We Remember

At the end of the year, I like to look back and remember some of the people we lost, and to celebrate their lives - especially the ones you may not have heard of.

It was a bad year for cartoons. Tigger, Piglet, Fred Flintstone, Tony the Tiger and the Jolly Green Giant all lost their voices.
Bad year for Star Trek, too. The franchise died, along with the Chief Engineer. So Long, Mr. Doohan.
Bad year for Our Gang. Butch and Porky both bought it.
Bad year for Music. Shirley Horn died. Go find one of her records. Now. Lalo Guerrero, father of Chicano music, died. George Scott, of the Blind Boys of Alabama. Robert Moog, the synthesizer man, who thereby invented 70s music. Skitch Henderson, Tonight Show bandleader. Link Wray, guitarist who inspired many of today's artists. R.L. Burnside, the bluesman. Long John Baldry. Go buy his record, too.

Other notables you may not have heard of:
Will Eisner, the comic book creator of the Spirit, and the graphic novel. The man who pretty much changed comics from Cape-Man Saves the Day to serious stuff.
Peter Foy, the theatrical effects creator. Before they said "You will believe a man can fly", he made two women fly - Mary Martin in Peter Pan, and Sally Field in The Flying Nun. An artist from the days before computer imaging.
Philip Johnson, the architect who popularized the "glass box" skyscraper, thus making sure that every city in the world looked like New York, and vice versa. He redeemed himself in later years.
Dale Messick, comic strip artist, inventer of the first female investigative reporter, Brenda Starr.
Evan Hunter, creator of Ed McBain, the police procedural, and as a result, inspiration of just about everything on TV right now.
Frank Gorshin. 10,000 voices, one of them the one and only Riddler. Sorry, Carrey.
Stan Berenstein. If you have kids, you know about the Berenstein Bears.
Dennis Flanagan, who revitalized Scientific American.
Samuel W. Alderson, inventor of the crash test dummy.
George Atkinson, inventor of the video rental business.
"Hack" Hackworth, America's most decorated veteran at the time of his death.
Gerry Thomas, inventor of the TV dinner.
John Van Hengel, creator of the food bank.
Alexander Yakovlev, key framer of the policies of Glasnost and Peristroika.
Peter F. Drucker, writer of the first "management" book.
Jay Hammond, the former governor R-Alaska, best Republican ever.
Joe Grant, one of the last of Disney's team.

They will be remembered.

The National Loss of Faith

And no, I'm not talking about the secular Christmas nonsense.
I'm talking about the loss of faith in our institutions.

We have become a nation of conspiracy theorists. We have convinced ourselves that every organization around us is secretly trying to screw us around.
Whether you are left or right wing, we have one thing in common - we both think that half of our elected politicians are traitors, to America and to American ideals.
The number one book on the market alleges that the Catholic Church has been running a cover-up since St. Peter was in charge - a cover up that has included over the years everything from Opus Dei to Freemasonry, in a plot that wouldn't have made the cut for an X-Files episode.
Don't get started on JFK. I understand the newest theory implicates everyone except L. Ron Hubbard and E.T. So many groups have been named over the years that the Presidential limo should have looked like Bonnie and Clyde's flivver.

It's no wonder that people are embracing everything from Intelligent Design to UFOlogy. When you believe that your whole life is a fraud, facts become suspect.

Well, folks, here is some old Hick advice.
Secrets are things held by two people, not twenty. The Catholic Church did not keep a secret for 2,000 years. Somebody would have lost their faith and spilled the beans before now. JFK might have been killed by the mafia, but not by the Illuminati, the Cubans, or the Secret Cabal That Has Run The Country Since 1963.
The Democrats are not traitors, they are just idiots trying to get re-elected. The Republicans, ditto. The ACLU is clumsily trying to help, not revive communism.
The world is in the state it's in because of plain old fashioned incompetence, greed, apathy, and ignorance. No secret plan exists to keep us down.

So have yourselves a Merry Little Christmas, and do what you can to make people's lives a little better this season. Don't preach, don't picket. Don't assume that PETA is full of terrorists, conservatives want a dictatorship, or that the guy at the end of the road works for Al-Qaida.
Be safe. Be happy. For one day, anyway.

When is enough enough?

So, what action by the current administration IS too much for the Right?
Is there anything, other than sex with an intern, that the right wing blogs will not explain away, deny, or refuse to talk about?
So far, they have not balked at:
- Bush acknowledging that the reasons he gave for invading Iraq were false,
- Media manipulation galore, from Gannongate, to pay-for-play in this country (remember Armstrong Williams?), to pay-for-play in Iraq.
- Scandals involving DeLay, Abramoff, Plame, Brown, Libby, bridges to nowhere, wiretaps, . . .
- flip-flops on Social Security, troop withdrawls, Supreme Court nominees, . . .
- Bush's inability to move quickly, seen on 9/11 (storybook time), and Katrina (guitar time).
- endless statements on how Iraq is going well - after 4 years, we now have an election most of the participants are calling corrupted . . .
- the abandonment of the chase for Bin Laden; in 2006, the only troops who will be working in force in Afghanistan will be the CANADIANS!
- FEMA
- the Budget
- torture

Meanwhile, most of the accomplishments of the Bush administration have been negative accomplishments.
Terrorists have NOT struck.
. . . at least, Al-Qaida has not struck in this country. Several eco-terrorist groups have successfully eluded the Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security. Al-Qaida seems to have spent its time attacking other countries - and have managed to do so despite America's wiretaps, interrogations, and surveillance. Either that, or America just didn't bother warning anyone.
Plus, this also excludes all the attacks made in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe Al-Qaida is lazy, finding it too easy to attack Americans abroad to bother attacking the mainland. So, hats off to America's brave fighting men and women, staked out like Fay before King Kong, with the government hoping that Al-Kong will take the sacrifice and leave them alone.
The country has NOT entered a depression.
. . . although this could be more due to the actions of American businesses rather than the administration. There is no sign that oil companies are hiring, despite the windfalls they got from the government this year.

Merry Christmas.

Where are their medals?

For four years now, American troops have been in constant danger, constant combat. They have been through a hell we can only barely understand. Through it all, as in all wars, there have been moments of bravery, of valor, of heroism.
Why have they not been rewarded?
Why have I not heard, from any source - MSM, government, or blog - of any award for valor given out to a soldier in Iraq?
Has no one in the last four years produced even one act worthy of the Silver Star? The Medal of Honor?

There are several ways in which a country honors its troops. One of them is to reward their bravery. When is the government going to do so for the men and women in Iraq?

Terrorists may be using your cell phone.

The phones of top executives from Canada's Rogers Telecom had been the target of repeated cloning by a group linked to Hezbollah. (Cloning is the duplication of a cellphone's identity by copying its number and encrypted security code.)
Rogers apparently does have a method of detecting unusual patterns of calls (such as you, having made local calls only for years, suddenly calling Syria daily.) However, they are sometimes unwilling to shut off service.
The main reason is that most of the "clones" are of phones belonging to top executives, both of Rogers and of other companies.
“They were using actually a pretty brilliant psychology. Nobody wants to cut off Ted Rogers' phone or any people that are directly under Ted Rogers, so they took their scanners to our building, like our north building, where our senior top, top, top executives are. They took their scanners there and also to Yorkville, where there are a lot of high rollers and like it would be a major PR blunder to shoot first and ask questions later. . . . Nobody wants to shut off Ted. Even if he is calling Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Kuwait.” said a company spokeperson.

Nice.

Thanks to The Toronto Globe and Mail for the information.

The words from Iran.

Question: does calling someone a Holocaust Denier enough to invoke Godwin's Law?
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is now trying to become the white supremist poster boy. He has called the Holocaust a myth, and wants the Jews sent back where they came from. He's done everything but shave his head and wear Doc Martins.
The fact that he's doing it is not suprising - he is, after all, an embattled leader in a Mulsim theocracy. Threatening Israel and badmouthing the US comes right after praising Allah in the Iranian campaigner's diary. What's unsettling is that he's doing it with American military forces on two of his borders. One would think he isn't too concerned with invasion.
He may be right. This is the final repercussion of the bad intel/lack of planning that has plagued the Iraq War. Iran, and Syria, are not afraid of the United States right now. They see Uncle Sam as a bungler, vulnerable to a few suicide bombers.
So, now what? Do we ignore him, confirm their beliefs, and get ready for a wave of terrorist attacks? Or do we attack, and commit overworked soldiers to another series of battles?

Where's the Religious Right Now?

While shopping for Christmas presents this year, I came across a set of cards called Guardian Angels. Created by the aptly named Angela McGerr, it is a card drawing oracle designed to help provide you with guidance for your life.
Why hasn't the Religious Right jumped all over this?
For all its nice art and better intentions, this is a tricked up Tarot deck. It is magic in Christian clothing. It includes a book of 100 angels, like Aratron, Guardian Angel of Nature's Magic. I do not believe I am familiar with that name, neither from the Bible nor the Apochripha. Nor have I heard of Och, Guardian Angel of Chrystal Alchemy. I'm sure I would have remembered THAT name. Unless Ms McGerr is claiming divine contact, it is a total invention which she wishes us to believe is a sending of God and a guide for our lives.
It is a lie, and a dangerous one.
Using this set replaces judgement and knowledge of God's plan with a faith in the draw, and the randomness of chance. The unfortunate believer has as much chance of getting a correct answer to his problem than he has of drawing to an inside straight.

Dobson and Robertson are hyping the "de-Christing of Christmas" as the greatest assault against Christianity since the fall of Rome, yet this insidious little game - and all the other similar little angelic oracles - are a greater danger by an order of magnitude. They are an assault on the core beliefs of the religion, not just on the public use of language.
If the Religious Right really cared about the faith, they would be concentrating on getting these sets out of the Christian book stores. To heck with what they call the 25th!

The voice of the Right?

Just in case you were wondering whether Fox News was really the fair and balanced voice of truth and true Americans, . . .
During last month’s street riots in France, Fox News ran a banner during a news segment, that read “Muslim riots.” Billionaire Saudi Prince al-Walid bin Talal didn't like it. He phoned Murdock. He had it changed to "Urban Riots."

That's right folks. While the army's been paying Iraqi reporters to print pro-US stories, al-Walid has been getting anti-Muslim statements off the air. And, seeing as he owns 5.5% of Fox, he didn't even have to pay.

The ACLU - love it or hate it.

Here's some of the love.

And here's some of the hate.
And here.

Much of the ranting against the ACLU appears to be that it pursues lawsuits for people some others don't feel deserve lawsuits, or against people who don't deserve to be sued.

Defender of rights, or too PC? Arguments exist on both sides.

Side-tracked

Why are we all getting so bogged down in trivia?
Terrible things are going on in our world, in our country. The damage from Katrina has not been repaired yet, and we have no idea whether we can afford next year's blows. Bird Flu is on the horizon, terrorists are still on the march, and . . .

And the left is trying to get a Crip off death row. Because he wrote children's books.
Suppose he wrote self-help books, or an autobiography. Would it be ok to execute him then?
The man is a cold-blooded killer, with ties to a group that spans the continent. He needs to feel what the law can impose upon him, and his friends need to see it done.

Meanwhile, the right is frothing at the attack on Christmas. They are pissed that WalMart and Target are selling "holiday trees" instead of Christmas trees. Maybe if they looked at how those trees are made, and by whom, out there in the third world, they might have second thoughts about associating HIS name with them. Ho Ho Ho that, boys and girls.
Anyway, if the Soviet Union, Red China, and militant Islam can't kill Christianity, then Sam Walton's juggernaught won't either.

Meanwhile, the left are objecting to the new Narnia movies, on account of the "Christian" subtext. What, they've got holiday trees in it, or something?
Yes, C.S.Lewis was a Christian apologist, and there are traces of Christian thought in the books, and movie. There are also creatures from Greek myth, Norse myth, and Germanic myth.
Or did you myth the fauns, dwarves, and giants?
Honestly, this is the old Dungeons and Dragons argument again. D+D is satanic because it has devils as adversaries. Narnia is Christian because some of the ideas are Christian.
Well, Lord of the Rings had the same sorts of elements. Go rain on that parade for a while.

Meanwhile, . . . the birds are coming. And so are the hurricanes.

Generalities

The biggest things crushing debate in the US are generalities.
All Muslims are evil. Their "religion of peace" is a sham. They are all anti-American.
Do you believe that? Then why are thousands of American soldiers risking their lives to save them? Why are they taking all this abuse when they could just sweep across Iraq, Iran, and Syria, getting rid of all the terrorists?
All Democrats are moonbats. All Republicans are nazis. All fundamentalists are crazy. The list goes on.

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Agreed, several members of Congress have proven themselves guilty, as have several bloggers. But it doesn't hurt to listen to alternate arguments. Think of it as a test of your cognitive functions. Read what they say, and try to come up with a counter-argument that doesn't contain insults, off-topic references, or circular reasoning.

Oh, and several Muslims don't believe in terrorism. Including, by the way, the families of those being killed by the terrorists - at a greater rate than Americans, right now.

Still loved by the Iraqi

According to a Knight Ridder report, Iraqi newspaper, TV and radio reporters who join the "Baghdad Press Club" -- a group formed by U.S. Army officers last year -- receive as much as $50 per "favorable" article from the United States.
So, we have gone from being greeted by cheers and flowers to having to BUY favorable press.
But we're still number one in their hearts, right?

Lennon

Today is the anniversary of John Lennon's death - an event which shows just how far some people are willing to go for fame.
I wonder if some people in Iraq have learned this lesson?
Another bunch of peace activists have been kidnapped, and their captors demand the release of all prisoners.
What will that accomplish?
The prisoners go free. The hostages die anyway. New prisoners are taken. The wheel turns again.

Merry Christmas to the troops in Iraq.
Merry Christmas to the troops in Afghanistan, a group of people who have been mostly overshadowed by the more (un)popular conflict next door. Their job is just as arduous, just as dangerous.
But their stories are not getting on CNN. Merry Christmas, folks.

Wasted Time

The Bush administration will go down in history for, if nothing else, all the wasted potential.
They've had a firm majority for years now, both in the House and the Senate. They cleaned out the bureaucracy and inserted their own key people.
And for what? What have they really accomplished?
True, the war was a major distraction, but so what? They should have been able to leave the war to the Pentagon and concentrated on domestic issues. That's what the Pentagon is for.
Can you name a major bill or initiative that the Bush government has managed to push through? No Child Left Behind is being left behind. Social Security reform vanished.
For all their talk that they don't need to defend their record, the Bush circle is spending a lot of time defending their record, and not much time sponsoring legislation, bringing it to a vote, and passing it.
The bills they have passed, I've noticed, have been seriously underplayed. The government does not brag about what they've managed to do. They haven't even mentioned it. If they are that sensitive to criticism with a majority, what will they be like with a minority?

Come on, conservatives! Make some noise. Brag a little.
Start by doing something to brag about.

The only Intelligent Design argument you need.

Is right here.

Very funny. Very true.

Troop reductions? Or just a change in tactics?

So, the US Government has decided on a troop pullout.
Or has it?
Follow the following link, and see what's really in store.
From The New Yorker ...

Congressmen injured in Iraq

Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pennsylvania, and Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Missouri, were both injured while on an inspection tour of Iraq. Thei vehicle was hit by an oncoming truck. This was not considered a terrorist attack.
Ike Skelton has partial paralysis of his arms from polio. What is HE doing in a war zone? Aren't there any politicians out there with full use of their limbs?
Note that I am not calling Mr. Skelton's intelligence, or courage into question. But let's get the political correctness out of the way. The man is in a situation where your life depends on doing the right thing quickly, and although I applaud his triumph over a crippling disease, he is STILL not the man to send into a war zone. Why is he there?

Abolish Democracy NOW!

Top 10 Reasons we should abolish democracy in the United States.

10: The large group, growing larger, that believes that drunk driving is the fault of the liquor companies, shootings are the fault of the gun salesmen, and drug crimes are the fault of some cabal in Columbia.
"We is all jus' pore white folks, wit fif' grade ejucatons, an' we don't know nuttin 'bout things, 'cept how to call our lawyer when we is hurt or sumpin', an' we couldn'ta even have dun that witout him programmin' the speed dialler 'for us." Too many voters believe that they are not responsible for anything, and that no matter what happens in life, there is somebody to be sued. Somebody should sue them. And keep them away from anything important, like the running of a country. After all, they aren't responsible people.

9: The rise of the anti intellectuals, especially the astrologists, creationists, UFOlogists, and conspiracy theorists - anyone who thinks that their beliefs are more important than the facts.
Your brain does not dictate reality. You are not that important, and I don't think egoists like you should be allowed to control a country.
Besides, you'd just give the place away to the Martians.

8: People who think their leaders should be "one of them". That's just what we need - a self-deluded, ignorant truck driver who can't get laid, leading the country.

7: The voter turnout. When we get to the stage where a 50% turnout is good, it's time to relieve all those poor, set-upon citizens of that nasty old vote.

6: The growing belief that God created an entire class of people for you to prove your faith against. This includes those who beat gays to death, shoot abortionists, and pilot airplanes into office buildings. God saved all those you kill, even the aborted. You're just sending yourself to hell. Also, who'd give any sort of responsibility to someone who thinks that a life of killing women who have sex out of wedlock, is going to win them seventy-odd virgins? Do you really think they're going to put out for you? You'd kill them!
Given the many examples from the 20th Century of what happens when people who believe in killing fellow citizens for "wrong" behavior get into power, it's best they not get a vote.

5: The cult of celebrity. I have great doubts about any voter who pays attention to the political views of someone who plays Make-Believe for a living. Not that it's dirty or anything, it's just that spending all that time learning lines leaves them little time to consider the ramifications of the SALT treaties.
I also have serious doubts about anyone who can't find Iraq on a map, but knows who Jennifer is dating now. And who knows who I mean by "Jennifer" without mentioning a last name.

4: The Great Christian Meltdown. This includes, but is not limited to. . .
- The people who think that because WalMart no longer says "Merry Christmas!", that Christianity is in danger, even though Christianity survived Nero and his lions.
- The people who listen to Pat Robertson, or for that matter any Christian leader who believes that the embodiment of peace and forgiveness wants certain people to burn in hell.
- Those who believe that the agnostics of our generation are so important to God that he will be willing to suspend natural laws, unleash the AntiChrist, and destroy the entire world, just to win them over - unlike the agnostics of, say, 1932. They can go to hell.

3: The rise of Multiculturalism, and the belief that our careful designed culture, polished over 8,000 years, influenced by everything from Hammurabi to Sun Tzu to Napoleon, is no more moral than some stone age tribe that ate raw monkeys and killed their daughters.
Look, the many cultures that have graced this world have contributed thousands of good ideas. Fire. Tea. Rubber. Dancing.
They have also contributed more than their fair share of bad ideas.
Mutilation. Abuse. Murder by decree.
There is a growing number of people who think that multiculturalism goes beyond contributing a new china pattern, to become an excuse for committing any sort of behavior, on the grounds that sometime, somewhere, one of your ancestors thought is was proper.
Your ancestors were barbarians, and I don't want you running things.

2: The state of Modern Education. I don't mind that a functional illiterate can get a B.A. by examining the effects of Lesbian Vampires upon Japanese anime. I just don't think these people should be allowed to vote. They may decide to elect a lesbian vampire, and then where would we all be?

1: The continued dominance of Me-ism. Anyone who thinks that nothing in the country exists that is more important than their own personal comfort should be safely ensconced in a secure little facility, where they can be taken care of while real people run things.

Name Droppers

Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people.

I will discuss ideas and events on this blog.
Not people.
Every conservative blog I've turned to today has had the word Murtha in the title.
Forget Murtha. If you want to discuss the struggle in Iraq, fine. But I will not discuss the man.
Murtha is not dissing MY ideas. Or me. I will not diss him.

Merry Whatever

Christmastime is here again. A time of joy, a time of cheer.
A time for the most bent members of the Religious Right to get even more twisted.
Christianity is under attack - because schools and stores say "Happy Holidays" and insist on restricting nativity scenes.
I guess the message of peace and joy has nothing to do with Christmas. It's all about the slogans.
Listen guys - the stores say "Happy Holidays" because they want the Hannukah crowd to come in during December, too. Why is the wisdom of the marketplace trusted in every other instance, but not THIS instance?
The schools practice religious-neutral activities because if they didn't, they'd be sued. Ours is the most lawsuit-happy culture in history. The political-correctness issue, the zero-tolerance issue, and the no-nativity scene issue all stem from a bunch of cranks willing to file a $10 million suit if their child "perceives an inappropriate idea" in a public place.

Get over it guys. Before someone sues you.

Why Johnnie can't fight

Despite its current reputation, the American army has never done well with tactics. Battles they have won have, for the most part, been grinding affairs, with heavy casualties.

The Revolutionary War started out very poorly for the Americans, with loss after loss. They were almost ready to throw in the towel at Valley Forge. Other than a few bright spots, such as the battle of Cowpens, American generals produced no great victories during the war. Meanwhile, the British, who declared war on France, will also face Spain, who will declare war in 1779 as an ally of France, and the Dutch, who have been engaging in profitable trade with the French and Americans. In addition to America, the British will fight in the Mediterranean, Africa, India, the West Indies, and on the high seas, while facing possible invasion of England itself by the French. In 1782, Parliament, tired of all the fighting, and demoralized by the loss at Yorktown, decides not to pursue the war any longer.

The War of 1812 was a non-starter. After a few naval actions, the Continental Army invaded over the Niagara River, met the Canadians at Lundy's Lane, and the two sides shot each other to pieces.

Then there was the Civil War. America's one great shining light, Robert E. Lee, along with a more than competent staff, kept the South in the game years longer than they should have been able to. They were helped in no small measure by the Generals of the Union, and it helps us in our understanding of the mindset of the the American general to look at them. McClellan, who was loved by the troops - on both sides, since he was an overcautious tactician. Burnside, one of the worst generals in human history. Sherman, master of the Army Ant School of warfare, whose only tactical innovation was the willingness to kill and burn everything in his path. Many later US generals would take a page from his book. Grant, the old drunk who was able to finally make use of his army's numerical and material advantages to bring the war to an end.

The pattern was set, and has been followed ever since. Casualties be damned, finesse be damned. Git there fastest with the mostest. Use numerical and material superiority to grind your opponent into the dirt.
Every war the US Army has ever fought has been fought the same way. And when that basic tactic hasn't worked, the US Army hasn't won.

There was WW1. After sitting as a neutral for three years, presumably getting reports on the fighting, the United States entered the war in 1917. They had no aircraft; they bought French planes. One year after Cambrai, they had no tanks. Two years after the Somme, their first battle had them go over the top into German machine gun fire, causing them to join the stalemate. One year later, a fed-up German army essentially went on strike, and the war ended.

WW2. Again, the US sat out the fight until the Japanese convinced them of the folly of isolationism - a lesson that the US would have to relearn 60 years later. Again, the US went to war with no modern tanks or aircraft. They won their early victories by overwhelming their German opponents - and defeated the Japanese by technical innovation. There was no tactical innovation by the Americans in this war. Patton read Rommel's book; Nimitz copied what the Japanese were doing, and beat them at their own game. The Sherman tank beat the Tigers by numbers, sacrificing 3 out of 4 tanks to kill their opponent, and counting on the fact that they had 5 Shermans for every Tiger the Germans had.

Korea saw the Americans armed with WW2 weapons try to beat the Chinese. With the UN's help, America managed a draw. MacArthur's Inchon invasion stands out amidst a lackluster performance by American generals. However, the Chinese were too numerous to overwhelm, and America eventually just sealed off the border and went home.

Vietnam showed off America's weaknesses to the world. The US Army had learned nothing since The Battle of the Bulge. They fought a blitzkrieg in the jungle, and lost, unable to bring their enemy to bear. This was only a few years after the French had lost to the same army in the same way - and only a few years after the Australians had beaten a similar army using more practical tactics. Tactics that America failed to learn.

Finally, after years of Cold War, America was presented with the perfect conflict - the Gulf War. Textbook tank terrain, an opponent inferior in numbers, technology, and training, a noble cause, no outside allies for the enemy. Bush Senior's army rolled over the Republican Guard.

Then came the 21st Century, and the neo-chickenhawks. They had been chafing since Bush Sr. had left Saddam untouched. They decided to go over and do things right.
For a while, it was the Gulf War all over again. The precision missile strikes, the tank attacks.
Then the war changed, from blitzkrieg to guerilla. And the army faltered.
With tactics still unchanged from the streets of Berlin, 60 years ago, the men of the United States army now attempts to fight a 21st Century war. At the platoon level, the troops are first rate. Barring an ambush, they can take on all comers - and they can usually deal with ambushers, too.
It's at the staff level that it all breaks down. The generals cannot seem to get their head around the problem of an enemy that plants bombs along the road, or sends suicide bombers against their troops.
They say that they cannot leave until the job is done.
Then go back to their war of attrition.

We need a Guderian. A Napoleon. Someone to think of a whole new way of making war.
Something the United States has never had - a military genius. Robert E., where are you, now that we need you?

War/Pieces

Why is the army still in Iraq?
Think about it. The most powerful military machine in the world, for that matter the most powerful military machine of all time, is still fighting 4 years later against a 3rd world power. Less than that, since Saddam, his army, and his followers are toast.
Why?
Well, believe it or not, it's because of liberal ideas.
Since the Vietnam War, the idea of the army as peacekeeper has become standard. Soldiers are urged to "be all that you can be", and the weary dogface has become a policeman-at-arms. The new army stands tall, protecting the public and standing between harm and the innocent.
Sorry, Kofi.
The army is what it has always been - The Fourth Horseman incarnate. Its job is to break things - armies, countries, dictators. They shoot people. In any terrain, at any time, in all weather.
Unfortunately, in both Democratic and Republican circles, this image is verboten. The US invaded Iraq with the notion that the army was the perfect tool for rebuilding, policing, and reempowering the populace.
It wasn't. It isn't. Peace is NOT their profession. You want to run a war, they're your man. You want to run a peace, you call the Peace Corp.

The House was able to make $50 billion of reductions in the rate of growth of the budget over the next five years. Those cuts will affect poor and middle class families. At the same time, the Senate passed legislation granting $60 billion in tax cuts, primarily for the wealthy, on Thursday.
Pardon me? Isn't this a little silly?
On second thought, strike the "little". And the "silly". This is insulting.

Muslims killing Muslims

The next time someone defends a Muslim extremist group by saying that they are striking back against America's injustices, ask a simple question.

"Name one Muslim terrorist organization that has never killed Muslims."

The most recent attacks in Iraq have been in mosques. The most recent Al-Qaida attack was in Jordan. Today, extremists threatened the King of Jordan, calling him a traitor.
Attacking Americans has almost become a sideline for these people. Apparently they want to purge the religion of any moderates before taking on the real enemy.
Which, I suppose, fits the extremist mindset very well.

I highly recommend this book: http://www.StellaAwards.com/book.html

The Great Divider

The one sure legacy of the Bush Government we can see, is that he will be known as the Great Divider. The man whose government turned American against American, liberal vs. Conservative, blue vs. red.
Oh, we can pass some of the blame onto the bloggers, the media, or the lunatic fringe. But not all of it. We can't even pass most of it.
Bloggers? The most widely read of them have an audience of only a few thousands. They aren't affecting the majority of citizens.
The media? There are few media personalities trusted the way America trusted say, Walter Cronkite. Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh may have voiced the opinions, but their targets just responded with a few books and T-shirts. No divisiveness there.
The lunatic fringe we have always had, raving and frothing. But nobody ever paid attention to them before.

No. It has been the government's policies and statements, demonizing dissenters and championing an Us or Them state, that has separated the United States into two separate States.
I only wish I knew how this was going to end.

Intelligence

Perhaps there is a way for the Bush government to improve its analysis of intelligence.
Stop hiring oil executives to do it.
PFIAB, the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, is a group of appointees who advise the President on all intelligence matters. They have access to ALL top security information, and are expected to give expert and objective advice concerning it, and how well the various agencies are giving it.
Oilman Ray Hunt, financier William DeWitt Jr., Netscape founder Jim Barksdale, and former Commerce secretary Donald Evans are all members of the current PFIAB. THESE are intelligence experts? These are the men Bush depends on to decide whether a CIA report is worth the paper it's written on?

Now What?

The Republicans have finally awakened to the fact that someday the troops are going to have to come home, and that if they intend to stay until the terrorists are all gone and the threat ended they had better import brides and start reproducing a new crop of privates.
I'm sure the Right will condemn all the traitors in the Senate who adopted this new measure. Some of them may even have a good reason for doing so , other than the fact that it contradicts the known wishes of George W. Deity.

Look.
Here's the scenerio.
Your mission is as follows. There is a nation of several hundred million people. 500 of them are terrorists. You must destroy the five hundred without greatly disturbing the lifestyles of the several hundred million others.
You may choose from the following force options:
a) A carrier task force and 3 armored divisions.
b) An impeccable intelligence agency and 10 SEAL teams.
c) A strategic nuclear arsenal.

The correct choice was (b). Too bad nobody chose it.
Now the US is stuck trying to crush cockroaches with a sledgehammer.
It's time to change. Time to lose the sledgehammer and bring out the bug traps.

This is not surrender. It is not retreat. It is strategy.
If only the loons could see this.

Profits

Can one of you nice connected people out there help the ol' Small town Hick with the answer to a question?
Haliburton has been in charge of supplying the Army in Iraq since the beginning, as well as running the reconstruction. Last I heard, ther had been overcharging for gasoline (something that seems to have dropped off the radar), and the troops were still having to provide their own body armor and hummer plates.
A Haliburton subsidiary has been in charge of the Katrina cleanup, and recently the news has been that KBR has been bringing in illegals and underpaying them for the work. I haven't been hearing any cheering from the bleachers about KBR keeping the price of the cleanup down, so I assume they've been billing the government for proper salaries, even if they haven't been paying them.
So, my question - does anybody have any idea, even an estimate, of how much money Haliburton has been paid by the government since the election of George W. Bush?
And how much of that is profit?

Losing Patience

I am losing patience.
Losing patience with the Bush government, with the conservative blogs, with the liberals, with everybody.

The White House has said "These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs."
The White House has said "More than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power."
The question is, Is the White House giving bipartisan Senate investigations the same information that the House and Senate received during the buildup to war, ie. wrong information?

I am sick and tired of all the defenders of the "CIA should be able to torture" argument.
Even assuming - assuming - that the information acquired by torture can be trusted, ie. is not being made up on the spot just to stop the torture,
If the enemy knows we are torturing people, they will take countermeasures.
Torture is not new, and neither are the ways to circumvent torture. Giving out information on a need-to-know basis, giving false info to people likely to be captured, and so on.
Reliable intelligence is the kind the enemy doesn't know we are collecting - informants, hidden microphones, phone taps, and so on. Especially informants - nothing is better than someone on the inside who likes you more than them.
Unfortunately, you must be more likeable than they are. With all that's happened over the last few years, that isn't likely.
In fact, it is possible that the enemy is getting information from us. Lots of liberals hate Bush right now, including all the people in the intelligence departments who keep leaking damaging information to the press. Who's to say that one isn't leaking someting to Al-Qaida, too?

And now: Is WP a chemical weapon? No. It's an incendiary, like napalm.
OK. Technically, white phosphorus is a chemical weapon. TNT is a chemical weapon, because TNT is a chemical. However, we don't classify TNT that way. There are explosive weapons, there are solid shot weapons.
And there are all the other weapons. White Phosphorus counts as one of those.
Is it inhumane? Does it cause a lot of suffering?
Yes. So is TNT and the spent uranium in the anti-tank shells.
Next question.

The Queen of England is now on the Al-Qaida hit list. Near the top, no less. Not bad for a figurehead with no legislative power.

And the Iowa activists have announced that anyone who opposes Alito's nomination can forget about running for president next time. Oh, this is RICH!
1) The people who will be opposing Alito will be running for SENATE. And only two of those will be affected by an Iowa vote. Plus, with the current mood of the country, the Iowa activists may turn out to be 1% of the vote.
2) Anyone who hitches his wagon to the Bush star can probably forget about being president next time. The record of the current government - scandal, cronyism, overspending, incompetence - means that thre next conservative who runs against the neo-conservatives is likely to run them out of town.

Iran may have nuclear weapons. We need to do something about it.
Too bad our troops are conmmitted to a job they shouldn't have to be doing, isn't it?

I've had enough for one post.

I want to know.

I want to get to the bottom of this.
Blogs for Bush says that there isn't a grain of truth in the anti-war arguments, and that they are aiding the enemy.
Well, the enemy is in retreat, and there are still a lot of questions that even I want to know.

I want to know where the WMDs are. There are 4 possibilities.
1) They exist, and the US found them. If this is true, then the Bush government should be publishing photos, instead of letting all this speculation go on.
2) They exist, but we never found them. If so, then why did we call off the search? Are we just going to let enriched uranium sit under the sands somewhere until somebody accidentally finds it?
3) They exist, but they're no longer in Iraq. If so, then somebody's got a LOT of explaining to do. We went to war to destroy the WMD. If Al-Qaida got away with them, and perhaps also looted one of Saddam's arsenals (unsecured at the time by US troops.), then the war is a bust.
4) They don't exist. Supported, if by nothing else, by the changing explaination for the war - was WMD, then was Remove Saddam - this would be a horrible crime to have perpetrated upon the United States Armed Forces and their families.
I want proof. One way or the other.

Second, I want to know who's lying in the Plame case.
The case is not a farce, as some on the right have said. The evidence may be a farce - the case is deadly serious. An intelligence system in disarray, trying to bring down a sitting president - this is NOT a farce.

Third, I want to know what's being done about Al-Qaida.
Bin Ladin's still out there. Agents are still blowing things up.
Fighting the terrorists who don't happen to be in Iraq is a matter for US intelligence. Which may want to bring down the government more than it wants to save the country.
The police will not help us against terrorists. We ALL have to be involved. We all have to know what we're dealing with, and what to look for.
We're not being told.
This is total war, people, against an enemy that strikes from the shadows, and looks like the kids from the tenaments. England and France have both been struck, not by Iraqi, but by people who have lived in those countries all their lives.
They live in New York, too. And Los Angeles.

I want to know these things.
So do you. Whether you say so or not.

Australia

There you go.
You get a pro-democracy, anti-terrorist population together, and you get informants willing to rat out terrorist cells.
As soon as the Iraqi learn this, Iraq will settle down.

Who's Right?

Whatever you think of George W. Bush, he is a second term president. He will not be re-elected.
Who should be the next Republican candidate for President of the United States?

I just watched West Wing, and I was very impressed by Alan Alda's performance. I wouldn't mind voting for the character he portrayed. However, seeing as Vinnick is fictional, we need to ask ourselves whether we can elect someone like him. In other words, how close can we come?
We need someone with the right mix of morals, integrity, force, and intelligence to lead the US out of what is going to be a rough decade. The current scandals, like it or not, pretty much exclude Bush's inner circle.
Any suggestions? The floor is open.

France

Nobody has a national identity more distinct than the French.
From language to cooking to history, French culture is legendary.
That may be the problem.
You see, French arrogance is also a byword. To a frenchman, the world is divided into the French and the barbarians. The French voted down the EU constitution mainly because it would have forced the French to treat other Europeans as though they were French - intolerable!
And now we have riots..
They say it's the rise of the Muslims. Hogwash. It's the rise of the Africans. It's the Watts Riots, moved to Europe. No clansman, no redneck sheriff, was ever more intolerant of non-whites than the French. It's taken an extra 40 years, but desegregation is finally coming to France.
Too bad there was no French Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King to speak out for non-violent change. Or maybe there was, and we English speakers never heard them.
Well, it's done now. The French have two choices - integration, or a "final solution".
And despite what a lot of my colleagues have said about surrender monkeys in the past, they may choose the latter this time.

No Torture

U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney asked Republican senators this week to allow CIA exemptions from a proposed ban on the torture of terror suspects in U.S. custody.
Mr. Cheney told his audience the United States doesn't engage in torture, even though he said the administration needed an exemption from any legislation banning "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment in case the president decided one was necessary to prevent a terrorist attack.

Dear Mr. Cheney.
No.

Torture is wrong. It is UnChristian, it is immoral, it is unethical.
I will not live under a system of government that condones torture.
Everything that my father fought for in WW2, and my grandfather in WW1, was to save us from having to live under a regime that condones things like torture.

We are not terrorists. We are not torturers.
Other nations have turned to terrorism and torture, both against others and against their own people. They do it because it is effective, they do it to maintain order, they do it to maintain their positions.
Their excuse has been that it keeps the trains running on time. Their excuse has been that they are trying to keep communists from destablizing their governments.
Their real excuse is that they are willing to do anything to keep themselves in power.

They are not us. I am willing to die rather than become a torturer. I WILL NOT support a government of sadists, of butchers, of gestapo. I will not support a policy that will destroy the dignity of this nation, or discard all that generations of good men have fought for.

Mr. Cheney, this country will survive with dignity, or not at all. We are members of the Republican party, not the Donner party. We do not do whatever it takes to survive. There are fates worse than death.

Bias

The latest argument against the nomination of Samuel Alito goes like this: His nomination would leave the Supreme Court with 7 white men, one woman, and one black.
OK. Help the ol' Small Town Hick out with this. A case comes up to the Supreme Court, and Justice "X" says "This is an interesting case. A pity my fellow justices cannot see the nuances that I can, seeing as I grew up in the ghetto."
Are not "nuances" in this case the same as "biases"? Are the things we are really looking for in minority nominees not a set of preconceptions that rich educated Americans do not have?
Are we saying that the Supreme Court rules, not by the law, but by deciding in favor of "their" group? And that what we want now is that the Supreme Court should rule in favor of "our" group?
If so, I am in favor of disbanding what has become just another battleground for liberals and conservatives, and let the elected figures fight it out.

By the way, if you'd like to see more of the kinds of legal reforms The Hick would like to see, go to this website.
http://www.StellaAwards.com

Bullets

The Newhouse News Service stated yesterday that U.S. troops are running out of .50-caliber ammunition -- "in some cases dusting off crates of World War II machine gun rounds and shipping them off to combat units."

I thought the country was on a war footing. I thought the country was at war. I haven't heard any news about a surrender or peace treaty, other than that "Mission Accomplished" banner.

So why aren't the munition plants running 24/7?
For that matter, why are the troops STILL waiting for hummer armor?

Every conservative website say "Support the Troops" on it somewhere. Where's the support?

20 million People.

That is how many will receive a flu vaccine under the current plan outlined by President Bush.
What is the current population, again?

Should America be moving towards a Canadian-style medical system?
That is, in essence, what is being contemplated when the Presdident states that Americans need to have vaccines against any flu that comes along, avian or otherwise.
After all, why stop there. Should we defend ourselves against influenza, only to die from the newest version of typhoid or cholera? Shouldn't the US stockpile, at government expense, agents against every disease, ready to give out should one develop into a pandemic?

Sounds expensive.

Feel Free to Disagree.

We're not so different, Liberals and Conservatives, Muslim and Christian.
We all want a good woman, a fat wallet, and the right to make everybody in the world think and act the way we want.

Yes, you too, liberals. Tell me you're willing to make conservation voluntary. Or gun control. Tell me you'd be willing to allow racist free speech.
You too, conservatives. Many of you are good this way, but there's still a few of you out there willing to start and end an argument with the word "moonbat".

I WELCOME free speech, especially the kind I don't like, don't agree with, and/or think is incorrect. The only way to fight bad ideas is with good ideas - and the only way to get bad ideas to fight is to get them out where everybody can see them.

Political correctness is incorrect.
Gun Control is useless. Untrained gun owners deserve to get killed.
Racial epithets are acceptable. By both sides. At least the hate is out in the open.
Bullies remain bullies whether you give them councelling or a smackdown.
A central government is good for a few things, but local government should handle the bulk of all governing.
Replace every sentence of a year in prison with a week of torture. Less expensive, easier to compensate the falsely convicted, and a "life sentence" becomes more of a deterrent.
Anything that happens in the house, stays in the house. If they bring it outside, THEN intervene.
Introduce sex at a young age. Include pictures. By the time they reach puberty, it won't look so desireable. Especially if the pictures are of real people, rather than airbrushed 15 year old Asians.

Feel free to disagree.
But include arguments. Simple objections will be ignored. I have the right to do so.

Samuel Alito

Who is Samuel Alito?
I have heard that he is an experienced judge, that he is likely to vote no on abortion, and that the democrats don't like him.
Is there anything else? We're talking about a young man here. He will likely be still on the bench in 2025. What else do we know about him?
What are his feelings about free press, stem cells, evolution, and the separation of Church and State, to name several hot buttons of the moment?
Roe vs. Wade is one case, which will fill maybe one of his 40 years on the bench. The remaining 39 years will shape the way America proceeds and develops.
Tell me about Samuel Alito.

When do we stop blaming Democrats?

Democrats are a void in the American political system.
They have no spokeman. Or woman, either, despite Hilary's attempts. Their leaders are compromised, buffoons, or charletans.
They are bluster in a cheap suit, barely able to threaten action, much less act. Their worst threat is to filibuster - they cannot do more than stall.

So why do we continue to blame them for Republican failures?

Republicans have control. Polls be damned, indictments be damned, media be damned. The party is STILL able to push through any legislature it wants, just by showing up and voting.

Why aren't they?

is it because they might lose the next election if their popularity falls?
Lose it to whom?
Besides, it looks like a Republican loss next time anyway. What have they got to lose?

Everything, I guess.
The lower ranks have lost faith in the upper ranks. And bloggers don't pass laws.
So, we go out, not with a bang but with a whimper?
One appropriate for whipped dogs?

This, then, is what the men in Iraq are dying for. Their bravery buys time and opportunity, which is then wasted by the Washington benchwarmers.
Shame on you all. Get back in there and do America proud.

The words of Teddy Rooseveldt

"In “Pilgrim’s Progress” the Man with the Muck-rake is set forth as the example of him whose vision is fixed on carnal instead of on spiritual things. Yet he also typifies the man who in this life consistently refuses to see aught that is lofty, and fixes his eyes with solemn intentness only on that which is vile and debasing. Now, it is very necessary that we should not flinch from seeing what is vile and debasing. There is filth on the floor and it must be scraped up with the muck-rake; and there are times and places where this service is the most needed of all the services that can be performed. But the man who never does anything else, who never thinks or speaks or writes, save of his feats with the muck-rake, speedily becomes, not a help to society, not an incitement to good, but one of the most potent forces for evil.
There are, in the body politic, economic and social, many and grave evils, and there is urgent necessity for the sternest war upon them. There should be relentless exposure of and attack upon every evil man whether politician or business man, every evil practice, whether in politics, in business, or in social life. I hail as a benefactor every writer or speaker, every man who, on the platform, or in book, magazine, or newspaper, with merciless severity makes such attack, provided always that he in his turn remembers that the attack is of use only if it is absolutely truthful. The liar is no whit better than the thief, and if his mendacity takes the form of slander, he may be worse than most thieves. It puts a premium upon knavery untruthfully to attack an honest man, or even with hysterical exaggeration to assail a bad man with untruth. An epidemic of indiscriminate assault upon character does not good, but very great harm. The soul of every scoundrel is gladdened whenever an honest man is assailed, or even when a scoundrel is untruthfully assailed."

Are we too negative?
I just had a look through several conservative blogs. One common thread was that there was nothing to the Libby story - and then went to town on the Libby story.
Maybe we should forget about the Libby story, at least until it becomes a story.
Maybe we should concentrate on some of the good things going on.
How goes the war in Iraq? I've seen several comments that only the bad things are reported by the MSM. I don't see any of the good things reported, not even by the servicemen blogs. Somebody out in the blogosphere must have some good news.

The one thing I have always hated about the MSM is that it is a bad news transmitter. No good news ever seems to be worth reporting, unless someone else got hurt by it. Why can't someone connected to the sources out there start sending us some heartening news about the Bush government? Lord knows we could use some.

What would Reagan Do?

A post by Ann Coulter asked just that question a little while ago.
Today, with the inditement, the suspicions, and the promise of more, we have to ask again.
What would Reagan do?

Actually, we know what he would do.
After the Iran-Contra scandal broke, starring many of these same neo-conservatives - names like Cheney, for one, -
He fired their damn asses. Threw the whole lot of them out of the upper ranks, including their head cheese at the time, Casper Weinburger.

Now, shall we all think about what Jesus would do?

Cell Phones

The news today is that, starting in 2006, all new cell phones will have a gps system included. Verizon and the other providers will refuse to activate a phone that does not have a gps.
Naturally, the conspiracy crowd is yelling about Big Brother. May I point out a few things?
1) This will only work as an anti-terrorist (or big brother-ish) system if it is possible to monitor MILLIONS OF CELL PHONE CALLS IN REAL TIME! A caller saying "Now is the time, my brothers! Strike in Allah's name!" is not going to be stopped if the call is only listened to 4 months later.
2) I see a big rush on Canadian cell phones among the secretive set next year.
3) Step one - call your terrorist cell mates. Step two - lose the phone. Step three - run like hell while the authorities home in on the gps chip you just hurled into the Hudson.

This action will no doubt benefit the cell phone manufacturers, who will now be able to charge more for a (non)optional feature. It will benefit the bureaucrats at Homeland Security, by making it look like they are doing something constructive.
It will not help us. Or Big Brother either.

Pro Republican

I just saw a blog which nominates Tom DeLay for President. Why? Because he stands up to liberals and Democrats.
. . . and?
Is that what we have sunk to? We laugh at the Democrats for having no focus, no plans, and no vision, and here we are choosing a leader solely because he stands up to such people.
We do not need a pro-Republican leader. We need a Republican Pro.
We need someone with skills that go beyond the gathering of votes. We need someone with vision.
In the whole of the party, can't we find ONE statesman?

Oh, and please don't mention Condi.
She's up north in Canada, telling them that despite the government's recanting the NAFTA ruling regarding the softwood issue, America's word is "as good as gold".
Surprisingly enough, the Canadians aren't buying it - at a ratio of 90-10 against, according to one poll.

The Terrorists Have Won

We dare not use stem cells, lest some evil man somewhere abort fetuses for them.
We dare not invent nanotechnology, lest some evil man use them as weapons.

We dare not invent fire, lest some evil man invent arson.

The terrorists have won, because now we allow them to dictate our actions. We make decisions on what we will and will not develop, create, and exploit, not on whether it will benefit us, but whether terrorists can use what we create to strike at us.

We dare not invent the automobile, lest some evil man invent the hit-and-run. Yet we live with thousands of traffic fatalities each year, without a need to outlaw, restrict, or hobble the family car. We licence them, we police their use, we punish offenders, and then we let the general public do as they want with them.

Ban the ban. We cannot live afraid of our own genius, and we cannot survive while others develop the technology we deny. There are risks involved. Defeat them. There are fears to face. Conquer them.

Go boldly into the future. Don't creep.

When did we become bad?

Why are conservatives the bad guys?
We believe in Jesus, frugality, responsibility, and justice.
We give to charities, are kind to the elderly, and believe in law and order.

Why is our party the one that attracts the loonies?
Sure, the liberals are a little woozy around the edges, but when was the last time you heard a liberal accuse a cartoon character of immorality? Come on - a CARTOON?
Sure, some liberals blame Katrina on global warming, but how many of them blamed God?
Liberals say lots of stupid things. Why do so-called "conservatives" say them on national TV, like Jerry "9/11 was God's revenge on Homos" Falwell - and then deny these RECORDED statements later?

Why do we get these people?
And why can't we get rid of them?

Syria

So, it looks like Syria WAS behind the assassination of Rafik Hariri, the former president of Lebanon. The response: a call for UN action.
UN action. a couple of years ago, the US government would have laughed at the thought. They would have considered launching an attack, as they did in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Unfortunately, too much of America's military might is now focused on Iraq. The United States can no longer make credible threats against other countries, except in the most dire circumstances. Unilateralism has died.
It didn't have to. America had enough military strength. It could have crushed Iraq and moved on. But it didn't. It went in too weak, and without a plan. It stayed to do a job better suited to ambassadors and bureaucrats.
And now America has to call upon the UN to frighten Syria. Don't tell Bolton. It might kill him.

Slow Day

It's been a slow day, news wise.
No inditements, no disasters. Wilma's still a ways away.
So I started a new blog.
I've been meaning to for some time now - this blog is devoted to politics, and I have other interests. The new blog will cover them.

So, if you're interested in anything else I have to say, look at
Mental Vitamins and 2 cent Philosophies
over at http://mentalvitamin.blogspot.com

and amuse/educate yourself.

MSM

As a small town hick, I rely on the mainstream media, the MSM, for a lot of my information. We're not a savvy lot, we hicks. We don't surf a lot, we don't know the trendy websites. We get our fix from CBS and the New York Times.
Which is why we tend to get anxious over Rather and Martin's Laugh-In.
They have lied to us. We know that they have lied to us. And nobody cares.
The government doesn't care - unless the lies are not in their favor. The bloggers crow every time they catch someone in a lie, and predict the end of the MSM.
Dream on, bloggers. You are an elite. The best known among you gather perhaps 100,000 hits, all of them high-end netsurfers like yourselves.
We hicks, we working class bums who have other people program our VCRs and still listen to FM radio, we number in the hundreds of millions.
We're the people who elect governments. We're the ones you elite are counting on to elect a good and wise president in a few years.
And we do not trust anything we hear anymore.
Are Republicans a corrupt bunch of cronies - or an unjustly accused bend of patriots? I've seen both arguments. Both offer proof.
One side is lying. And we have no way - NO WAY - to discover which.
We do not meet the candidates. Those of us who live in Utah or New Mexico cannot afford to take time off to visit Washington and see these people in person. Hell, those of us who live in Baltimore don't have the time.
We don't have the time or money to go to New Orleans and see for ourselves what's going on.
We don't have the documents to screen Miers, or DeLay.
We don't know.

And yet we must know. Democracy is based on the idea that the common people make the decisions. An uninformed decision is a bad decision. And we remain uninformed.

We need the MSM. We need a working MSM. Blogs are fine for some things, but a broadsheet called "Crush the Democrat Traitors", seen by 20 people a month, is not going to fill the gap of a missing news medium.

What Law?

Scientists from Britain, the United States, and South Korea are to announce in Seoul the formation of a World Stem Cell Foundation. The idea is to collect stem cells from cloned human embryos and sell them to researchers.
So much for banning stem cell research. They just go elsewhere.
Anything else you want banned, people? You'd think we would have learned from Prohibition. Ban alcohol, and people just go to Canada. Result - the Canadian liquor industry is STILL booming, 80 years later.
Today, you go to Amsterdam for drugs, to Singapore for virgins, and now to Seoul for stem cells.
There ought to be an international body that can create and enforce common laws. Oops, we've got one. Oops, we don't cooperate with it. Oops, we left it toothless. Oops, it's become corrupt without proper oversite.

Like it or not, we need a United Nations. A functional United Nations. We thought back in 1941 that the oceans could protect us from the rest of the world. We thought wrong. We were reminded of this on 9/11. We should have been reminded by Ebola, AIDS, and avian flu. We should have known after we had to send our National Guard just to pacify ONE of many terrorist breeding grounds.

A lot of my fellow conservatives are not going to like hearing about this. A lot of my fellow conservatives would like to have control of their own destinies, not have an international organization out there telling us what to do. Well, we've got to live with it, just like we have to live with a bloated federal government and an unweildy body of laws.
Because the alternative is gruesome.
The world is too small now. Everything affects us, from an outbreak in the Amazon rain forest to an uprising in Uzbekistan. We need to be able to influence these events, not just sit and watch our doom develop and be unable to do anything about it.

Kick the crooks out. Reform the hell out of the UN.
Then empower it and support it. Like it or not, we need the support.

Laws and Facts

The one great problem with the current Intelligent Design case is not whether or not it is a fact.
It is the idea of legislating curriculum.
The proponents of Intelligent Design are, in fact, saying, "We think this should be taught to everybody, because we believe it." They want a law that will allow them to force an unwilling Establishment to promote their idea, regardless.

Can the proponents of Planet X, or the Hollow Earth Society, have their beliefs taught in schools, because people believe in these theories, and current science cannot 100% disprove them? If not, why not?
Shall we teach reincarnation as fact? There is plenty of evidence for it, and science cannot prove it doesn't exist.

The proponents of Intelligent Design will label this as hogwash, of course. All they are saying is that there must be an intelligent designer - nothing more, they will argue. Any of these other arguments are nonsense, unlike theirs.
But look at what their argument states. Their argument is that there is an intelligence directing the development on life on this planet. If the spotted owl goes extinct, then the Designer must have wanted it that way, or he would have prevented it. Therefore, who needs conservation?
If influenza mutates into a killer varient, then the Designer must have done it on purpose. Why would he hate us so much?
It implies that we are meant to be the way we are. If man was meant to fly, then the Designer would have given us wings.
And so on.

We cannot allow a belief - any belief - to be taught BY LAW.
Let the theory work its way through the system, like Newton's Laws, Galileo's moons, and Pasteur's processes did. Truth will not falter.

Trust

Do you trust your government?

Scenario #1:
The FBI announces that an explosive device has been planted in your neighborhood. Do you
a) get the hell out of Dodge, or
b) wonder which scandal the government is trying to distract us from this time, and get on with your life.

Scenario #2:
The FDA announces that the new low price generic medicine you just bought has dangerous impurities. Do you
a) dispose of the medication, or
b) wonder which pharmaceudical company got to them this time, and keep the medicine.

A government cannot function properly without trust. It cannot react promptly or properly, and it cannot do its job.
Trust is a two way street. The people must trust their government, and the government must be trustworthy. All the people, not just members of the ruling party. All the government, not just the senior staff.
How long has it been since the nation trusted its governors? Since anyone trusted their President? I think JFK was the last - and if he hadn't died, the Mob and Marilyn scandals might have toppled him, too.

A news agency is based on trust. We the people can't speak to the confidential sources, we can't fly out to Pakistan or Baton Rouge and verify the latest story. We accept what you say on trust.
So what are we to think when we catch you making things up?
Whether it's paddling a canoe on TV, mishandling a faked document, or writing lies for the Times, lies break our trust. And without trust, you're nothing.

The Small Town Hick relies on trust in his institutions, just like all the other small town hicks. Without trust, how do I decide which action to take? Without trust, who do I vote for?
Without trust, there is no enthusiasm, no extra effort, no volunteering, no confidence. None of the things that make a nation great.

Without trust, there is no nation. No matter what the polls, the blogs, or the bumper stickers say. There are only little pockets of faith, and a large body of pessimism.

Inefficiency

The problem is not that we aren't helping the victims of Katrina - it's that we're not doing so efficiently. Scammers are taking advantage of handouts. Help is being stopped by red tape.

The problem is not that we aren't winning in Iraq - it's that we're not doing it efficiently. The army is still waiting for its armored Hummers. The kits don't protect the bottoms of the unarmored vehicles.

Monies that could be spent on improving roads in Louisiana are being spent building a bridge in Alaska. True, it creates jobs up there - are they going to build a bridge every year to maintain those jobs?

The intelligence czar, whose job it is to co-ordinate between the agencies, is only complicating things. Why?

We need more efficiency.

The Good News

The Iraq referendum went off well.
The Katrina cleanup is going well.

Looks like Americans can do some things right after all. Let's keep working.

On the other hand, preparations for the flu season are progressing slowly, and consist mostly of stockpiling vaccine that scientists feel will be ineffective against Avian Flu.
May I respectfully remind the administration that, of all the disasters we've seen so far in the Bush presidency, the flu pandemic stands alone in that it is just as likely to hit the Washington powerbrokers as it is to hit the urban poor, and that, being of advancing age, the members of Congress, the White House senior staff, and the justices of the Supreme Court are all at high risk of contracting, and dying from, Avian Flu?

Proving my Point

Have a look at my entry two entries down, called "Attack".
Look at the comments - the one by Francis W. Porretto.
See what I mean?
Francis writes a good blog called Eternity Road. From what I have seen, he has not commented on the Miers nomination lately.
However, he reacts to my post by calling me a leftist, and states that attacks by the right are where you "accurately quote them and hold their statements and behavior up to public scrutiny."

This was about Republicans agreeing to work together, rather than get into an insult festival. Is this a leftist idea?
Did you accurately quote me, and show me where my ideas were wrong?

Conservatives have won because they have had a united vision. They will lose if they lose their unity.
That is not a leftist statement.
If you disagree, please accurately quote me, and show me where my ideas are wrong.

The Girls

A lot of people have pointed out that Bush likes to surround himself with yes men and cronies.
Has anyone noticed that the women around him all seem to adore him?
Condi thinks of him as a father figure. Karen Hughes has a habit of mouthing the words George Bush speaks during his speeches. And now we have Harriet Miers, whose paper trail, submitted by the New York Times, seem to consist of mash notes to Governor Bush.

This is beginning to look like a rock star's entourage of groupies. Not the message I'd like to give to America just now.

Attack!

It's hard to look at the right wing blogs debate the Miers nomination.
For years now, the strategy behind the right has been to attack any opposition. Attack Kerry, attack Dean, attack Kennedy, attack McCain. If they have a different opinion, attack.
And now, with the right divided on their next nominee for the Supreme Court, they have no mechanism for reasoned rhetoric. The two camps cannot communicate, debate, or conciliate.
All they can do is attack each other.

This issue may yet give the left the Christmas gift they've been wishing for - a permanently divided right. And it will be all our own fault if it happens.

Three-fer

The Bush government has recently announced its strategy for the expected avian flu pandemic.
It looks a lot like its other recent strategies.
Essentially, the plan states that a lot of us are going to die, and there's nothing to be done about it. The details are mostly concerned on how to quarantine the diseased and maintain the country's infrastructure until the flu runs its course.

I presume that the strategy for handling a biological attack from terrorists is the same. Everybody pray, ride out the storm, then spend like mad to repair the damage.

Why can't we do better than this? Where are our strategic planners? It's been several years since 9/11, and as the president says, they're still out there. Why haven't we prepared for this? Must EVERYTHING that happens take this government by surprise?

Not Quite Fanatic

Pakistan has now been hit by a huge disaster. There has been major loss of life, especially among the young. It parallels the disaster in Louisiana in several ways - and differs in a few distinct ways.
One of the ways is that no one has yet blamed God for the events.
I have not read anything anywhere that implies that God has smote this Islamic land for the sin of recruiting terrorists, or for hating God's Chosen, the Americans, or, for that matter, for allowing abortions.
Are we finally starting to grow up?

The Smurfs get bombed

This just in.
UNICEF has just unveiled a cartoon for a fund raising effort for the rehabilitation of former child soldiers in Burundi. It features the Smurfs, those blue guys we all saw in the 70s, being bombed out of existence.
This bothers me on several levels.
1) that there are real people out there who think that we have become jaded by seeing scenes of real kids with real injuries, but that seeing Papa Smurf disemboweled by shrapnel will get us to open our wallets again.
2) that it actually WORKED in Belgium.
3) that it would work in America, but for different reasons - several acquaintences would probably pay good money to see Brainy's legs cut off at the knees, no matter who the money went to.
4) that bombed villages have something to do with child soldiers - maybe if we saw Smurfette forced to carry an AK-74 . . .

and 5)
. . . that somebody will eventually figure out that it would work with our cultural icons, too.
Who do you think they'll kill first - Mickey, Barbie, or Captain Kirk?

Florida Guns

I am all in favor of the current Florida laws concerning guns. I hope the idea spreads.
But I also hope that manditory training also spreads.
Nobody questions the idea of learning to drive before getting a driver's licence. They even teach driving in some of the high schools.
So why don't they teach shooting before issuing gun licences?

A handgun is possibly the most difficult tool the human race has ever come up with. Thousands of hours of TV and movies have convinced many of us that the hardest part of using a pistol is getting it out of your pants fast enough. they are wrong.
The real culprit was the penny dreadfuls - the comic books and pulp novels of the 1890s - which told the stories of Jesse James and the other outlaws. They would relate how these desperados could draw and fire in a heartbeat, and shoot out the pip of an Ace of Spades at 200 feet.
Well, Ol' Jesse started out as a member of Quantrell's raiders during the Civil War, alongside other penny dreadful stalwarts like Cole Younger. After the war, he continued as an outlaw. By the 1880s, he had been using that Navy Colt of his daily, under combat conditions, for well over a decade. You do that, and you'll be able to pick off playing cards, too.

The point is that most people don't train long enough and often enough to use a handgun effectively. If you're one of the majority who go to a range about once every couple of months, then the day you're threatened by a mugger will be you're last. You'll pull your heat, put a slug into the tree across the street, and take a slug in the chest from someone who DOES shoot daily. Like many of Jesse James's victims, you'll find out why plowboys shouldn't pull on gunfighters.

America needs a law that makes it manditory to receive firearms training in order to receive a license - and make it a lot easier to get that training. A voluntary high school program would be nice - as it's voluntary, the left wingers can't yell it out of existance, and it will serve a good purpose both in national defence and in personal defence.

Florida is the perfect place to start a pilot project. Can you hear me, Gov. Bush?

Giving the News some time.

I'm back. I've spent the week in Florida, away from computers and the Internet. I've kept myself informed via newsprint and TV. During this time, I made copious notes about what I would write about when I got back.
Guess what? I tore 90% of those notes up.
It's amazing how much political news is either half-baked or a tempest in a teapot. Take the Miers case.
She's in. She's bad. She's out. She's still in. She'll never be in.
All in one week.
The jury's still out (hah!) on the lady. Virtually nothing's known for sure about her. Yet the blogs churned all week about the consequences of her nomination.
I'm not criticizing - I would have churned, too, if I'd had my keyboard. But having watched and waited, I suddenly relearned something from before I started this video correspondence - that some stories take time to become significant. Roberts has yet to make a single ruling, Miers has yet to be appointed, and people are already predicting the fate of the Supreme Court years down the road.

Let's get a few more facts, people. Then we can speculate.

The final quality that makes a conservative great is courage.
Some thing in rare supply these days.
Washington is too obsessed with polls, with money and with special interests - and I am referring to both parties.
We need leaders that will do what's best for the people. Not the people who elected them, not the people they call friends. ALL the people. Even the ones who hate them.
Our leaders need to learn that. Now.

As a conservative, I believe . . .

I believe in ethics, and the responsibilities of strong leadership. I am not a Democrat, but that doesn’t mean that I am willing to let Republicans get away with murder. I expect high ethical and moral standards from the members of the party, let alone the government, and anyone who commits fraud, or cronism; who lies, who shows incompetence, arrogance, insolence, or ignorance, is going down, no matter which party they are members of. Nobody pulls that kind of bull on my watch.

I believe that the federal government’s job is to handle things a country alone can handle.. There are things the government should stay out of. And there are things the government MUST get involved in. Anything that involves more than one state must be monitored, regulated, and, if necessary, punished by the federal government. That includes FEMA, FDA, and all the other alphabet agencies. I also believe that outside of keeping people from beating on each other, the government and courts should stay out of people’s lives. If a man sin, that is between him and God, and he shall pay for it in time. If it doesn’t lower property values or keep people up at night, then people should be able to do it without the neighborhood watch getting involved.
At the same time, I know that these rights stop at the doorstep, and that those who insist on committing unsavory acts in public should be committed.

I believe in business. Anarchy is not business, nor is piracy. I will not call Ken Lay a businessman. He is a grifter, and anyone who supports him is no friend of mine, no matter what politics he claims to follow. The markets can operate without handouts, but not without regulators to keep the con artists and thieves at bay. Only a fool would try to do business in a thoroughly unregulated market – even the grifters would end up robbed.
I believe in fiscal responsibility. This doesn’t necessarily mean pinching pennies, but it does mean not spending what you don’t have unless you have an idea how to earn it.

I believe in conservation. Only a fool fails to care for his property. A conservative conserves. He keeps his cities in good repair and looks after the trash regularly. Like a boy scout, he leaves nothing but footprints and he doesn’t harm the wildlife, so that others can share what he has shared. The greedy and the pompous are prevented from ruining it for the rest of us.

I believe in civilization. Civilization is where people live and work together, as equals, in harmony. That means you treat people with respect, even if you don’t like them. It means no special treatment for any group, minority or majority. It means saying “I think you’re wrong” without 1-6 epithets mixed in.

I believe in truth. The saddest thing about the information age is the lack of information. They started by saying the moon shot was faked, and have gone on to disbelieve anything the cameras pick up that doesn’t fit their worldview.

I believe that our sense of duty should be equal to any sense of entitlement. This doesn’t mean blind obedience, or of universal enlistment. Is does mean picking up litter, voting in every election, keeping abreast of the news, and doing everything you can to keep your little part of the world sane, safe, and comfortable.

I believe in cooperation. The world is too close now, in every way. The lesson of 9/11 is that we can no longer ignore other cultures and nations. We cannot just disband the UN and sit behind our Minutemen. We have to play a part in this world. If we try to hide, the world will come and get us - in a 747, if necessary.

And finally, I believe in God. I believe that we were put on this world to test our moral fiber. I believe we are failing. From littering to the Seven Deadly Sins, we are breaking His rules without remorse. Worse, we are attaching our own prejudices to Him, crediting out most obnoxious words and deeds to His will.

This I believe – that we can do better, and that it is our duty as conservatives to make things better. It is our job to remind people of the greatness of the past, and to carefully consider the path of tomorrow.

I've been cruising the Conservative blogs for the last few hours, and I've learned an important rule.

Treat with suspicion anyone who uses the term "moonbat".

The word has become the touchstone for the right wing wannabes. Anybody who wants to gain respect, and has nothing to say, just quotes a news story under a title like "Moonbats at it again!"
To all you moonbat folk - read Victor David Hanson.
Read how he analyzes an event, points out the left wing fallacies, and then, actually suggests solutions.
See how he does it using proper English, without resorting to invective. see him try to improve the situation, instead of inflame it.
This is what your blog should be like. It is what my blog would be like if I had the insider information he has. As it is, I try to make intelligent points according to the facts as they are presented to me, and I refrain from name calling.
After all, I am wrong a lot.

Small Towns are more American. Why don’t they ever run polls in small towns?
Question - Who lives in cities?
1) The immigrants. Immigrants are people who have been raised with different beliefs. Yes, they have taken the oath of allegiance, and most of them have done so in good faith. But that doesn’t mean that they understand American values, or that they would believe in them. Small town folk, on the other hand, are second and third, maybe fourth generation Americans. They are as native as Norman Rockwell models, immersed in the culture.
2) The Trangients. Here are high level executives who spend this week in New York, fly to a meeting in Singapore, and while there participate in teleconferencing with 5 other nations. Their money’s in the Bahamas, their house is in Italy . . . what do they care what happens to America? So long as they get enough warning to cash out their US dollars, they wouldn’t care if the whole country collapsed. They’d buy up the real estate cheap and sell it to Mexico. Small town folk, on the other hand, are invested in America. They have lived their whole lives in those towns, just like their parents. They aren’t going anywhere. Their decisions, their wants, flow from a desire, a need, to keep their America strong, safe, and prosperous.
3) The Urban Poor. These poor souls only have one thing on their mind – becoming the urban rich. No body cares about them, and they care for nobody but themselves. Small town folks never get that poor. They have friends who help out. They know the value of community, and of the Nation.

Next time you want to know what’s best for America, don’t ask a corporate flunky with no stake in a country. Don’t ask an immigrant who barely knows what America means. Don’t ask the poor, to whom America is a money teat, or nothing at all.
Go to a small town. Ask one of us.

I just spent the day moving my wife’s grandmother into a retirement home – the one I work at. For the first time, I have seen how much work it is to get someone placed in the system.
The system is badly in need of revision. It is understaffed, over-bureaucratted, and way too interested in money. I understand earning a profit, and I am all in favor of doing so, but this system is straight out of the Ebenezar Scrooge Wring Each Dollar Out Of The Sucker school of economics. This is a system where management doesn’t smile because there’s no way to charge people for receiving them.
My wife’s grandmother was a part of the generation that made this nation great. She is part of the generation that beat Hitler, rebuilt the economy after the Depression, and created the lap of luxury that the Boomers are currently sitting in.
We owe them better than this. Charging them 3 star hotel prices for a single room and meals is too much.
This is why I don’t trust corporations. They aren’t interested in real people.
This is why we need Governments - to regulate, and to enforce regulations.
Sure, we can leave the markets to sort themselves out. It worked great in Tombstone, Arizona, back before the Earps.
Is that the kind of America people want? No rules, the strong eat the weak? There are countries like that, you know. They have armed rebellions every few months because without enforced laws, there is only one way for the common people to deal with the grifters and the misers.
I for one do not want our system to degenerate into a Darwinian hell where people steal the medications they need, and nursing homes become deadbeat hotels where the elderly are deprived because their next of kin stiffed the management and fled.
We owe our grandparents a better world than that.

Michael Brown, currently on the payroll of the Department of Homeland Security, today blamed the Katrina fiasco on local government, while remaining mum on his own liabilities, or those of government higher-ups. In other news, the sun rose in the east today.

The government has restated that it will not increase taxes to pay for Katrina. Tom DeLay has also gone on record as saying there is no pork in any of the government's spending bills, so nothing will be cut. In other words, the government is telling the waiter "HE's paying!", pointing across the room, then dodging out the side door.

The Anti-War protests held this week were, for the most part, organized by a few left wing groups. The Support the Troops march a few weeks ago were, for the most part, organized by the Pentagon. Neither were well attended, by most reports.

And the CNN starts a poll as to whether America would accept a female President.

Lunacy.
America is losing all respect for Washington, period. The Republicans, run by a few Ivory Tower hardliners who are not about to have their positions challenged by a few petty facts, and the Democrats, who have no position other than "Bush is wrong", have thoroughly demoralized the country to the point where they don't even care about the war anymore.
Out here in the small towns, we just pick up the pieces of our lives, pick up overtime to pay the extra gas prices, and dream about the day when an unforseen hurricane slams into DC and turns Brown, Farrikan, DeLay, Kennedy, Rove, Hilary, and Bush into refugees.
Whom we can turf out into trailer parks and promise to feed someday.

In the meantime, George, stop wasting airplane fuel on a job that can be done by conference calls. If you'd done your job right in the first place, you wouldn't have to salvage your reputation with a month of photo ops.

From Sympatico News:
"A leadership that frowns on admitting mistakes is doomed to stagnate, says Gilles Brouillette, director of the Collaborative Leadership Institute's Montreal office.
Justifying blunders rather than owning up to them can end up taking so much time and effort that eventually a manager can't look forward and will become averse to the risk-taking needed for growth, he says."

We are almost halfway through the first decade of the 21st Century. What shall we call it?

The first decade of the 20th Century was the Gilded Era. Nickleodeons, pitching woo, Wright Brothers. Doyle was still writing Sherlock Holmes stories. It was the last gasp of the Edwardian Age, of fine manners, of Duty and Honor.

The first decade of the 21st Century has been marked by arrogance, by insolence, by intolerance. Perhaps the "I's" Age would be appropriate.

It's time we got control of ourselves again. Took responsibility.
Anti-War people - sometimes we do what we must do. Stop shouting.
Leaders - when you make a mistake, admit it. Correct it. Move on.
Judges - you were hired to do a certain job. Do it.
CEOs - you have a duty to your companies, not just to your biggest stockholders and your own pocketbooks. Treat your companies as if they made parts for your artificial hearts.

There is a whole century ahead of us. Spend your days as if you were going to see the end of it.

Rita is a tragedy.
I am tired of people all over the blogosphere heaving sighs of relief over rita, or gloating that the left won't have anything to rag the government over because Rita was not another Katrina.
That's like smiling after being mugged because the mugger was no Mike Tyson.
Homes are flooded. People have died. Millions of dollars in damages have been done.
It was handled better, yes. After the Katrina media grinder, any official, local, state, or national, who mucked this up would have been guilty of an impeachable offence. Nobody DARED move too slowly on Rita.
So the hurricane relief effort was handled better. Good. Now please stop saying that Rita was easier on everyone than Katrina. The people trying to find something left of their baby photos can't tell the difference.

How to pay for Katrina, Suggestion #66287.

Instead of retaining tax cuts for the rich, offer them a writeoff on any moneys spent on the reclaimation/reconstruction of those areas hit by Hurrican Katrina.
This will
1. Silence a lot of critics.
2. Ensure that the strategy of tax breaks creating new jobs actually works.
3. Save the government from the humiliation of looking under metaphorical seat cushions for the money.

Now, it's not that I don't TRUST the rich not to take the money and run - even though corporate strategy is to do whatever makes the most money, whether it nets you a tax break or not - but I would feel a lot better. And so would the rest of Small Town America.

It's time for a good long reform over at the Pentagon - and in Iraq.

The Pentagon is in trouble. At home there's the lost money in Iraq, and the Able Danger scandal. Overseas, there's the fact that it can't draw a bead on the terrorists.
Forget troops - the Army needs intelligence operatives and assets. Competent ones. And right now.
It needs to do three things right now.
1. Maintain 24 hour surveillance of the roads used by US troops in Iraq.
They can try satellite photography, ground sensors linked to infrared video cameras - hell, maybe 2000 ninja would be best - but they need to spot the people setting those mines, and track them back to their homes.
Let's face it - the army isn't going to win this thing playing Whack-a-Mole with the jihadista. They need to find these people. All of them. They need to find their headquarters, their recruiters, their storehouses.
They need military intelligence more than they need tanks right now.
2. Send a battalion of forensic accountants to Bagdad.
They need to restore their credibility both at home and abroad by finding who's been dipping into the till, nailing them to the wall, and GETTING THAT MONEY BACK!
In fact, the Pentagon need to retrieve that money more than they need to arrest the thieves. They need people to know that they aren't bunglers, and that stealing from them is dangerous.
They are sending people to Gitmo for being suspected armed terrorists. Let them send a few known economic terrorists behind the wire, and ask them nicely for their Swiss bank account numbers.
3. They need to link up with the United States Government again.
Negroponte was appointed Intelligence Czar practically over the Pentagon's dead body. Even now, the military is refusing government requests for oversite. This is not a bunch of Democratic anti-war activists asking - this is Congress, and the President. Negroponte was Bush's own selection.
Was Able Danger crushed by Clinton's people? Fine - get Clinton's people out of there, and get good people in. But get that organization working again.

America is in trouble. This is a bad time to have a military that is wasteful, incompetent, and surly.

Who pays for next year's storms?
In all the talk about deficits, the cutting of funding for this and that and PBS,
Amid all the debate about who's to blame and what's to be done,
I have not heard one word about how the government plans to pay for the next storm.

We've had two this year. What if we have three next year? Or five?
Do we keep setting up the pins so Hurricane Whoever can knock them over again, or do we stop building cheap pre-fabs and instead build hurricane-proof buildings next time?
Will anyone be able to afford hurricane-proof buildings?

When do we finally sit down and say "Global warming or not, these hurricanes are as big a threat as Nazi bombs were to England in 1941, and a similar national effort is needed as was mobilized in 1941."

We the People . . . secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity . . .

Liberty (n)
1.The condition of being free from restriction or control.
2.The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.
3.The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor. 4.Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.
5.A right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference

- and not just for ourselves, but for our children.
Oppressed by taxes. Oppressed by religion. Oppressed by absentee governors and mercenary troops. Oppressed by government-connected businesses that monopolized trade in the colonies by, among other things, using force to prevent American merchant ships from visiting foreign markets.

Sound familiar?
The republican government, prodded by its religious right allies, have been planning to do more to restrict American liberty than any foreign government in this generation.
It does not believe that Americans have the right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing. Any criticism on the government is referred to as anti-American, liberal, pro-terrorist, and any number of other epithets.
It does not believe that Americans deserve the condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor. They will lock people up without trial, on suspicion of being a terrorist.
It does not believe in freedom from unjust or undue governmental control, or a right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference. The religious Right has a number of certain actions they wish to control or interfere with, and they want the government to authorize the controlling.

Shame. Six goals, and today they are all as far from achieved as they were in 1773.

In conclusion, let me leave you with this fragment from America's other document, the Declaration of Independence.
". . . 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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —"