nations still give a wink and a nod to any group of thugs who might drag America, Israel, or anybody else in the "developed" world down to the level of these dysfunctional nations. Their lack of moral and logical vision is one reason, BTW, that the UN is rendered incapable of enforcing its own resolutions.

There is only one way to win ... it is summarized in the old pseudo-Latin phrase "Illegitimi Non Carborundum" ... don't let the b******s grind you down.

The essential aspect of winning this war is RESOLVE. It's that simple, IMO ... and as these two principles in Murphy's Laws of Combat state:

... "the important things are always simple"
... "the simple things are always hard"

Those who want to set a timetable for our withdrawal from Iraq need to be reminded of the very next law in Murphy's list ...

... "the easy way is always mined."

Does this make me a Great Mind?

2005-06-18T09:18:00.000-05:00

Probably not ... but check out the latest Lileks Screed ... then check out this comment I posted towards the end of this thread at SMASH's, as part of my ongoing debates with Chris Alemany:

This is the same kind of problem we are dealing with regarding this War on Terror ... you and I are in general agreement on the objectives; the problem is HOW we get there from here.

I'd love nothing more than to be able to hit CTRL-ALT-DEL on the cosmic PC, select thugs like Saddam and Osama, and hit "End Process" ... and I believe that you would love to have the same chance to do the equivalent on the cosmic Mac.

The problem is, our world is not that sterile ... in fact, our attempts to make the world stage that sanitary have exacerbated the problem.

There was an old Star Trek episode that comes to mind, where the Enterprise got caught in a war-by-computer between two planets. There, the only way to stop the war was to destroy the computers, and force the warring planets to face the brutality of war that they had hidden behind the facade of "sanitary" disintegration chambers fed by computer-generated casualty reports.

Similarly, too many of us have thought that we are too civilized to even countenance going to war ... that going to war, even to defend against a known threat was a failure on our part unless the need was made extremely obvious by suffering mass casualties. Even when we suffer casualties, our shock and revulsion over them persuades us to sweep them under the rug and not remember how they got there.

That line of thinking didn't take into account the demonstrated potential for depravity among a few of us on this rock ... and that, as a result, there will be times that you are going to be forced to go to war, you will KNOW well beforehand that all the negotiations in the world will do no good, and waiting for the perfect proofs and conditions will only make the war longer and more costly ... so we'd better get on with it!

Also, just as trying, as some will advocate, to emulate the Apollo program (which only had to work about a dozen times ... not hundreds of millions) to find those new sources will not lead us to sustainable energy independence, sticking with the idealism of the 1960's will not work in prosecuting a war against an enemy that is not afraid of their own deaths, and has no compulsions against even using our open societies, respect, and goodwill to pave the road to our cemeteries.

Neither, with the present state of the art in both transportation and weapons technology, will waiting for total consensus of all nations work in dealing with this threat. Some of them just don't get it ... or don't want to get it, for fear they will "get it" from those of us who do get it. In the meantime, the enemy capitalizes on the delay to grow stronger, further entrench themselves, and spread unwarranted fear/uncertainty/doubt amount us.

The basic difference between you and I, is where the bar is set regarding the violation of national sovereignty ... not the desire to see people freed from tyranny. Unfortunately, when oppression has been imposed upon a people so long, a popular uprising without outside support that jumps over that bar often "can't get there from here".

This was generated ... a day before Lileks' great Screed, where he actually suggests (through his usual eloquent abrasiveness) how we could use the disintegration-chamber model in the War on Terror in order to quiet the moonbat criticism!

However, this post reflects a thought I have been chewing on for some time: have we, as I suggest above, swept things under the rug that we should be keeping in mind as we act today? Have we become too warm and fuzzy in our assurance that we have already "progressed" beyond such barbarism, and therefore believe we have no need to dirty our hands with further consideration of it?

On this earlier post at SMASH's, the Indepundit included a rather disturbing picture, to remind us what led to this war we're in. One of the regulars found it very disturbing, and requested that he take it down (and I can understand that ... they had lost someone close to them on September 11). To his credit, SMASH said "no" ... his intent in placing that picture out there was to jar our sensibilities and remind us of the importance of what happened there, as we walk around in our Jacko/Cruise/Pitt/Jolie hallucinations and are losing sight of the important issues of our time.

IMO, all of us ... including our children, in an age-appropriate manner that will give them as accurate a picture as they can understand ... need to understand that this world is not yet a safe place when it comes to others' ability to perpetrate brutality, and that we MUST BE READY TO RESPOND DECISIVELY -- even as we eschew the paralysis of fear, and continue to live life abundantly as our Creator designed us to do. While we don't have to be callused in life ... neither do we have the luxury of being so soft and naive, that our very innocence and goodwill can be turned against us.

Maybe we do need to see a little more violence on TV ... accurately, but not sensationally portrayed on the news, instead of in gratuitous Technicolor on the movie channels ... to understand the world we live in, and realize that we are not too good for the dirty business of warfare.

Not because we ourselves wish to perpetrate totalitarian evil or spread death ... but because there exists a subset of humanity that does wish these things, and works to fufill those wishes in our less-than-safe world. The lack of self-control within that subset poisons humanity, pushing us towards either oppression or anarchy ... unless it is stopped, by any means necessary.

We need to be reminded that, since Armageddon has not (yet) arrived, the lion and the lamb are still on their feet.

It's even worse than I thought ...

2005-06-17T12:15:00.000-05:00

... check out Bubblehead's post on the latest antics of Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps ... crashing a funeral of one of our fallen heroes.

Pay particular attention to the signs in the photos ... they've got some new lines that makes it look like they've supplemented their Bible readings, not with the Book of Mormon ... but with the book of Moore-on.

The Biblical concept of "grace", however, is something they (still) are missing in their study.

The similarity of their message to Michael Moore's is logical, being that they have now expanded their judgmental hatred to America as a whole. In their references to IED's, they have now sunk to the level of those who put up the sign "Support our Troops .... when they shoot their officers".

If Paul had this kind of attitude, he would have tried to nuke Mars Hill, instead of preaching from it.

Freakin' idiots.

Where the heck have I been lately?

2005-06-17T07:58:00.000-05:00

My parents were here three weeks ago ... and my in-laws were in town over the last two weeks in the motorhome ... need I say more?

Well, I did say more ... here ... and here ... and here ... and here, producing comment fodder.

You need to go here ... Daniel has really outdone himself, and as a veteran of the Israeli Defense Force, seasoned by the tragedies there, he has the credibility to make this case.

You even need to go here ... for once, my debate adversary Chris has something to say that I can agree with (at least in part)!

Finally, go here ... after the shameful display of his opponent yesterday, Rusten Currie needs our support to part-the-Waters, more than ever before! Is his opponent's action one shot in a new, media-only Tet Offensive?

More later ... hopefully!

Down-ing that memo ...

2005-06-04T08:37:00.000-05:00

Some on the hard Left are trying to make a big deal over the "Downing Street Memo". These notes of a 2002 meeting in the British PM's office are being waved about by John Kerry and Michael Moore (among others) as prima facie evidence that President Bush (1) was determined to start a war with Saddam & Sons, and (2) intentionally fabricated evidence about WMD.

However, there's one chink in their armor, as I described to fellow Indepundit cybersquatter and debate opponent Chris Alemany (who's joined Senator Kerry and the Moore-on in waving the memo and calling for my President's ouster) in the following comment on his blog, Murky View.

Ahem, Chris … that memo also documents the discussions regarding what would happen if Saddam used his WMD against Coalition forces, early in the conflict. If this is the smoking gun, regarding my President’s “fabrications”
re: Iraq, then why were they even discussing that scenario in this meeting? Hmmm ...

As usual, Chris retorted with a juicy response, ripe for the Fisking ... so here we go ...

Because they didn’t know for sure, that’s the whole point Rich.

They didn't know for sure that Saddam did NOT have WMD, either ... however, they DID know that he had used them in the past to further his totalitarian objectives, had sought to acquire and/or develop more potent ones, and would use them again if the opportunity was right in his eyes.

Furthermore, as the Duelfer Report pointed out, Saddam actually liked to keep people ... even his OWN FREAKIN' GENERALS ... guessing about his WMD capabilities -- he was nowhere near as reassuringly forthcoming as, for example, South Africa when it came to verifying disarmament.

As I have asserted before here, you can reliably tell who is a threat, and who is not, by evaluating their past history, character, and capabilities ... and when evaluated in that light, Saddam & Sons were a threat.

No one did at that point. As the Memo states, the WMD angle was the only justifiable angle.

The missing key word here, is "politically".

Any rational person would see that Saddam & Sons were a threat, as I described above and will talk about more later ... but Leftists like Moore and Kerry have, over the last fifty years, sold so effectively the fallacies of "war is NEVER the answer" and peace-through-universal-impotence that it takes nothing less than the threat of WMD to get many people to pay attention to a threat.

The fact that it takes the threat of WMD to get peoples' attention is an indictment of the judgment of the Left, who encouraged this mindset as they prioritized the prevention of American mistakes over the prevention of thug intent.

Did you read the whole memo? It says. “…the case was thin. ..."

In terms of courtroom-level-proof, many months before the war ... perhaps. In terms of the common sense of reasonable people, who look beyond a go/no-go UN checklist to the character of those who might be threatening us ... the case was strong.

"Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran."

Saddam was theatening at least one nearby "neighbor" ... Israel, through his support of Palestinian terrorism. His support of other forms of terrorism (including possibly the 1993 WTC bombing) threatened his global neighbors, as well. WMD would amplify the effect of that "neighborly outreach".

Of course, he had also been threatening the local "neighbors" -- the Kurds and Shiites within Iraq. The only reason the execution of those threats had been suspended (not eliminated) was because the United States military enforced the no-fly zones ... and IMO, it was not prudent to rely on that to keep Saddam in check in perpetuity. If nothing else, the way Saddam played the UN like a Stradivarius would eliminate any guarantee of our continued presence there ... and even if we could keep them in place, the fact that Saddam still controlled the ground there still made it difficult for these people to live free and pursue happiness.

If "capability" equates to number and type of weapons, they were probably right.

However, there is something else that must be considered when evaluating capability: probability of use. This has two components -- the character of those in charge, and the checks and balances exisiting within a government to prevent capricious use of these capabilities. This is what made Saddam Huessin stand out from all the rest ... history shows him as brutal, capricious, and unpredictible, and his nation had NO effective checks-and-balances to inhibit his ability to perpetrate aggression and/or provide significant support to terrorists. History showed us that he would use WMD, terrorists, or any other means at his disposal to expand his totalitarian reach, whenever the opportunity presented itself!

"We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.”

This is their opinion ... not fact. It was not necessarily shared by my President.

For inspections to work, the inspected party must act in good faith ... and Saddam was notorious for his duplicity and obstructions during previous inspections. Get this through your heads, Leftists: inspections were not reliable for assuring compliance, as long as Saddam was still in power.

As for legal justification -- we already had the violation of the Gulf War cease-fire, and other violations of international law doucmented in SEVENTEEN UN resolutions! As I have asked you before, Chris ... when were y'all going to DO something to decisively resolve these problems? Any form of law is WORSE THAN USELESS when it is administered by misguided/relativist/corrupt leaders who will not acknowledge the existence of evil and enforce that law.

“The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action.”

You make this sound like this was just somebody's whim -- as I described above, we had legal justification to take the regime down ... WMD or no WMD.

“The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors. Regime change and WMD were linked in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD. ”

Again, the key word is "politically" ... because politics -- the misplaced idealism of the Left, combined with the realpolitik of the "international community" -- was getting in the way of enforcing the law and protecting the rights of the innocent.

Chris says "so this memo is a smoking gun because it shows:"

a) that Bush had decided to go to war even before he asked Congress and months before he made his “decision” clear to the American people.

You make it sound like he is as capricious and arbitrary in making that decision as Saddam would be ... Chris, have you ever thought that my President was thinking that this war was INEVITIBLE, because of the character of Saddam & Sons -- it was going to be fought, sooner or later, so it was better to fight it now BEFORE Saddam got any stronger or more motivated?

Of course you didn't ... in your idealism, you think that war can ALWAYS be avoided, so therefore anyone who acts to move towards war MUST be evil.

BTW, we do pay our CINC to think ahead, and formulate plans to deal with upcoming threats, even before he presents his findings to Congress and the American people.

Finally -- the policy of calling for regime change in Iraq not only predates this memo, not only predates 911 -- it predates President Bush entering office! It started in 1998, during the CLINTON administration ... with the support of many of those who would now like to use the actions of my President to justify his impeachment!

And, let me add one more thing ... if he was so arrogantly sure-of-himself that he was hell-bent on war ... why did he wait (and risk WMD dispersal) until March 2003, and go through the motions of the UN proceedings? Have you ever been in a situation where you already knew the answer, but were looking for something better?

My President is probably more patient ... than I would have been!

b) that the WMD angle was weak and that the *policy* was to “fix” the facts to fit the outcome.

You make it sound like my President KNEW that Saddam was clean ... but wanted him out, anyway. As I said above, Saddam acted to keep people guessing about his WMD capabilities ... he did not act in good faith or complete cooperation in the past.

And let's talk about that word "fix" ... which was in the memo.

Did that mean distort the intelligence? Where is your corroborating evidence, besides this collection of notes that legally would be considered hearsay, for that position?

The 911 commission found NO evidence of this ... the Senate investigation of our intel apparatus found NO evidence of this ... in fact, witness after witness asserted that NO pressure to distort intel was ever applied!!

OTOH, "fix" could mean organizing the existing, undistorted intelligence around the assertion that Saddam had to go ... that's also called "making your case" and is a fixture in every courtroom, Congressional debate, UN debate, and almost every decision involving more than one person.

c) When push came to shove… Saddam *did* let in inspectors, thus negating the “big difference” that Tony Blair himself said Saddams refusal would make.

Again, inspections were not reliable for assuring compliance, as long as Saddam was still in power. The "big difference" was only political in nature ... not in terms of actual security. The reason that we went ahead with war, was because our leadership accurately perceived the inadequacy of these inspections ... but still gave them every reasonable chance to work.

One problem with the UN is, its officials want to be perceived as "successful" to such a degree that they often sink to the level of "any negotiation -- or inspection -- is a good one", regardless of the facts on the ground ... and conversely, since they consider "any war is a failure" if they are involved in the preceeding events, they had a lot of incentive to get in the way of removing Saddam by force.

This memo may show that the Brits may have been hoping for inspections to make a difference in 2002 ... but when everything was said and done in 2003, compliance was not being assured, so they went to war right along with us.

d) That invading a country for the sole purpose of regime change is not a valid, legal reason for war.

Read all the above, and you'll see that regime change was not the "sole purpose", but only the mechanism for effectively dealing with the MANY REASONS that justified the removal of Saddam.

e) That the humanitarian angle was not an option because there was no ongoing humanitarian crisis (like it *was* in Bosnia and *is* in Darfur.

This note, Chris, illustrates the moral bankruptcy of the Left ... there were a lot fewer mass graves in Bosnia than in Iraq, but the Left had little problem going to war in Bosnia, while it was dead-set against it in Iraq.

Why? IMO, it was because they were assured that America was doing it for the right reasons ... a perception they had ONLY BECAUSE THEY DID NOT SEE ANY WAY FOR SOMEONE TO MAKE A PROFIT ON BOSNIA!

The amount of dead people, or the brutal ways in which they were killed, don't amount to a hill of beans for your ideological fellow-travelers if there is ANY CHANCE that some American rich guy can make a profit. To them, any appearance of personal profit irrevocably taints even the noblest of actions.

As for Darfur -- this is one penalty of inaction.

By the Left's effective inhibition of any effort to clean up these sinkholes of brutality like Iraq over the years, (through its moral myopia as shown above, combined with effective advocacy of its "war is NEVER the answer" position) we now have such a problem in Iraq, that a situation like Darfur -- that does not significantly threaten our ability to operate in the world -- has to wait for our attention.

There are other nations who could take that on ... but y'all insist that, to avoid the appearance of "imperialism", it must be a multinational effort, that includes those (like the UN) that emulate the corruption and ineptitude that feed the problems that are already there.

Please oh please explain to me how even *one* of those points could not be an impeacheable offense if proven?

You fail on two counts here, Chris:

First, this memo has many evidentiary holes in it, and no corroboration of your interpretation of it by other substantial evidence, to the degree that reasonable doubts regarding your assertions are removed.

Second, we had more than enough reasons to consider the removal of Saddam & Sons prudent ... if you recognize that sometimes, war is the answer.

A parting-of-the-Waters?

2005-06-01T11:38:00.000-05:00

Milblogger Rustin Currie, currently on deployment in Iraq, is running for Congress in Califorinia's 35th Congressional District.

That's right ... Maxine Waters' district.

Currie's site will be permalinked here in the near future ... as I will want to follow this!

I wish him much success, as he works to take down one of the biggest No-rons in our Congress.

(H/T SMASH)

Putting an end to ANOTHER kind of fillibuster ...

2005-05-24T11:28:00.000-05:00

This post is a composite, derived from the following:

>A blogospheric trading-of-blows with fellow Indepundit cybersquatter Chris Alemany, that triggered an awesome response from the Indepundit himself.

>The posting of Bill Whittle's latest essay, "Sanctuary".

First, let me deal with the particular -- Iraq.

We did not invade Iraq to exercise totalitarian control over it -- in sharp contrast to Saddam & Sons, who invaded Kuwait precisely for that reason.

We entered Iraq to put an end to that totalitarian control ... both to make sure the peace was kept from being destroyed by a capricious meglomaniac, and to liberate the Iraqi people from same.

IF (and I do mean IF) the President, as some say, had to "find reasons" to justify the invasion, it was ONLY because the international community was so morally bankrupt, that it couldn't discern the obvious ... and reasons had to be ADDED to what was already there (like, say, reasons in those SEVENTEEN UN resolutions) in an attempt to compel responsible action from them!

The inability of the UN (and its Leftist support base) to differentiate between what we did in Iraq, and what Saddam did in Kuwait, is why I hope our Presidents continue to ignore their brand of "international law".

**********

Unfortunately, the anti-war Left prides itself on its focus on every jot and tittle of international law ... as they simultaneously open their mouths to swallow whole the camel of totalitarianism and death.

That is what the anti-war Left has one, for decades. Like I have said before, and will continue to remind readers, only when you confront evil, do you defeat it ... sometimes, without firing a shot, but not always.

The Iraq of Saddam and Sons -- by its material and moral support for Islamofascist terrorism, by its continually callous disregard for human life, and by its pursuit of WMD without its leadership having the checks and balances needed to protect others from its use as a terror weapon -- did threaten your, and my, rights.

Iraq, as a nation, has the basic moral obligation to protect the rest of us from having its resources, infrastructure, and people hijacked and used against us to foment totalitarianism and terror.

In that regard, either the Iraq people were incapble of living up to that obligation by standing up and asserting their rights against the regime ... which in that case, they were innocent victims who needed our help to meet their obligation ... or they were unwilling to do so ... which means that they were complicit in the crimes of Saddam & Sons.

I thank God that the vast majority of the Iraqis fit the first case ... and they should thank Allah that they did not fit the second, for that might be enough justification for in situ sand-to-glass conversion on a national scale.

Yet, the anti-war Left still does not recognize the above obligation on the part of Iraq, or our need to help them -- and us -- out of an untenable situation that they were incapable of rectifying on their own.

The Left, instead, insists that the foundations for a long-term, stable peace that were the results of our action, are less important than the short-term appearances of chaos in Iraq ... and are less important than adherence to "international law". They see that "law" as their greatest protection against the "true" threats to peace in their eyes ... wealthy and powerful nations like, say, America ... yet are blind to the circumvention of that law, on a regular basis, for decades, via both misplaced idealism and corruption on the part of those charged with assuring compliance.

They just don't get what our predecessors already knew ...

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The preservation of the law is not the ultimate objective, for laws are subject to error and corruption on the part of those who enforce them -- OTOH, the preservation of our inalienable rights IS the ultimate objective, for this will act to protect us from that very error and corruption.

Of course, the anti-warriors like Chris counter with, "You can't, however decide that the rules magically don't apply to you anymore."

We didn't -- we obeyed them until the corruption of those charged with compelling compliance to those rules shirked their duties, our enemies stopped obeying them ... and those rules were morphed into a suicide pact for free people.

Again, Chris counters, "And when you break them you must assume and expect to be reprimanded."

The reprimand of those so morally bankrupt, that they treat democracies and dictatorships with EXACTLY the same deference, has no power or authority over free people ...

... if they wish to remain free.

**********

While we all know that the statement "might makes right" is simply not true, is the converse -- "right makes might" -- true?

In other words, is our power, prosperity and position in today's world derived from a legitimate base -- the wise decisions, derived from sound, absolute principles, made here over the years, from the very time of our founding -- that established and maintained a government and society that (imperfectly, but effectively):

>Protects our rights through the very characteristics of its structure?
>Limits, checks, and balances the power of that government over us?>Gives each of us a significant voice in that government?
>Keeps economic decisions in the hands of the individual
>Does not discourage individual initiative and innovation?

The loud voices on the Left seldom, if ever, consider this possiblity ... for it runs counter to several of their fundamental(ist) tenets, such as:

>In nearly all cases, wealth is ammassed through the exploitation of others ... and this can only be corrected by direct government intervention.

>Responsibility is only applicable for those who have already acuqired a large amount of power and/or wealth ... and that responsibility increases solely as a function of pocket depth.

>The acknowledgement of "black-and-white" truth is too simplistic for "thinking" people ... even if many such truths do exist.

Our adversaries -- both in the salons of diplomacy, and on the battlefields of the War on Terror -- have the capability of understanding all this ... but rather than emulate the sound principles we have, and make their people as prosperous and powerful as we are ...

... they instead attempt to leverage existing "international law", and the useful idiots of the loud Left, in order to "elevate" themselves (as opposed to their people) by dragging America down to their lowest-common-denominator.

We have let this happen, for far too long ... we have let the useful idiots and those who would exploit our own good will "fillibuster" the application of sound principles.

Now, finally, rational people ... from many of us on the comments threads in the links above, to SMASH, to Bill Whittle, to George W. Bush ... are acting to put an end to that fillibuster, and see sound principles applied worldwide --- the sound principles that was embodied by our Framers and quoted above.

We do so, for that is what will end suffering, make people prosperous ... and bring true peace.

Accept no substitutes.

I'll think about that tax increase ...

2005-05-21T05:36:00.000-05:00

... when this guy's book shrinks to a two-page brochure.

Actually, this is a bit of a dilemma for me ... on the one hand, I admire the way this entrepreneur has seized opportunity and ran with it ... on the other hand, I am appalled that we have created so many opportunities for him to run with!

So, how do you turn a democracy into a dictatorship?

2005-05-21T04:52:00.000-05:00

Let me tell you how, Mr. Lucas ... it is actually quite simple.

You start by its people replacing that mixture of common sense and profund wisdom that leads to a respect for absolute truth ... with a mixture of myopic idealism, relativism, and outright selfishness that leads to a desire for expediency.

As you already have told us, the "easy way out" leads to the Dark Side -- yet in so many areas, that is what we seek ...

... an affinity for government help that, in the name of helping people "get by", leaves them mired in poverty (or just spinning their wheels) while bleeding further productivity from the rest of us.

... the replacement of sound judgment with "zero-tolerance" -- where all problems are discerned with "one-bit resolution"; i.e. all offenders are equally bad, and are treated with equal harshness, regardless of degree, intent or motivation. The result: "collateral damage" to the good and honest among us, all in an effort to avoid the hassles of dealing with those who see due process and mercy as opportunities to "game" us "suckers" and gain the advantage.

... a loss of confidence in our own decision-making ability, leading us to subordinate ourselves more and more to the dictates of professional "experts" who are so specialized in their expertise, they often cannot see the forest for the trees -- and try to reduce every problem to that special kind of nail that their particular "hammer" is made for.

... a willingness to let tyranny stand, thinking that ignoring it will lead to peace ... when history shows us otherwise.

(Hat tips to Arthur and SMASH.)

Miss me?

2005-05-12T23:56:00.000-05:00

OK, probably not ... but let me explain where we've been lately:

> Things have been rather busy at work, including a business trip to Reno to make a presentation to a group of engineers on battery/charger technology. This was the first time I've ever visited Nevada ... and it was truly culture shock for me to see slot machines as soon as you exit the jetway.

> da Band is keeping me quite busy, too.

This Sunday is "Lakeway on the Lawn" -- an outdoor church service, followed by mass quantities of Texas BBQ from our "Hungry Souls" barbecue team ... then followed by three bands, including a 45-minute set from da Band.

Compounding the usual load (of managing da Band and making sure sound details are taken care of), is the need for me to play guitar with da Band ... our lead guitarist, Bluesman, is working concessions at the Byron Nelson golf tournament this weekend, and he may not be available to play with da Band. Anyone who has been a player-coach knows what I'm going through here -- I'm playing catch-up on the guitar work even as I continue to manage the band, which can at times be comparable to herding turtles.

Any of y'all in the DFW metroplex, feel free to stop in -- use this for directions, or just e-mail me if they don't work for you. The worship service starts at 11:00 -- we'll start dish'n out the BBQ a little after 12 Noon.

> My parents were coming in last week -- until Mom got sick. They're coming this week, so the Mrs. and I have work to do to support that.

> Also, I have not been absent from the blogosphere ... lately I've been stuck in "reactive mode", leaving comments over at SMASH's (and an occasional one at Greyhawk's, Froggy's, and The Fourth Rail) instead of posting original material here. If I get a chance in the next few days, I'll post some of the better ones here. In particular, check the the threads at SMASH's on North Korea.

The grindstone's now back up to speed ... must engage nose ...

Raspberry directs a raspberry ...

2005-04-20T12:09:00.000-05:00

... at Fox News. (H/T Mrs. Greyhawk)

The in-your-face right-wing partisanship that marks Fox News Channel's news broadcasts is having two dangerous effects.

(Hit the link for more about the "two dangerous effects".)

Actually, Fox News is succeeding, precisely because it deals with two basic problems within the MSM.

First, it is exposing the MSM's "objectivity" as the facade it is -- something William Raspberry doesn't seem to understand:

What is at risk is not a reputation for infallibility; everyone knows that even the best newspapers and most careful broadcasters make mistakes. But it has been generally accepted that the mainstream media at least try to get it right -- even when they too grudgingly acknowledge their errors after the fact

Do they really "try"? Or, do they stay within the comfort zones of the media elites of coastal society and/or academia as they engage in the practice of journalism, without consideration to alternative viewpoints outside those zones? Have they become intellectually inbred, as a result, and view ideological conflict not as Left and Right, but as "enlightened" and "ignorant", just like the fundamentalists they ridicule?

Basic problem: every human being is intrinsically biased ... and there is no way to neutralize that completely. Do we acknowledge this, both as journalists and as consumers of journalism, and evaluate the product accordingly ... or does the MSM want us to pretend that they have assembled a journalistic "priesthood" that are somehow immunized from bias and above the fray, and only they should be trusted?

What worries me is that journalism could become a battlefield of warring biases: I'll sock it to your guy, your party or your position on a public issue, and you'll sock it to mine. And we'll both believe we've done a good day's work.

Actually, that is a great filter for discerning truth ... as long as both sides are intellectually honest, and are willing to admit when they're wrong. It's how our Congress is supposed to work.

Unfortunately, the MSM has helped to shape the journalistic marketplace in a way that actually encourages such conflicts ... but adds a fatal flaw that negates the filtering effect and obscures the truth, which is the second basic problem with the MSM that Fox News resolves (at least in part):

The MSM has, to a significant degree, replaced a respect for objective truth with a deference to relavitism, which corrupts intellectual honesty.

Consider that many MSM outlets refuse to call a terrorist a "terrorist", but instead give them titles like "insurgent" or "guerilla" that confers a greater degree of legitimacy upon their intent to take innocent lives as a first resort.

They do so because they think this somehow maintains their "objectivity", by the avoidance of terminology that would "bias" the reader against the subject ... the same line of thinking that leads some in the MSM to declare themselves "citizens of the world", then report on the actions of a rights-respecting nation with as much disdain (if not more) than they do on the actions of nations or groups who seek to deny others their inalienable rights by any available means.

Consider the reporting upon the selection of the new Pope, giving a lot of weight to those who think the Catholic Church should "loosen up" and change with the times ... but not reporting on why some want to see those old-fashioned values of that faith stay in place, for such absolutism would be intolerant of diversity, after all.

On issues from the UN, to the environment, to gay marriage, to George W. Bush, the MSM attempts to remain "neutral", but instead is infected with the relativist's desire to declare all viewpoints equally valid ... regardless of objective fact (i.e. whether the implementation of a particular world view will kill you where you stand, or not).

By embracing relativist viewpoints in their attempts to be objective, the MSM has instead given up all neutrality between Left and Right -- for relativism is embedded in many areas of the Leftist worldview, particularly when it comes to personal conduct.

Fox News, OTOH, maintains a modicum of respect for objective fact ... it is willing to challenge the conventional wisdom of the MSM on issues, bringing up multiple viewpoints while also challenging the basis for each. While it allows other viewpoints to be heard, it does not treat them equally when the facts indicate an inequality between viewpoints.

That is why Bill O'Reilly is the success he is ... and that is what really scares people like William Raspberry.

What the Raspberries of the world are missing, is that while viewpoints can diverge, objective fact is not subject to the divergence imposed by relativism ... their attempts to remain "objective" are, in fact, actually attempts to avoid true objectivity, where opinion is opinion, faith is faith, theory is theory ...

... and fact is fact.

Harry Reid: right -- and wrong

2005-04-13T07:22:00.000-05:00

In the Washington Times, The Senate Minority Leader says that debate on an important supplemental spending bill (involving funding for our work in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as tsunami releif) will be bogged down unless a controversial amendment (the "Real ID" Act, which is intended to curb the use of drivers' licenses by illegal aliens, and places restrictions on asylum claims) is removed.

(Hat tip again to Mrs. Greyhawk's Dawn Patrol.)

For once, he's right ... one of my big beefs with the way our Congress does business is how it persists in using "back doors" to avoid real debate and get things done ... like hanging totally-unrelated amendments onto spending bills, knowing that those will be quickly pushed through the system.

(BTW -- many of us are right now dealing with another back door ... Congress' favorite back door for social change ... the tax code. That's a big part of the complication of our tax system.)

I agree with Senator Reid, that the immigration debate does not need to be part of this bill.

However, that's where the agreement ends ... for while I agree with Senator Reid on the procedural aspects of this debate, I cannot agree with the position of his party -- and for that matter, many Republicans -- on the issue of immigration.

Their focus is all wrong -- instead of working to make sure that our borders are secure and our immigration laws enforced (which are two separate things, that can be dealt with separately), they are focused on accommodating the illegals already here. Read the whole Times article for examples of this ... from BOTH parties.

In the meantime, Congress is TOTALLY leaving the borders to an overtaxed Border Patrol ... as those who would legally volunteer to assist them are not praised or encouraged, but instead denigrated as "vigilantes". And, in their efforts to be accommodating, they are ignoring the good reasons for our present (and practically unenforced) immigration laws.

As I said here, their motives for taking the approach of accommodation are rooted in Leftist ideology and the politics of "the race card" ... as opposed to common sense.

You really want to be right, Senator Reid -- stand up and tell the GOP to get off the dime and have a REAL immigration debate ... and tell those in your own party who think that we "owe" the world open borders to get real.

No-rons on the march ...

2005-04-08T12:27:00.000-05:00

... or is that a comic waddle?

The No-rons (big- and small-n) are out to get John Bolton ... and prevent his appointment as UN ambassador. (Another hat tip to Mrs. Greyhawk.).

You know, their opposition would be a little more credible if their ideology had actually produced good results when implemented ...

But wait ... there's more.

Senators Bill Nelson and Barbara Boxer (one of the big-N No-rons) are placing a hold on the confirmation process for Stephen Johnson as EPA Administrator.

The reason -- Johnson has not agreed to cancel a controversial program that measures the effects of pesticide usage on children.

Nelson's ... and especially Boxer's ... rhetoric is a textbook example of Leftist hyperbole ...

Boxer and Nelson said the EPA's Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study offers to pay parents of a baby nearly $1,000 if they agree to expose their child to household pesticides over a two-year period. (emphasis added).
"If EPA can get away with testing babies, infants, then they can get away with anything when it comes to human testing of toxics," said Boxer ...

Contrast this with this quote from the EPA's own fact sheet for this study:

EPA is committed to assuring that these products are used in ways that are both effective and safe. EPA will not ask parents to apply pesticides in their home to be a part of this study. This study does not encourage or promote the use of pesticides, but only collects data that will be used to better understand past and routine exposures around the home. This study includes both households that do not use pesticides and households where pesticides are commonly used to control bugs in the home. Once a family has been selected, routine, non-invasive monitoring will be used to determine whether and how children in the family may be exposed. (again, emphasis added)

Compare the two views above ... and you'll see my point. These no-rons are "finding evil" where none exists, simply to make themselves more important in this debate than they are as no-rons.

Take a cue from your Leftist supporters, and Move On, you no-rons.

(UPDATED) Here we go again ....

2005-04-08T09:29:00.000-05:00

... a granddaughter (aided and abetted by a judge) has twisted the legal system to have her grandmother placed in a hospice, then have her feeding tube removed.

(Hat tip to Mrs. Greyhawk ... you need to check out her daily Dawn Patrols! MajorDad is on top of this, too.)

Actually, this is even more egregious than the legalized killing of Terri Schaivo ... for the grandmother is neither terminal, in a vegetative state, nor even comatose ... and has a living will which clearly states that removal of a feeding tube is to be done ONLY if she is comatose or vegetative. The legal twists and turns are also much more egregious than in the Schaivo case ... compared to that case, this case has had almost no judicial oversight beyond a single lawyer and the attorney for the hospice.

Why is the granddaughter doing this? This will chill your heart ...

"grandmama is old and I think it is time she went home to Jesus," Gaddy told Magouirk's brother and nephew, McLeod and Ken Mullinax. "She has glaucoma and now this heart problem, and who would want to live with disabilities like these?"

Lady, it's not your call ... and you're the kind of idiot who makes my own calling harder.

Tell me we aren't fostering a "culture of death" these days ...

UPDATE: Common sense prevails! The grandmother is now at the University of Alabama - Birmingham medical center, where she is receiving the nourishment ... and medical care ... she needs, over the protest of the granddaughter -- who told the court that the grandmother's removal from the hospice would result in "irreparable harm". (Can you say "ironic"? -- thanks to Greyhawk for following up on his wife's good work!)

A measure of the effect John Paul II had ...

2005-04-06T08:12:00.000-05:00

... from FoxNews.com:

The crush of pilgrims on the road leading to the Vatican is expected to rise sharply when an expected 2 million Poles arrive in Rome for Friday's funeral of the Polish-born pontiff.

When he first entered the papacy, I don't think that, even in his wildest dreams, this Pope would have forseen THIS occurring at the end of his service.

(UPDATED) If you believe that prayer can change things ...

2005-04-05T08:06:00.000-05:00

... now's the time to turn belief into action.

SMASH's wife has been painfully injured, and faces a long, painful recovery. Check the link for details from SMASH himself.

One prayer already communicated to the Father ... more to follow.

Pray for them both.

UPDATE: Mrs. Smash is now home ... no paralysis, no surgery needed at this time. However, her L1 vertebra was compressed to the extent that it is significantly closer to her spinal cord, so she has to avoid high-impact activities ... like horseback riding, which has been a lifetime passion of hers). She is wearing a back brace for now, and faces a long, painful recovery.

Prayers answered ... more to follow.

See you later, my brother ...

2005-04-02T15:39:00.000-06:00

Some people want to live
Within the sound of chapel bells
But I want to run a mission
A yard from the gates of Hell
And with everyone you meet
I'll take them the gospel and share it well
And look around you as you hesitate
For another soul just fell
Let's run to the battle ...
("Run to the Battle" by Steve Camp)

I might not be a member of John Paul II's church, but we served the same Lord ... and he served Him in big ways, reaching far beyond the pulpit. The verse above certainly fits his life here among us -- and while we may not have agreed on some things, I look forward to seeing him again.

Enter into the Master's rest, faithful servant.

A hot news ... and blogosphere ... day!

2005-04-01T12:57:00.000-06:00

... Greyhawk has "seen the light", and is taking his blog in a whole new direction!

... Aero-News.net uncovers an example of the incompetence of the Bush Administration ... and another example of government incompetence on the part of our military-procurement authorities, as well. They're chock-full of articles today ... so many, they have designated today's news collection as a special edition. Read 'em all!

... and now, according to DrugWarRant, Bush too has seen the light (up) ... (hat tip to Radley). This policy change, when applied to his flight crew, may have inadvertently led to the incompetent act described by Aero-News above.

... and of course, you need to repeatedly check this source, on a hot news day like this.

Stay informed!

Your tax dollars NOT at work ...

2005-03-29T12:44:00.000-06:00

... but stupidity, instead.

The former US Ambassador to Pakistan reportedly prevented the distribution of materials advertising the $25 million reward for information leading to the capture of Osama bin Laden ... even going against the judgment of some of her own staff.

Keep in mind, this kind of advertising has already led to the capture of other significant terrorist operatives ... so it has been proven to be a viable and valuable option to get locals to drop the dime on our enemies.

Read the whole article ... you won't believe it. At least they have recalled this ambassador, and started to reverse course on this in a big way.

(H/T to a new blogroll addition ... Tim Blair)

The swirl around Terri Schiavo ...

2005-03-28T11:52:00.000-06:00

... kept on going, and going, even as I viewed the opposite extreme of life this weekend -- a wonderful visit with my daughter, son-in-law, and (insert drum roll and trumpets here) 2-1/2-year old granddaughter.

To me, Terri Schiavo is caught in a downward slide, where justice has been repeatedly denied in the name of the law ... through a sequence of actions that leave reasonable people viewing the "husband" (in quotes, because the conflict of interest of having a common-law wife with two kids effectively disqualifies him from acting in that capacity with respect to Terri, IMO) with more justified suspicion than anything that, say, Halliburton has ever done.

Even death-row inmates in Texas have more protection from what has happened to Terri than she has ... which was especially evident when the courts refused, in the face of LEGITIMATE action by the legislative branch to protect her most fundamental rights, to review the case de novo (i.e. as a new case, instead of focusing only on previous actions).

And, as usual, the battle lines have been drawn ...

On the right, you have the full spectrum, from the reasoned to the fanatic, getting in on the action. Froggy has a lot to say about both views ... in particular, this post got me thinking about the impediments to progress that the fanatics are unintentionally erecting ... and this post illustrates just the latest incidence of suspicious behavior on the part of the "husband", as is seen by the reasonable among us.

Both of the Greyhawks have been actively covering this situation, as well ... and the "man of the house" ties this in to his views on Redemption -- parts One, Two, and Three.

I find part Three above particularly interesting -- it gives us an insight into a particular thought process that is driving the Left to stand for the "right" of this "husband" to determine Terri's fate ... their fear of Christian fanaticism, which is quite unfounded in Greyhawk's eyes ... and mine as well, as this blast from the past shows.

In any other case involving actions that will lead to death ... from dogs to Death Row ... you find the Left standing up to preserve life, humanity and justice be damned. Why is it that they aren't standing up for Terri?

I'll tell you one possible reason why -- it's because they continually have to prove to their peers that they are "free-thinking" and "open-minded" -- and in order to prove that, it appears that they are
"required" to ALWAYS be on the opposite side of traditional moral values.

How ironic ... to require the denial of one world view, to prove that you can think freely ... and to aspire to having a mind so open, the common sense in your brain leaks out.

Just some new stuff ...

2005-03-22T14:31:00.000-06:00

Take a look at the bottom of each post, and you'll see something new ... a Trackback link. I have installed Haloscan's trackback service, for that rare day when someone actually thinks what I write is worth quoting. I am also now making sure to ping other blogs that I quote, as well ... and will be regularly pinging the daily open post the Greyhawks so graciously provide over at Mudville.

I have also added several fairly-recent posts to The Nuts & Bolts Index ... my list of posts that particularly illustrate "the nuts and bolts" -- the fundamental ideas -- that are behind what I write here. Be sure to check the list out ... especially if this blog is new to you.

Finally, for your entertainment ... in the comments thread of this post at SMASH's, regular commenter KCSteve left a real gem:

Off in another forum one of the members there is a leading member of the Orlando PW chapter. He posted a thread about their counter demonstration and I remarked that, once again, both the women and signs were much better looking on the 'Right' side of the street.

He posted this in response:

Some idiot actually responded "No fair, you all have better signs because you have jobs!"

Yes us evil white males taking all the jobs from uneducated HS dropouts. I should just kill myself.

As KCSteve concluded, "You really can't write stuff this good!"

One of the big lies ...

2005-03-21T12:11:00.000-06:00

From this story by NBC 7/39 San Diego (h/t SMASH) ... a sign at an anti-war protest:

"DISSENT IS THE HIGHEST FORM OF PATRIOTISM"

No, it isn't.

Not when the dissent is based upon falsehood and/or flawed logic.

That is what those who hold this sign ... and the many others (fortunately, fewer and fewer) who show up at events like this , including some in leadership positions in our nation ... refuse to acknowledge.

Such as these equate the mere possession of power and wealth as an indication of evil intent (unless control of such power and wealth is surrendered to their "wisdom").

Such as these believe that, if we only eradicate the things we can use for conflict, then act nicely towards our enemies, that the conflict itself will be eradicated ... in the process, ignoring the fact that some in this world are so fundamentally evil, they will see such overtures as a sign of weakness to be exploited, and will turn our own good faith against us.

Such as these forget that the same Creator who instructed us to "turn the other cheek" gave us a limited set of four cheeks (two above the waist, two below) ... and when all have been turned (or when the next slap starts looking like a fist to the temple, instead), it may be wise to change our tactics if we are serious about protecting life and liberty.

Such as these are more concerned that their intellectual peers will look down on them as "jingoistic" and "ignorant" because their nation seeks to protect life and liberty of their neighbors, than they are about that life and liberty ... they fail to realize that ignoring such threats to others make the eventual threat to ourselves significantly greater, and more costly to deal with.

Such as these demand total perfection (in their eyes) from our leadership ... or deliver total condemnation of it. They forget that often "the best is the enemy of the good" -- and that inaction is, in many cases, far worse than any mistake that results from acting.

Such as these are more concerned that some American CEO might shred some paper ... than they are that thugs like Saddam & Sons shred people.

For over five decades, we let such as these turn their ideas into public policy -- and in areas from social welfare, to foreign relations, to our very defense, their ideas have come up short.

NOTICE: as an American, you have the right to say even the most idiotic things -- but understand the following:

1> Words do mean things ... not only do your ideas, if implemented, have consequences -- but even the expression of your ideas can have profound consequences in the conduct of public policy, by influencing others to both doubt their own position and adopt yours. Speak wisely.

2> The rest of us have not only the right, but the responsibility to publically declare your viewpoint idiotic, if the facts support that conclusion. You may be protected from government sanction, but not from public disdain.

One example of such fact-finding is illustrated here. (Thanks to Mudville!)

(edited 2223/21 Mar 2005 for clarity -- edited 1723/25 Nov 2005 to replace hotlinked picture with text of sign)

A reminder of where we've been ...

2005-03-19T12:18:00.000-06:00

... and why we went there -- both in text, and in graphics.

Mudville commemerates the second anniversary of the start of OP Iraqi Freedom, with great quotes from his fellow Milbloggers, and the CINC, from those days.

Funny, I don't see any of these guys talking about oil, at all ...

When are they going to "get it"?

2005-03-16T07:54:00.000-06:00

Italy annouonces that it will start pulling troops out of Iraq.

"About time, better late than never," said opposition leader Romano Prodi, a former premier and former EU commission president who is expected to be Berlusconi's opponent in political elections next year. "It's the logical consequence of a wrong decision," Prodi was quoted as saying in daily La Repubblica on Wednesday. "This long-awaited news confirms our stance."

Mr. Prodi, you are seriously mistaken ... the only thing this confirms is that a very brave Prime Minister is facing an election, in a nation where people like you have misled the rest of its people. You will now proceed to use this "confirmation" (just like the Dems here used Bush Sr's tax increase in 1992) as a club to beat this brave man down with.

You want "confirmation"? YOU CAN"T HANDLE "CONFIRMATION"!

What do those millions of purple fingers in Iraq confirm?

What do those weapons hauled out of Libya confirm?

What do the pro-democracy forces in Tehran confirm?

What do the stirrings of democratic in reform, from Egypt to Saudi Arabia, confirm?

What do the anti-Syria protests in Beirut confirm?

They confirm that Bush was right ... and you are wrong.

Stop the idiocy ... we tried it your way for 50 years, and we got no improvement. The thugs increased, in power and numbers.

It is what you OPPOSE that is now solving the problems for us.

As SMASH would ask: anti-war, or just on the other side?

A little personal aside --

2005-03-11T12:11:00.000-06:00

As I state in Who the Heck am I, one of my "unpaid" jobs is managing a group of teenage musicians I informally call "da Band", who perform weekly in the youth worship service at the Baptist church I am a part of ... Lakeway Baptist Church, in The Colony, TX (yes ..."The" is part of the the full name of the town).

Don't let the Baptist affiliation fool you -- this church doesn't have the hang-ups of tradition when it comes to our services. I think of our services as being in God's living room, where I can comfortably get closer to the One I love and serve, without the distractions of uncomfortable "Sunday best" clothes and funeral music.

I also play bass (and occasionally guitar) for our regular worship services (or "geezer" services, as I refer to them in front of the teens). I am routinely up on the platform on Sunday mornings, in a (nice, no-hole) T-shirt, jeans and athletic shoes ... and the only guy in the place in a suit (sometimes with tie, sometimes without) is our senior pastor. We're also not afraid to push the musical envelope -- our congregation does appreciate the times when we open up the throttles and begin to rock the flock.

We're about to push those throttles up another notch or two this week -- da Band is coming over to play for both of our regular services.

This is my third teen band I have managed ... my first one here at Lakeway. In the past, I've worked with some really talented teens -- one is now a music/worship pastor in a medium-sized church in Missouri (and married to another talented lady I had the privelege to work with). da Band is different -- while the individual-peak talent level is not as high as in past bands I've managed, we have assembled a critical mass of talent, maturity, and committment in the form of its members, that is pushing da Band to a higher level of performance than I was able to get out of my previous teams. In other words, da Band "has legs" -- and is becoming a band that "can turn goat milk into gasoline", as Donald "Duck" Dunn (bassist of the Blues Brothers) might say (during family hour).

Now "let me tell you about my kids". Since I've not asked permission to use their names here, I'll refer to them by pseudonyms (a la Dick Marcinko):

"Paulie" -- the teenage senior sound tech, and potential electrical engineer. I call him "Paulie" because he plays that role to my "Paul Senior" (ref: American Chopper) imitation. He is bright, and has an excellent ear for sound; he's still learning the details of sound engineering that go beyond running the board, like maintenance -- and now is becoming detail-oriented to the threshold of irritation. He's also the only one besides me and Mrs. Ringer (see below) who is willing to pray out loud with the group so far.
"Vinnie" -- the #2 sound and lighting technician. One of the older ones in this team ... the only one in da Band with his own car ... and supposedly has a good singing voice that I'm trying to get him to use for us.
"Mikey" -- the PowerPoint operator (and also operates the more-sophisticated MediaShout software in our regular services). Our resident basketball player -- with the body for it -- and the patience to put up with my headless-chicken simulations on Sunday mornings.
"Sniper" -- the drummer. The name comes from his professed career goal -- to be a USMC Scout Sniper. He's a disciplined JROTC student who is a great listener, with a knack for catching the starts and stops at all the right places automatically. (This discipline results in part because he is a young drummer, and not yet full of himself over his abilities ... hopefully, he'll never get to the point of arrogance).
"Thunder" -- the bass player. Another JROTC student who competes as a marksman. Can't read sheet music, but can pick up even walking bass lines with just a little coaching from me ... an amazingly fast learner. He also plays in a "secular" band, too -- even though he's not driving yet (he makes me nervous when he comes to practice on his bicycle, bass slung over his shoulder ... without a case to protect it).
"Sneakers" -- the keyboardist. Her name comes from her quiet nature, and the rather bold shoes I see her wear frequently. The newest member of da Band, she is quickly picking up the ability to draw the color from chord sheets and put it on the musical canvas.
"Bluesman" -- our "guitar hero". The most talented member of da Band -- and the most respected by the teens. At 16, he's already the best guitarist in the entire church (which includes 30+ year players like myself). He doesn't let it go to his head, though -- he has a feel for what works in terms of teen worship, that often serves to correct and focus my own ideas. He's also unusual in that he doesn't like to play music with the same ol' alternative/grunge chord progressions all the time -- he has an appreciation for the blues and rock musicians of earlier years, like Stevie Ray Vaughn and ZZ Top, and loves to play those styles. He also can sing (when coaxed) and write (when inspired). I know when we're doing things right, when he smiles enough to see teeth.
"Goldie" -- as in "gold medal" -- a lady athlete who is one of our four vocalists. She is an alto who truly "plays with pain" -- I've seen her come in to our practice with serious floor burns from basketball practice, and even when other, more serious medical problems cropped up. She is a rock-steady performer who's not afraid to sing solo, even during the earliest/roughest days of da Band.
"Sunshine" -- a round-faced, strawberry-blonde lady whose soulful soprano voice can bring tears (of joy) to your eyes. She is also an aspiring guitarist .... and one of my hardest workers; when I need something done (like copies made), she's my go-to person. She's usually the first to show up on Sunday mornings. Her level of committment to this effort is inspiring, especially from someone so young.
"Ms. Style" -- Bluesman's little sister, and Sunshine's shadow. The name comes from the way she's usually dressed for church ... usually, a little more "formally" than most teens. She has a strong mezzo-soprano voice, and she knows how to use it for God's honor. She also is the first to "loosen up" and present a fun stage presence.
"Mrs. Ringer" -- a 25-year old newlywed with a beautiful alto voice, who looks almost like one of the kids, so she sings with them -- hence the "ringer" label. Her age gives her the maturity you need to step up and speak to the congregation with authority -- and the ability to work with the other three vocalists, to realize their full potential as both musicians and leaders, on and off stage. Her husband, Mr. Ringer, is another I look to for guidance -- he has a real heart for the worship of God, and his more charismatic roots bring a fresh viewpoint to da Band's efforts.

Can you tell that I am proud of them all?

UPDATE: They came, they rocked, they led the congregation to God's side ... a total success!

Is that wisdom ... or just knowledge?

2005-03-09T11:36:00.000-06:00

I've often noticed that there is a BIG difference between having knowledge, and having that ability to simultaneously apply that mix of knowledge, reason, compassion, and resolve we call wisdom.

Unfortunately, there are too many people in our society who do not see a difference, and end up revering those who are smart but unwise, while denigrating those who appear "simple", but are actually profound ...

... like this guy. This link illustrates plainly that he really "gets it" when it comes to preserving the peace -- in stark contrast to the "enlightened ones" who told us that war is never the answer, and equated "stability" with "peace". What they gave us instead was the peace of the graveyard ... many, mass graveyards ... while in the process driving up the cost and length of the inevitible conflicts with those who refuse to respect your and my rights. (Hat tip to SMASH)

... and this guy, who goes out of his way to tell his story, even to those who, out of mere passivity, just don't "get it". He's just been added to my blogroll, BTW. (Hat tip to Greyhawk)

Ready to get PO'd?

2005-02-25T10:21:00.000-06:00

View this.

An antiwar protest, masquerading as an event to honor our troops (why does Dallas seem to attract these deceptions?).

They are even calling for our government to face international "justice", for "crimes against humanity". Where were their calls for "justice" when Saddam was gassing his own people ... then invaded Kuwait? When Hamas used human hand grenades to kill Israeli civilians? When Syria occupied Lebanon all these years?

Oh, that's right -- these people weren't responsible, because their nations have not been as prosperous as America -- and therefore haven't been as "greedy" and "evil". Once again, pocket depth has been presented as a primary determinant of moral accountability, and the willingness to posess and use decisive force has been equated with evil intent.

It appears that an organization that I once had grudging respect for has gone over the edge to all-out moonbat mode. For a bunch of people that claim to know the mind of God, their moral equivalence is a stench that reaches to Heaven itself, IMO.

(edited 1223/25 Feb 2005 to improve clarity)

Amazing what you can do when you're not being shot at ...

2005-02-22T07:43:00.000-06:00

... Mudville is chock full of great stuff today. Check out this ...

... and this

... and this

... and top it off with this. However, I must disagree with Greyhawk's assertion that

"It's got to be increasingly difficult for reasonable people to call
themselves Democrats in public - and that is not a good thing."

To me, the Democratic leadership reducing their party to insignificance is a good thing. The sooner that process is complete, the sooner we can move to "no-party" rule and redefine "politics as usual".

Brace yourself for immediate disintegration ...

2005-02-15T07:48:00.000-06:00

... of seriousness!

Check out the comments section of this post from SMASH, where the discussion of wacko conspiracy theories regarding 911 eventually "goes way out into deep space" (thanks to commenter Steve Skubinna).

Where's Marvin when you need him?

My "dream" ...

2005-02-14T07:29:00.000-06:00

... a recurring theme in my cybersquatting over the last few years, growing from the ashes of my version of Don Quixote. It still remains relevant, in this environment of Howard "Scream" becoming the DNC chairman, and the actions of his fellow No-rons so far this year (the latest being a Levinist attempt to twist the confirmation hearings for the new Homeland Security nominee -- a man who has bipartisan support -- into another microscopic examination of the Administration's policies in other areas from the extremely idealistic "September 10" viewpoint.)

The latest description of my "dream" was posted in the comments section of this post, over at the Mudville Gazette. I've reprinted it below, for your consideration and comments.

---------

Here's another way to look at this:

What we have now is the political equivalent of the Cold War -- two superpower parties, full of political professionals intent on advancing their own carrers, more concerned with staying in power than in advancing the best interests of this nation.

As a result, we get multiple, independently-targeted variants of Mutually Assured Dumbness launched at us by our own government -- from pork-barrels to wide-open-borders -- and no one appears to be able to stop it.

Other voices, not beholden to an institutionalized party like the GOP or Democratic Party, could put a stop to this, but they are effectively shut out of the legislative process ... in large part because each party uses the threat of empowering "the only other viable alternative to us" to keep voters in their camp, and away from other, uncorrupted alternatives.

These two institutions --- the GOP and Democratic Party -- are like two trees that have fallen together in the forest. Each is supported only by the other pushing against it ... while both end up blocking the sunlight out below them.

How do we end the Mutually Assured Dumbness? By reducing the institutions that perpetrate it to insignificance. However, history has shown that taking both down simultaneously is virtually impossible. One, then the other, must fall.

The minority of No-rons who have hijacked the apparatus of the Democratic party are presenting us with an opportunity to take just such a course of action.

Let them take that party to self-destruction ... for when that happens, the GOP loses its ability to continue with "politics as usual" because they will no longer have the threat of the loony Left to hold over our heads. We can replace them, not with moonbats, but with people who actually give a rip about our national interest.

Do not worry about one-party rule if this happens -- for the American people will not let that last long. Frankly, my hope is that we end up with "no-party" rule -- that our Executive and Legislative branches will not be populated with Democrats, or Republicans ... or Libertarians, or Greens, or Socialists ...

... but just Americans.

Super Bowl Sunday ... the Day After

2005-02-07T07:55:00.000-06:00

Good morning all.

Here's my views on the two Big Games ... first, the one in Jacksonville.

The football game itself ... a classic. The Pats once again show the teamwork, skill, drive, and consistency that have revived the term "dynasty" in the NFL lexicon. And the Eagles still have much to be proud of ... the only big flaw I saw on the field was their lethargic time management during the last two minutes, where the "no huddle" offense was replaced with the "no rush" approach to the line of scrimmage. The score was consistent with the performance of both teams.

It's also interesting how the instant-replay review system worked here ... two calls reversed in one game because of it. And, the refs were calling a tight game, with lots of flags in the first half.

The halftime show ... fun to watch, and not just because of the synchronized lights from miles outside the stadium, or the four horizontal Jumbotrons on the field. It was fun because Sir Paul McCartney rocked the house with some great music ... and no wardrobe malfunctions. Memo to Hollywood: you can entertain us without leading us to the gutter!

The commercials ... nothing on the order of the Apple Mac commercial of years past, but still some good ones. Of course, the winner was the Annheiser-Busch commercial that showed ordinary citizens showing their appreciation to some "ordinary" soldiers! The Ford Mustang commercial (with the frozen driver) was an eye catcher. OTOH, in what may be this year's "wardrobe malfunction", the commercials for Go Daddy.com and Diet Pepsi (the one with both men and women lustily following the Diet Pepsi drinker -- not the P. Diddy one) pushed the envelope a little too far for family viewing, IMO.

Now, briefly, to that other big game ... the ongoing one in Washington. In particular, the plays inside the Social Security Zone.

The Democrats need to watch what they say if they wish to have any credibility about this issue. The party line is that there is no real crisis ... problem is, not only did Bill Clinton act during his term as if there is a Social Security crisis, the Dems opposed the Bush tax cuts in part, to "save" social security! The stubborn, no-ron Donkeys, focused on opposing anything this President proposes, have been put into a box of their own making.

And, once again, they are using the tactic of the half-truth to oppose this President. They are emphasizing that, for younger people who will fall under the President's privatization plan, "benefits will be cut" (insert evil organ music here).

To this I say ... DUH!

The government-guaranteed portion of the benefit might be cut (because less money is being placed in that so-called "lockbox" to fund it by these retirees) -- but any cut will be more than made up by the returns from the invested, private accounts!

And -- I use the word "will" for a reason:

History has shown that the markets consistently outperform the government investments Social Security is based upon, over all but the shortest time horizons.
There is another risk factor in the present plan no one's talking about -- the ability of our politicians to further undermine the plan, by dipping into this (lack of) "trust fund" to mask their fiscal responsibility ... with the possiblity of making up the resulting shortfalls through MASSIVE tax increases in the future!

Now, one thing that makes me nervous is this idea in the DeMint plan of "clawback" -- that the government will take a large portion of your private account, and convert it to a stream of guaranteed payments ... and possibly getting some of that money back at the time of the recipient's death.

This runs counter to the need for ownership of these accounts, in order to build wealth and transfer it across generations ... and I will be speaking out against these kinds of provisions as the debate rages.

But, isn't it ironic that the Dems are using "clawback" as a dirty word, when in fact it not only gives them what they want -- a guarantee against personal errors -- but is, when you get down to it, an apt description for the present system they now think is so good?

UPDATE: in talking with my colleagues, I noted that I forgot to mention the closest things to side-splitters in this year's Super Bowl lineup ... the Ameriquest Mortgage "Don't Judge Too Quickly" ads.

Both the "robber" and the "kitty" spots were really good -- though the fact that I had forgotten them might indicate that they weren't THAT good?

BTW, Ameriquest is already issuing letters of apology for the "kitty" spot, which apparently offended some animal lovers -- to them I say:

"THICKEN YOUR SKIN A LITTLE, FOR PETE'S SAKE!"

Iraq for Moore-ons (and No-rons) ...

2005-01-31T07:07:00.000-06:00

"Freedom-fighter" (a.k.a. "Iraqi Minuteman") -- Iraqi citizen who risks his/her life for freedom, signified by the presence of purple dye on one index finger. Prime examples of such heroes may be found here, and here.

"Martyr" -- those who gave their lives for the cause of freedom, who are signified by either the presence of the purple dye above at the time of their demise, or the fact that they were on their way to apply that dye when life was taken from them.

"Oppressive, imperialist bully" -- those who took the lives from the martyrs, in a lame attempt to dissuade the freedom-fighters from acting in support of Iraqi freedom. A specifc form of the term "loser".

"no-ron" -- (generic term) one who refiexively opposes ANY decisive use of American force (unless there is a pre-existing condition of massive American casualties within its borders; then, they will allow force ONLY against those who actually "pulled the trigger", but not against those who support such threats, and/or clearly will present such threats in the future).

"No-ron" -- (specific term) one of the thirteen Senators who exhibited an abject lack of sound judgment, by voting against the confirmation of Condi Rice as Secretary of State in January 2005.

"Moore-on" -- self-explanatory.

OK ... now I'm back ...

2005-01-24T11:57:00.000-06:00

... and I have been living in "interesting" times this month -- that's why the severe lack of posting.

I've been fighting a "wonderful" little respratory bug for the last two weeks ... a fight made much harder around the second or third day, when a combination of coughing intensity and body position resulted in intense pain whenever I coughed. I thought I had simply strained a stomach muscle, until I went to the doctor about a week later -- he informed me that I had probably torn some cartilage in my rib cage, and the only thing he could do for me was prescribe some pain meds (that also acted as a cough suppressant). I'm better now (and off the pain meds), but it still hurts somewhat to cough.
While I was at my parents' over New Years', my wife (who stayed at home, worn out from our trips to St. Louis and L.A. over Christmas) went out and added to our family. The addition: an approximately six-year-old Pomerianian, who was rescued by the authorities and SPCA from a breeder who was keeping the dogs in decrepit conditions. This dog had apparently only seen the inside of a kennel its entire life -- housebreaking is still not complete yet, even after three weeks, and she consistently runs in clockwise circles. I wanted to name her Dizzy, but cooler heads prevailed ... she is now known as Susie.
Work has been dizzy, as well ... lots of action with reviewing customer designs for any "gotchas" (which can be a very tedious process at times.), capped off with a "parting of the ways" between the corporation and our group's VP (who was part of our startup, and is one of the best managers I've ever worked for). While I do not think that my employment is threatened at this time, there is change in the wind, and I'm going to have to "roll with the changes" a la R.E.O. Speedwagon.

Now, as Paul Harvey would say, "stand by for news ..."

First, I note with a touch of sadness the passing of another cultural icon who spanned both my parents' and my own generation. Johnny Carson could be considered "comedy's venture capitalist", based upon how many of stars -- both yesterday's and today's -- got their start on his shows. He himself may be gone ... but the effect he had on our popular culture is still rippling across the pond of humanity, even in the late-night real estate he once dominated (now shared by two of his professional progeny -- Dave Letterman and Jay Leno).
Of course, I enjoyed the inaugration of President Bush -- and while I may be biased, here's my take on his speech: Freedom is a necessary prerequisite for lasting peace ... so instead of repeating the past, by acting with the timidity and indecision produced by moral equivalence, it is time to act with resolve -- to both foster the good of others, and either turn or destroy those who would perpetrate the basic evil of denying others their inalienable, God-given rights. It was a ringing endorsement of the neoconservative viewpoint, that is already serving to tick off his political adversaries, to the point of exposing their eagerness to perpetuate the foolishness of the "Sept. 10" worldview that did NOTHING to remove the Saddams and Osamas, but let them grow instead.
Speaking of foolishness -- those who are presently takinig the point for the Democrats ... Barbara Boxer, Robert Byrd, Nancy Pelosi, Cynthia McKinney, Howard Dean ... are giving me hope. Their actions (without any help from me or others) are furthering my hope for the establishment of a one-party GOP government in the near future. This, in my view, would lead to the destruction of BOTH major parties, and open the doors for substantial changes in the way our federal government "does the people's business" by eliminating the two largest special-interest institutions out there -- and allowing us to elect people who would put the good of the nation before the perpetuation of their party.

Oh, and Ms. Pelosi ... let me 'splain you how the President thought there were WMD, when it appears there was none "in Iraq":

Saddam, even while stating publically that he had no WMD, also intentionally misled HIS OWN PEOPLE, telling them they still existed, according to the Duelfer Report. He worked to keep that situation ambiguous, as he saw the perception by others of possible Iraqi posession of WMD as a significant deterrent against an attack by his neighbors, and/or diplomatic leverage for himself.
As a result, intelligence organizations around the world, including our own, had GOOD reason to think Saddam was hiding WMD. The President acted on the best intelligence he had ... and he would have had to wait months (if not years) for the development of anything better.
If we had been right, and Saddam had those stockpiles, was waiting those months or years a prudent thing to do ... especially in the light of thousands of lives being lost within Iraq at the hand of this regime, and in the light of what we now KNOW were Saddam's intentions to reconstitute his WMD capabilities, once the UN gave him a clean bill of health and told us to butt out?

Our own failure to sort out the truth, Ms. Pelosi ... both the truth of "no stockpiles", and the truth of Saddam's future lethal intentions ... is a direct result of the emasculation of our intelligence capabilities over the last three decades.

Riddle me this ... what political party, over those three decades, gave us the strongest advocates for those actions ... and were also the biggest opponents to the decisive actions that would have nipped problems like Saddam and Al Quada in the bud?

Go ahead ... make my day ...

2005-01-12T16:03:00.000-06:00

The head-in-sand coalition never seems to learn from previous performance, do they?

Here we go again ...

A new home for a Free Iraqi ...

2005-01-06T18:02:00.000-06:00

... Ali, one of the three brothers who started Iraq the Model, now has his own blog, Free Iraqi.

I just added it to my blogroll, as he (and his brothers) are true Sources for Sanity when it comes to the situation in their homeland.

Hit the link, and just keep reading ...

Talkin' 'bout our immigration ...

2005-01-04T13:44:00.000-06:00

This is the one area where neither political camp in this nation has my vote -- and quite strangely, the majority of Americans appear to be in my position!

Our present immigration policy is effectively Open Borders Lite, where hundreds of thousands enter our nation without the approval of our government, even as we pay lip service to "fighting illegal immigration" and throw a few back out. This stands in stark contrast to the controlled process implemented during the late 19th-early 20th century -- the celebrated period of large-scale immigration to America, which turned Ellis Island into a household word.

Right now, let me make something clear -- immigration is good for America, and for the world. For some, like Albert Einstein, immigration literally saved their lives -- and allowed them to continue their great contributions to humanity. For many others, it allowed them to leverage their personal initiative into innovation and industry that benefit us all ... outcomes that would have never occurred, had they not come here.

Immigrants also act as unofficial ambassadors for America, giving people "back home" a clear view into our nation that they often do not get from their own media (or our MSM, for that matter) in the same way that millbloggers have given us another viewpoint about OP Iraqi Freedom and the GWOT.

I also agree with the "open borders" crowd, when it comes to the value to humanity of free trade, a global economy, and even outsourcing ... when governments limit their involvement in these processes to the maintenance of global trade freedom, and individuals (including workers) act with initiative and wisdom in such an environment, we can utilize our resources with optimum efficiency and effectiveness, and even leverage them further to create wealth. (It is important that the utilization phase be left to indivdiduals; governments are structurally incapable of effectively/efficiently conducting that phase of the political/economic process.)

Where I part company with them is when they either want (as the President does) to legalize those who are already here illegally, and/or remove even more of the restrictions we have placed upon immigration to this nation.

The motives for supporting such actions vary.

The Left views open borders as a way to further their aims of "economic justice" ... not only by increasing opportunities for others to share in our prosperity (in itself, a legitimate aim, if legally pursued), but by compelling Americans to bear "their fair share" (as seen by the Left -- not by me) of the economic "burden" as seen within their zero-sum viewpoint. They also see it as a way to diminish what they see as overbearing American power and influence, by increasing the proportion of voices who are supposedly "sensitive" to this problem ... looking forward to their aim of subordinating the soverign American state to a more "trustworthy" body like the UN (yeah, right ...).

The support for open borders among conservatives and libertarians stems from the legitimate desire to maximize the benefits of free trade and a globally-based economy, by supposedly maximizing freedom for the labor components of such trade, even as they eschew global governance. They are also cowed into supporting open borders, by the painting of those who seek tighter immigration controls as racist/greedy/imperialist by the loudest voices among the "economic justice" advocates. Unfortunately, a few support open borders just because they want the cheapest labor they can get, regardless of any problems uncontrolled immigration may cause.

Both sides also trot out the "what's the use, they're already here -- so what are you going to do about it, deport 'em all?" argument, and combine it the MSM's portrayals of illegal-immigrant detentions/deportations as "mean-spirited/heartless".

So, what's the use, anyway? Why not just hey, ho, go with the flow, and throw open the doors of America totally?

Well, there are some very good reasons for the controls we have placed (but only sporadically enforce) upon immigration to America:

> Avoiding infrastructure overload

Answer me this ... when you throw a party, do you make out a guest list, or do you just throw open the doors and invite everyone in? If you've ever done the latter, you know the difficulty of buying food/drinks/paper plates (and maybe renting a tent) for an unknown number of guests -- you either overbuy, or risk running short; neither is optimum in terms of efficiency and/or effectiveness.

Our immigration controls function as the guest list for the great American party -- if these controls were applied properly, we can make sure that people do not enter America at a faster rate than our socioeconomic infrastructure can expand to accommodate them.

Unfortunately, the schools and hospitals in the four states that border Mexico are now showing the ill effects you get when these controls are not applied, and the infrastructure becomes overloaded. That is why you see people in California and Arizona placing initiatives on their ballots to limit illegal aliens' access to social services. (Texas, unfortunately, has no mechanism for such ballot initiatives -- we have to work through the politicians in our state legislature to get something done, and these people are subject to the pressures and political "considerations" I described above).

> Maintaining national security

There are people out there that want to crash our party ... literally, as we found on 11 September 2001. Letting those people in is the height of stupidity on our part ... yet our sporadic enforcement of immigration law, along with the irrational perversion of the separations between state and federal law enforcement (reinforced by starry-eyed Utopian executives and legislators at the state and local levels) that prevent local cops from detaining illegal aliens, allows these people in to stay ... and lets them turn their intent into deadly action.

> Educating newcomers about America

People are coming here from widely diverse societies; while we certainly want them to remember and honor their own cultures, there are a few areas at the center of the American experience that, if they are to thrive here, they must clearly understand and adopt.

They need to know what they can expect -- and not expect -- from our government and society, and what our society and government expects them to take on, from legal compliance to language skills. They also need to understand both their authority and their responsibility in exercising the personal initiative that is at the very core of our freedom.

Our immigration processes have been historically designed to impart a basic level of knowledge about these issues to immigrants ... and to encourage those who choose to make their stay permanent, to become citizens.

Open borders, OTOH, do neither ... immigrants under such a system can (and even now with OB Lite, do) end up living in frustration with problems when they don't have to, because they do not understand how our system works. Other immigrants (like, unfortunately, many of our native-born) will view an open-borders America as a pasture full of cash cows ... not only economic opportunities, but social support ... that they view as ripe for the milking, but will feel no need to act in ways to preserve or nurture these resources for others.

Thanks to the relativism that has permeated our public-education systems, we already have too many native-born Americans who don't understand how this nation works so well for its people (and the world). We shouldn't add millions more to their numbers, almost overnight -- for if we do so, we increase the risk of going off one (or more) of many socioeconomic cliffs out of ignorance.

> Using EVERY resource for humanity

It may sound kind like a recent anti-drug commercial, but it is true -- condoning illegal immigration subsidizdes corruption and mismanagement.

Many of the nations that are points of origin for large numbers of illegal immigrants (like Mexico) have a lot of resources of their own ... but the socioeconomic structure in these nations prevents these resources from making their way down to the masses in the way that our free-entrprise system does. These are people from class-defined ogliarchies ... socialist "experiments" (which often end up as ideologically-defined ogliarchies) ... totalitarian states ... and/or nations whose governments are flat-out corrupt. Some -- most notably, Mexico -- are a combination of these social pathologies ... Mexico combines class, socialism, and corruption to keep the well-connected well off, at the expense of the masses ... a system where it is less likely (and more risky) for an ordinary person to "work around" the well-connected and attain prosperity than it is in America.

If these nations had to face the pressure of the dissatisfaction of their masses, they would be compelled to change their society so that the masses could better their lot -- and the wealth that is presently "hoarded" by the well-connected would be better leveraged to create wealth, both locally and globally.

(Note that this problem is significantly different than the complaints here about "the rich getting richer", for our free-enterprise system demands that the rich utilize their wealth wisely, in ways that benefit the masses through wealth/opportunity creation ... or risk a reduction in their holdings, through inflation and -- more importantly -- economic competition. Here, some in the masses can come from nowhere and take the wealth away from the slothful rich ... and the rich who remain that way do so by working within the economy in ways that benefit us all. It is a win-win situation, in stark contrast to the win-lose of the ogliarchy, the socialist paradise, or the banana republic.)

However, the pressure that could move these dysfunctional nations towards truly free enterprise is relieved when we open our borders -- for it is a win-win (in the short term) for all in that nation. The masses who move here find opportunities (both legitimate and illegitimate) to improve their lot, while the well-connected stay on top in the home country. In fact, as we are seeing with Mexico, immigrants to America are the source of a net INFLOW of wealth into their origin nation, as those who come here send some of what they have earned back to their familes there ... further reducing the pressure upon the leadership of the origin nation to change their ways.

The bottom line -- the mismanagement of wealth in these nations means that there is less aggregate wealth for the rest of us to utilize, because we end up using our resources to cover the costs (human and economic) of such mismanagement.

So, what's the solution ...

1> Enforce our present immigration laws.

2> Simplify our legal immigration/visa processes.

3> Change the way we grant citizenship to the children of immigrants.

4> Encourage the source nations to deal with their problems.

More on these points ... later.

What else can be said ...

2005-01-04T13:35:00.000-06:00

... about the disaster in Southeast Asia?

All I can say is ... exercise both your compassion and your wisdom. Help out where you can, choosing wisely the conduit for your compassion, so that the results of that compassion match up with your intent.

Thanks also to all those ... civilian and military ... who are already on-scene and starting the long process of sorting this out.

A quick question for you ...

2005-01-04T13:31:00.000-06:00

... is this ad over-the-top?

Our local media says it is ... what say you?

Themes that I am afraid will be recurring ones ...

2004-12-29T14:08:00.000-06:00

... because many among us still don't "get it":

>A truce is worth the character of the man on the other side of the table (Tsion Ben-Judah in the LaHaye/Jenkins novel Armageddon). There are adversaries who have so little respect for us, they will use diplomacy as "war by other means" and turn our good faith against us. With such adversaries, war is inevitable, if we are to protect our freedom. Saddam & Sons *were* one such enemy. Al Quada and other terrorist groups are another.

>911 was not an isolated criminal act -- it was one of many attacks (both before and after 11 September 2001) by a loosely-allied set of adversaries who used lethal force on a mass scale, to further their agendas ... primarily the imposition, by force if necessary, of a religious/political system that does not acknowledge our inalienable rights. Yet there are some who do not see the War on Terror as a real war, simply because our adversary is not a soverign nation ... even though in terms of tactics, objectives, and lethality, the characteristics of this conflict are identical to those of "traditional" wars.

>Weapons and transportation technology have made it an unacceptable risk to wait until the enemy strikes first before we act. While we are still responsible to choose wisely, the wise choice is often preemptive.

>The Leftist refusal to accept the above makes the inevitable war more protracted, more costly ... and more deadly; their reflexive opposition to the decisive use of American force is actually counterproductive to the achievement of their stated aims of peace. We have tried it their way for five decades ... even though there have been conflicts, most were not dealt with decisively ... and the problems persisted.

Winning the War on Terror comes down to one word.

Resolve.

No matter what they throw at us ... we cannot let those who would use lethal force with the intent to deny others' their inalienable rights (and replace those rights with their dominance) get their way.

This is not about "freedom fighters" fighting for their rights ... for our adversaries seek to take away those very rights from others.

This is not about preventing "American imperialism" ... for if we were imperialist, Kuwait, Iraq, (and possibly Saudi Arabia) would have been American territories for over a decade.

This is not about corporate greed ... for greed takes the easy way out (see: UN Oil-For-Food).

This is about protecting our rights in the best way we can ... by the transformation of dysfunctional nations into rights-respecting, representative, limited-government ones, so that no one any longer has the combination of capability and will needed to hijack those nations once again, to further agendas based on the denial of individual rights.

Yes, rights-respecting democracy can, and sometimes must, be imposed on an unwilling people ... for it is a vital component of that "best way". It levels the playing field, giving individuals the ability to override the passions of religion and ethnicity that drive the herd ... or can allow evil "shepherds" to lead it over a cliff ... and guides diverse individuals to the realization that their self-interest resides in the mutual preservation of their freedoms.

If you have a better way to prevent the hijacking than this, bring it on.

'Tis the season ...

2004-12-25T13:52:00.000-06:00

... for some pseudo-random thoughts!

... Isn't it ironic that some say Christian voices should not be heard inside our public institutions, when it was government tax policy that determined the location and conditions of the birth of the central figure of Christianity.

... It's now time for the ultimate test of a toy's market potential -- how long do children play with the toy vs. how long do they play with the box?

... From tomorrow until New Years' is my favorite time to buy Christmas decorations.

... Who would have ever thought that the Texas Gulf Coast, all the way from the Mexican to the Louisiana border, would have ** a ** White Christmas ... much less a ** 4-inch ** White Christmas? (Look for disaster-area declarations later!) ...

... not that you need snow for Christmas, when you have plastic sheets and packing peanuts to put on the ground in its place (as they do in "the O.C.", which is where I am at as I write this).

... In fact, Christmas is only incidentally about snow, Frosty, Rudolph -- and Santa. It's about the expression of love in just One gift (in a small package) given to us two millennia ago ... and this season is an opportunity for us to cover the world around us with the contents of that package, in the same way that five loaves and two fish fed thousands.

And for the "gentlemen" (and ladies) far from home, who defend our ability to express that love. May "God rest ye merry", with relief from the burdens of your appointed duty, at least for a while.

Merry Christmas to all, from The Alleged Mental Case.

It isn't a dirty word, people ...

2004-12-24T10:50:00.000-06:00

For conservatives like me, "activism" has had a much different flavor in years past than it did for our counterparts on the Left.

To us, respected conservative activists were those who, while seeking change, did so within relatively tight bounds of civility, nearly always working within the systems of our society (instead of attempting to go around them or replace them outright).

OTOH, we looked upon those who utilized the incendiary rhetoric and shrill tactics of the 1960's protest movements with a significant degree of disdain -- a disdain that even crossed party lines. Even when we agreed with the principles behind the protest (such as those behind the more militant protests at abortion clinics), many of us on the Right were still uncomfortable with the stridency ... and the press for immediate, radical change ... of some of those movements.

We told ourselves that the way to persuade more citizens to adopt conservative principles was to keep ourselves not just out of, but well away from, the gutter of "in your face" stridency.

What we did, instead, was cede a major battlefield to our ideological opponents -- the battlefield of simple ideas, presented with passion in public -- a battlefield whose newsworthiness is not only evident, and not only renewable, but a major component of its very worth as a battlefield.

As a result, a media who was already biased against conservative principles repeatedly took notice of only one side of the debate -- and in its reporting of that single side, reinforced its own biases against sound principle -- because it was the only side that took the time to present things in a way that the media would "understand" and pay attention to.

Fortunately, many of us have seen the error of our ways, and (while avoiding the distortion of fact that has become characteristic of Leftist activism) are now increasing our (in your) face time with the American public -- and turning back the tide of creeping fallacies like relativism and wealthism.

ONE WORD AT A TIME

While the foundation of today's conservative activism has roots that reach back to such "in-system" movements as the Contract for America, the Christian Coalition, the Reagan Revolution, and even Barry Goldwater, the stridency level was built up through the 1990's ... one word at a time. Old-fashioned paper (in hardcover, paperback, and even occasionally newsprint), not-so-old-fashioned radio, and the new-fangled Internet were the platforms where a new generation of conservative writer/pundit I refer to as the "bad cop" made their appearance.

Unlike the "good cops" of conservatism -- those like William F. Buckley Jr. and George Will, who coupled deep insight with calm, precise erudition -- the "bad cops" were not afraid to hit the Donkey with a rhetorical 2x4 to get its attention. On occasion, they went where even Rush Limbaugh would not go; even becoming outright advocates for certain causes.

These are people who are not afraid to say what millions of conservatives really think deep down ... but normally would not express in polite company. People like Sean Hannity ... Jonah Goldberg ... Michelle Malkin ... Michael Savage (who's even too far "out there" for my taste!) ... and of course, the Iron Fox of punditry, Ann Coulter.

Others, like David Horowitz and Charles Krauthammer, stood astride the boundary between "good cop" and "bad cop" ... in David's case, not only with his own writing, but in opening his forum, Frontpage Magazine, to "cops" bad and good. Still others who I consider "good cops", like Walter Williams and Bill Kristol, are not afraid to "go bad" when they need to ... they just don't stay there long.

IMO, we need both the "good cops" and the "bad cops" above if we are to maintain a healthy civil discourse ... the "bad cops" to passionately challenge our complacency and motivate us to "think the unthinkable" (and act upon it) ... the "good cops" to logically encourage us to do the same, and to provide the calm analysis that keeps both their own rhetorical bullets and the "bad cops" shotgun blasts on target.

CITIZENS ON PATROL

The Internet also let millions of citizens directly add billions of words to the public discourse. The availability of e-mail, comment facilities, message boards -- and ultimately, blogs -- gave the ordinary person access to the discourse that left the letter-to-the-editor in the dust.

E-mail replaced the fax machine of the 1980's and 1990's as the preferred tool to bombard Congress with our wishes. Message boards like Free Republic blossomed into online political communities, with the ability to both get a message out with lightning speed, and get large numbers of people thinking "on the same page".

Online magazines not only gave many (who previously couldn't afford to get their viewpoint out en masse) the ability to change some minds and reinforce others ... they had the instant feedback of online comments. And, the comments sections themselves often became online communities in their own right, with the advantages noted above.

And, we all know how blogs -- and their ability to focus expertise and cross-checking (and the online communities that rise around them) upon the political landscape -- have reshaped that landscape like bulldozers, and also given us a cautiously-hopeful viewpoint on Iraq that the MSM just doesn't EVER seem to see ... a viewpoint that comes from many with the credibility that only comes from being "on the ground" there.

All these derivatives of Internet technology have increased the ability of ordinary citizens to go beyond just watching the news unfold ... they have made it far easier for them to take an active role in shaping events; i.e. become activists themselves, as much as their situation and inclination allows.

For those who were already highly motivated to activism ... like the SwiftVets ... the Internet gave them another advantage; the ability to go around an apathetic or hostile media, and get their clear message out to "we the people" like never before. The MSM monopoly on the flow of information has been thoroughly busted ... and the 2004 election results reflect this.

ON THE STREETS

However, when it comes to on-the-streets activism, I consider the Miami-Dade County courthouse in Florida the launch pad for today's publically-expressed conservative stridency. There, a group of well-dressed young men raised their voices -- LOUDLY!! -- and demanded public access to the (disputed) vote-recount process of Election 2000 in that county, which was moved away from the public eye ... and was being dominated by political partisans loyal to Al Gore.

This level of stridency was virtually unheard of from conservatives outside the pro-life movement -- and it was coming from an unexpected source; men who (except perhaps for their youth) apparently had nothing in common with the moonbats normally associated with such protests. The MSM tried to use the normal disdain for such protesting against these people, painting them as crazies ... the Clinton-Gore administration threatened an investigation of the protesters (and people think that the Bush Administration is the one who actively suppresses dissent!). Neither attempt to smear these guys stuck to them. They are heroes to conservatives like me ... and legitimate in the eyes of many others.

On a more mainstream ... but still passionate ... level, we have seen another kind of "uprising" appear in the last four years -- an uprising based on loving concern, and not just repelling stupidity. The initiators for this kind of activism were two talk-radio hosts -- from Dallas, KLIF-AM's morning-drive host Darrell Ankarlo and the duct-taped "sick freak" of syndicated talk radio, Glenn Beck, who took what Darrell started locally, and spread it across the nation. Many others (including a LOT of ordinary people ... not just media celebrities) have carried on this effort.

This is the now-commonplace "support the troops" rally ... driven by the desire to see our soldiers, both on the field of battle and when they return home, treated with respect and supported (morally and materially) in their efforts to keep us safe and free ... and to pre-empt the disdain and loathing of our military that was seen at the end of Vietnam. People who previously would have considered taking the time for this an "unnecessary" distraction, now make a point of expressing their support for our troops and what they are trying to do through their presence and involvement in these.

Conservative activism has also progressed to the degree that, in 2004, an organization pried open the streets themselves, enabling conservatives to take on the Leftists at their own game ... in many cases, from inside the very events the Left organized. This is an organization that has leveraged the Internet to build support nationwide, that works smarter ... instead of harder. It replaces shrillness with wit, can be assertive and civil at the same time, and empowers conservatives who are otherwise uncomfortable with street activism by giving them the tools and guidance to successfuly hit the streets ... and force the MSM to report on their views, instead of just parrotting the Lefist viewpoint.

It has proven that we can beat the moonbats at their own game. I had a small part in proving that, by helping make the front lawn of Halliburton's Carrollton, TX facility so uncomfortable for the local Leftists' efforts to make that name a moonbat mantra, that they left that battlefield of their own accord ... ceding it to us! This was not done by force or violence, but by wit, innovation, persistence and assertiveness. This success was (and is still) repeated in many other venues, from its origins in San Francisco, all the way to NYC/Boston/DC ... and back through Texas all the way to San Diego.

That organization is Protest Warrior. I encourage you to check it out.

OK ... IT'S OUR TURN

All these people have blazed the trail to where at least some of us, at some time, need to go.

On the one hand, we don't need to get down in the gutter that Leftist street activism dwells in. The truth is on our side (and if it is not, we had better change our thinking). We don't need to emulate their hypocricy:

> We don't need to threaten to destroy the property of others to make our point ...

> We don't need to be profanely belligerent ...

> We don't need to reject wholesale common decency and civility, even as we make our point ...

> Nor do we need to raise our middle fingers towards the fundamental principles and basic institutions that have served our society well.

What we DO need to do, however is ...

> Be assertive in making our viewpoint heard; one can still be respectful and civil while making their point loud and clear.

> Stand our ground. Never let our opponents intimidate us -- particularly when they start the name-calling and the simplistic insistence upon their "right" to present their views unchallenged. They will try to do so -- and even attempt to make it a legal matter -- but in nearly all cases, they don't have a leg to stand on ... for we have just as much right to be "out there" as they do. And, remind them that, while they (and we) have the right to say even the stupidest things, each of us has the RESPONSIBILITY to publically declare them stupid, when the facts support that assertion!

> Work smarter -- not harder. Simply matching the tactics of the opposition is insufficient ... if we appear just like them, the majority of Americans will tune us out ... just like them. We have many other "weapons" to utilize ... our ability to innovate, our individual initiative (in stark contrast to the collectivist predisposition of our opponents), our insistence upon logical justification for ideas, our respect for others, even civility itself ... that our opponents do not appreciate and/or have chosen not to use consistently or wisely. We can outhink them ... so we don't have to outshout them!

Activism is no longer a dirty word for conservatives ... for many, it needs to be a duty. Get involved ... add your voice to a comments community, or start your own blog (it's easy!). Support YOUR troops ... with your presence at support events, and with your donations of time and money. When an opportunity arises, hit the streets, and repel the useful idiots who would hijack our nation ... and the ideas and institutions that have served it well ... in the pursuit of relativist/collectivist/wealthist stupidity.

To borrow a line from Apollo 13, "let's work the problem, people" ... smarter, not harder!

Thanks for your patience ...

2004-12-18T08:24:00.000-06:00

... and your persistence in checking back here for new stuff, even when I couldn't deliver!

Today, I'm sitting here in my son's home in Highland, IL -- the town where Kelly and I raised our two kids (yeah, they are really my stepkids -- but they've been in my life long enough for me to address them this way) until they entered college and we left the nest (moving to TX in 2000, just in time for the bursting of the dot-com bubble).

We are here for one of those momentous occasions in life ... my son is getting his Bachelor's in Business from Southern Illinois University today!

Actually the celebration started a little over a month ago -- with the writing of the LAST TUITION CHECK!! We paid for the college education of both our son and our daughter (she graduated in 2000 from SIU with her Bachelor's in Psychology), so we have been writing tuition checks since 1997. While finances are not my strong suit (especially when you have to deal with a wife who suffers from an addiction to HGTV!), we were able to get both kids through school with NO student loans ... an example of the grace of God, applied with a little wisdom.

As good as that feels, today feels even better -- but not because of my direct actions.

My son has shown a steadily-increasing level of maturity over the last few years that not only has culminated in this day, but has much to make me proud of my limited influence in his life. He has taken the opportunities set before him, and squeezed every last drop of good from them.

He learned the value of study -- learning the hard way, at first, that college study wasn't the easy ride that high school was for this intellectual "gazelle". I was concerned that he had not picked up the concept that study was something one had to work at -- but he quickly learned and adopted that concept, resulting in his steady school performance.

He and his wife (of six-and-one-half months) are self-sufficient ... something that seems to be quite notable for a 23-year-old these days.

In his last year of high school, my son took a co-op job with a local construction company (as an IT geek), and his diligence, hard work, and smarts turned it into a very-well-paying, full-time, salaried position that he still holds today. (His wife shares these qualities ... she works as a CNA while she studies for her nursing degree.) One side effect is hearing him complain about his taxes ... the boy is learning conservative principles, as well!

Does it show that I'm proud of him?

-----------------------

After my long ride on the "PCB Trace" over the last few weeks, I plan on playing catch-up over the next week, as I am out of the office. Watch this space for more ... and thanks again for doing so!

I'm baaack ...

2004-12-10T06:19:00.000-06:00

... for a few quick hits.

First, check this out over at SMASH's place ... not only did he really outdo himself this time, I think this post has probably generated more comments than any I have seen from the LCDR. Then, check out this follow-up ... and this one, too.

Second, some thoughts about the Rumsfeld press conference ... a little historical perspective is in order here. Also, the SECDEF is absolutely right ... you never go into battle with the army you want, but the army you have ... for if you wait until you get the army you want, you will probably have already lost. This is truly a case of "the best is the enemy of the good" ... and the sentiments of this soldier -- who now appears to have been coached by an activist-journalist -- are hardly universal.

Memo to the critics -- your criticism on topics like these would be far more credible, if your knees didn't jerk with spasms of "IMPEACH!" and "REMOVE!" at the appearance of each problem like this ... and if you wouldn't try to use each and every problem like this as "proof" that we shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place!

More later ... not only about the world, but about what I have been going through in the last week.

Up for air ... almost ...

2004-12-08T13:20:00.000-06:00

Sorry for the lack of posting over the last few days ... that 10-pounds-in-a-5-pounds bag project stretched through the weekend, and even into the last two days.

Now, I'm playing catch-up on the OTHER projects ... so I can't post right now (even though I have a lot on my mind!) Probably tonight, though ... thanks for your patience, and please keep checking back.

An inactive activist here ...

2004-12-03T11:29:00.000-06:00

... for the last two days, I've had a major, emergency project going in my day job. I've been redesigning a printed-circuit board for a customer ... a real "10 pounds in a 5 pound bag" project. That's why you've not seen any new stuff since Wednesday.

In the meantime, read this post from Blackfive ... be sure to check out its comments section, as well, and add yours.

For now, I'll say that we conservatives for too long considered activist a dirty word ... and that was a mistake on our part.

Check back this weekend for more on this.

Back to the grind ...

There's some Major blogging ...

2004-12-01T13:02:00.000-06:00

... that you need to read.

Go over to MajorDad's, and be sure to read these posts:

Be Thou at Peace ... I stand in total agreement with the Major, here.

Rough Men and Women Standing Ready ... 'nuff said.

You Make The Call ... IRAQ -- which has engendered a stiff debate in its comments section.

My view on this is simple -- while the Iraqis have every right to determine their own form of governance, they also have the responsibility to assure that their government not only adopts, but structurally protects all the principles of human interaction that are described here .

Otherwise, we will have to go back in there and repeat this detestible process, sooner or later ... for a failure in exercising this responsibility will once again turn Iraqi soil into fertile ground for the growth of terror and evil.

At least the world's getting this right ...

2004-11-30T11:35:00.000-06:00

... while I have not been following this as closely as I'd like, the events that are unfolding in Ukraine (BTW, it's not "the Ukraine" -- hasn't been since it gained independence from the old Soviet Union).

Instapundit (of course) has been tracking the news and views that are permeating the blogosphere on this ... be sure and check there regularly.

A few pseudo-random thoughts of my own:

The apparent corruption there makes other shady elections (from Chicago's cemetery voters to Saddam's coerced consenses) look like minor addition errors. Next time someone yells "election fraud" regarding our elections, I'll be sure to remind them what REAL election fraud looks like.
This is also an object lesson about what can happen when political influence gets in the way of media objectivity. The fraud was sustained by the inhibition of media coverage by the government, until people could stand it no longer, went around the media, and found ways to publicize the corruption. (I wonder -- how much of this was by coercion, and how much of this was by the choice of media leadership to voluntarily collude? Given our own media climate, we need to take note here.)
Amazingly, international leaders are stepping up to the plate -- and into the faces of both the Ukrainian government and Vladimir Putin -- to denounce the fraud and support the opposition. In a refreshing change from our old policies of "non-interference", our own State Department came out strongly on the side of right ... as did the European Union, and many others.

However, as John O'Sullivan notes, this confrontation has also exposed a couple of losers, besides the obvious ones above:

A third loser is French President Jacques Chirac and those European leaders who want the European Union to be an anti-American counterweight to America. International crises involving Russia tend to remind Europeans that the United
States remains a very valuable ally in a dangerous and unpredictable world. Fantasies of a superpower Europe seem insubstantial delusions by comparison with this tested alliance.
The final losers are the U.N. and Kofi Annan. The U.N. has been invisible. As Kofi Annan has been trying to keep his head above oil, he has issued his usual appeal for restraint. But this crisis has brought forth the heroes of the Cold War from retirement -- Vaclav Havel, Lech Walesa and Margaret Thatcher -- to encourage the orange revolutionaries. And Annan cannot begin to compete with their moral authority or the legitimacy they can bestow.

I paricularly like how these members of the Freedom Hall of Fame have stepped up and showed the world what true leadership is. Let us not forget that without their courageous leadership in earlier times, when it would have been easier to engage in the shams of "peaceful coexistence" and "detente", the Ukrainian people would not be able to stand up against the corruption in their midst.

Let us also not forget one other who made these days possible ...

Thank you, Mr. Reagan.

Thanks to you, the Ukrainian people ... and a world who now sees your wisdom ... can "win one more for the Gipper."

From the blogosphere, I give thanks ...

2004-11-25T10:23:00.000-06:00

... for being endowed by a loving, personal Creator with such inalienable rights as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ... and placing me in a nation where the most fundamental principle of its government is the preservation of these rights.

... that people like me can exercise those rights "because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf" -- by land, by sea and from above -- both at present, and in the past -- and that even these "rough" men have within them a great compassion that simultaneously tempers that roughness, and motivates their willingness to be rough when called for.

... that I have the right to question, and even challenge the government, its leaders, and our social elites of my nation, in both word and deed.

... that even those who stridently disagree with me still have the same voice in the affairs of this nation that I do. I am thankful that we all have the right to say even idiotic things ... and both the authority and responsibility to declare them idiotic, when the facts support that conclusion.

... that the free flow of information ... and the analysis of same ... through multiple media systems is structurally protected by our nation as vital to maintaining our freedom -- and that the blogosphere itself has taken its place as an essential tool for the maintainence of integrity within that flow.

... that, even in time of crisis, we can still "dream big", soar like eagles, and reach for the stars.

... that there are others in our world -- indivduals and nations -- who share our values, stand by us, and could even serve as our refuge if our nation ever goes bad.

... that there are even people who, working with us, are turning bad places in this world into good ones ... even as they realize what it meant to our own Founders to pledge "their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor" to the effort.

... that even those who care for the smallest Gnat can be recognized for their greatness ... and maintian a realism and humility about them that makes them reluctant to acquire greater power.

.... and, that, finally, all these virtues are shared by a multitude that is almost impossible to number.

Enjoy the holiday ... and do remember the reasons for this season.

So, who the heck is The Alleged Mental Case?

2004-11-23T18:49:00.002-06:00

Name: Rich Casebolt

Age: 49

Family status:

Married (for 24 years), two stepchildren (both now married) two granddaughters, and two grand-doggies ... the kids/grandkids/grand-doggies are all in Illinois, though, which can be somewhat frustrating for my wife and I.
Since August 2005, we have lived near the south-central shore of Long Island, NY ... you could say that I'm a stranger, in a strange land ... a (high-tech) redneck in a blue state.

Day Job:

Electronic-design engineer for a small Long Island company, that is a major supplier of portable-power systems to the US Armed Forces and other customers who deal with harsh environments.

Other, unpaid jobs:

Guitarist/bass player/songwriter.
Commenting on other blogs ... Blackfive, Mudville, American Power, and Gateway Pundit are my main haunts for cybersquatting.

Basic viewpoints:

Politically, a support-the-man-not-the-party independent who would like nothing more than to see both major parties rendered obsolete. Until we can make that happen, however, I think I will find myself siding more often with the GOP than with the Dems.
Philosophically, a principled, yet practical, conservative with libertarian leanings. I believe in doing what works, as long as it doesn't cause significant damage in other areas.

Spiritually speaking:

A "generic" Christian who gravitates towards Baptist and Evangelical Free churches.
I believe in the existence of a sentient, intelligent, authoritative, and perfect God as essential for both the creation and maintenance of the ordered universe we live in ...
... His ability to interact with us as "living souls" in love ...
... our need for that relationship ...
... the central inhibition to that relationship created by our willful rebellion against His authority (both past and present) ... an authority that is necessary to keep the universe from descending into chaos ...
... our inability to remove that inhibition ... and its ultimate consequence of total separation from the presence of God (something that He must do, as long as any hint of rebellion remains, to maintain His authority) ...
... and the ability, at a terrible cost, of God to act to remove that inhibition for us, in a way that stands apart from all of religion in its uniqueness and logic.

Other significant stuff:

The name of this blog stems from an incident about 20 years ago, when a wisenheimer colleague did a little creative work with the copier, and replaced my "Rich Casebolt" laminated nameplate insert with a rather convincing "Mental Casebolt" lookalike.
Unintentionally reinforcing this perception, I succumbed to the hubris of the 1990's Internet, and ran for President in 2000.

Truth, in 1000-word doses ...

2004-11-23T17:18:00.000-06:00

John Donovan shows us Fallujah in pictures.

Learn a little more about the thugs Michael Moore called "minutemen".

(Hat tip: SMASH)

You need to get in on this ...

2004-11-23T08:05:00.000-06:00

Citizen Smash is wisely encouraging us to think about the unthinkable.

Condi-sternation over a needed paragidm shift

2004-11-22T11:37:00.000-06:00

President Bush has got the chattering classes howling again, with his appointment of Dr. Condoleezza Rice to replace Gen. Colin Powell as Secretary of State.

In formats from prose to art to video, the critics are protraying her as a sycophant of the President -- in many cases, sinking as low as invoking the symbiology of Aunt Jemima and other racial stereotypes (and it is qute telling that the silence from the NAACP and other civil-rights "leaders" about this is positively deafening).

Others -- apparently including some State Department veterans -- are viewing Dr. Rice's appointment as a sign that neoconservative ideology will trump "realism" in our foreign policy for the next few years.

From where I sit, the critics couldn't be more wrong ...

... wait a minute, actually they can ...

... and Dr. Rice may be just the person to right that wrong.

The tone of the "principled" criticism (I won't even grace the moonbat malarky of the editorial cartoons with a review here) is that Dr. Rice will be incapable of contributing the "moderate"/"realistic" foreign-policy voice this Administration, in their view, needs. Their fear is that the "evil neocons" will increase their dominance of this Administration, to the detriment of the world.

The problem I have with what these critics are advocating, is the legacy of such "moderation" and "realism" -- since our foreign policy, for the last fifty years, has been dominated by such "moderation" and "realism".

Since the horrors of World War II -- particularly the atomic horror at its very end -- and the demise of colonialism in other parts of the world, our foreign policy has been dominated by such "moderate" principles as:

War ... no matter the circumstance, even if necessary ... is a failure on our part.
We must strive to avoid even the appearance of imperialism, at all times.
Even though it is quite arguable have acheived our standing in the world more on right than on might, we can never assert that standing ... or the principles that underlie it ... in our foreign policy, unless others are willing to stand with us, lest we be perceived as "arrogant" or "a bully".
It is more important that America avoid the possiblity of error, than it is to make sure we avoid the consequences of others' errors ... let alone malicious intentions.

When our political leaders have hinted at deviating from these principles ... much less actually done so ... the intellegincia in this nation have excoriated them heavily, consistently portraying such conduct as a greater evil than whatever our leaders were planning to act against.

This double standard is what led us to allow proven thugs to persist in their oppression ... the threat of being perceived as "imperialist" was considered greater than the oppression -- and expansion of power -- of such thugs.

Instead of removing these melanomas from the skin of the world, we kept them there to avoid the "failure" of warfare ... and even used them as our proxies, to avoid the "failure" of direct confrontation with our biggest enemy.

Many of us ... even me, from time to time ... agreed with this. Liberals and conservatives alike bought into the idealistic view that we were somehow beyond the dirty business of warfare ... that discussion and reason has made war obsolete.

We couldn't have been more wrong.

This viewpoint led to Vietnam's downfall ... the rise of Iranian Islamofascism and its derivatives and copies, from Hamas to Al Quada ... the empowerment of Saddam Hussein, and Bashar Assad, and Kim Jong Il.

All avoidable, even in the presence of the Soviet Union, if we didn't have an inflated opinion of the goodness of humanity ... especially ourselves.

Simply put, the overly idealistic view that the direct use of American military force must always be avoided ... unless bodies are already lying dead in OUR streets ... is the biggest error in our foreign policy since WWII.

It still persists today ... from the campaigns of Howard Dean and John Kerry, to these critics of Dr. Rice ... despite the history. When will the political Left take its share of the blame for creating the conditions that led to our present War on Terror?

What you are about to see, should Dr. Rice be confirmed, is the correction of this error. The thugs (and weasels) in this world had better take note -- America is now taking a realistic view of you, and will act in realistic ways to protect her interests.

It is nothing less than the embedding of a new paragidm into the fabric of our foreign policy ... new to the career professionals within the State Department, and perhaps to the intelligencia, but not to the rest of us.

We call it common sense ... and it's been a long time coming.

Check back this afternoon ...

2004-11-22T07:56:00.000-06:00

... for something deeper than this post.

I've got some good stuff (IMO) to post here -- but it took me until this morning to (hopefully) complete the spyware cleanout on the family PC.

Right now, I think that those who propagate this garbage should be subjected to some Bill O'Reilly justice ... life at hard labor, living in a tent in central Alaska, with no access to the Internet whatsoever.

Now don't make me repeat myself ...

2004-11-20T10:42:00.000-06:00

... use my new feature -- The Nuts & Bolts Index -- to the right.

This brings up a selection of past posts, that are good illustrations of the fundamental ideas behind my take on the issues.

Read 'em, and see where I'm coming from.

UPDATE: another phishing expedition ...

2004-11-20T07:27:00.000-06:00

... got another email spoofing PayPal, this morning.

I forwarded it on to the PayPal people, for their "action".

Here's the PayPal viewpoint on spoofing -- it is highy recommended reading, IMO.

Leadership personified ...

2004-11-18T13:51:00.000-06:00

To my readers from The Agitator and elsewhere ... you NEED to read this post from SMASH.

This is leadership -- and good policy -- on all levels ...

personal and national ...

tactical and strategic ...

operational and policy.

Mr. President, Mr Rumsfeld (and Dr. Rice -- more on her in the near future) -- this is the kind of leadership we expect from you. Make us proud.