Monday, March 28, 2005
VDH : Dead On Again.
Victor Davis Hanson has a great piece in the American Enterprise Magazine this month (you can find it on his homepage here.) It is a brief summation of exactly why we need to spread democracy.
"And while promoting democracy is idealistic, it does not necessarily follow that it is naive. What, after all, prevents wars? Hardly the U.N.; and not just aircraft carriers either. The last half-century of peace in Europe and Japan, and the end of our old enmity of Russia, attest that the widest spread of democratic rule is the best guarantee against international aggression. Ballots substitute for bullets in venting internal frustrations."
"And while promoting democracy is idealistic, it does not necessarily follow that it is naive. What, after all, prevents wars? Hardly the U.N.; and not just aircraft carriers either. The last half-century of peace in Europe and Japan, and the end of our old enmity of Russia, attest that the widest spread of democratic rule is the best guarantee against international aggression. Ballots substitute for bullets in venting internal frustrations."
Things poly-geeks dream about.
Is there any reason whatsoever for not having the Prime Minister of the Ukraine, Yulia Tymoshenko, visit Washington D.C. and have a press conference with Condi Rice.
This would be great for um, international rel...hmmm. Yeah, whatever.
This would be great for um, international rel...hmmm. Yeah, whatever.
Sunday, March 27, 2005
This Train is bound for Glory
The people of Bahrain and the people of Mongolia are demanding democracy.
Mon-F-ing-Golia! Are you kidding me? Whoa!
Freedom is on the march. This is in the Zeitgeist. Although you will not hear any of this in the Mainstream Media (MSM.) Slack-jawed dimwits.
And you cannot say it enough: thank God for President George W. Bush.
Hat Tip: Instapundit (everyone should read this guy's site twice a day.)
Note: Both blogs I linked to above link to credible news sources. For the empirically minded, I am not linking to blogosphere myths.
Mon-F-ing-Golia! Are you kidding me? Whoa!
Freedom is on the march. This is in the Zeitgeist. Although you will not hear any of this in the Mainstream Media (MSM.) Slack-jawed dimwits.
And you cannot say it enough: thank God for President George W. Bush.
Hat Tip: Instapundit (everyone should read this guy's site twice a day.)
Note: Both blogs I linked to above link to credible news sources. For the empirically minded, I am not linking to blogosphere myths.
The kind of ally we want to have....
"If you believe in freedom, you believe in fighting for it. If you believe in fighting for freedom, you believe in America."
Fatos Tarifa, Albanian Ambassador to the U.S.
Hat Tip: Power Line
Fatos Tarifa, Albanian Ambassador to the U.S.
Hat Tip: Power Line
Sin City
If you needed any other reason to go see Sin City, here is one.
Rutger Hauer is in it.
Talk about bringing out the dead.
Rutger Hauer is in it.
Talk about bringing out the dead.
Saturday, March 26, 2005
Turn on a dime
There is a small controversy in the land of caffeine addiction. Starbucks has started placing Profound quotes on the side of their coffee cups. The controversy is, predictably, that liberalism is overrepresented in the campaign. I know, I know, who would have expected that from a company run by Latte-drinking millionaires from Seattle? But it is true.
Or it was true. On the Starbucks homepage, the first name and face listed under "Featured Authors": Jonah Goldberg.
This is not a dumb company.
Or it was true. On the Starbucks homepage, the first name and face listed under "Featured Authors": Jonah Goldberg.
This is not a dumb company.
Friday, March 25, 2005
Internet Awesomeness
I had the opportunity today to introduce a co-worker to the Blogosphere. The whole thing was new to him, although he had heard about blogs in the MSM. He was startled by the amount of information and the story of Dan Rather's blog induced self-destruction. I even found some psychology blogs that related to his graduate work. All of this took ten minutes.
The internet is an awesome force. Go to the upper right hand corner of this blog and hit next blog. Check out the next ten pages. You'll find blogs covering every conceivable subject from home building to life as a medical school student, and they will be written in English, Spanish, or even Farsi. The blogosphere combines mass production with complete individualization. And that is cool.
The internet is an awesome force. Go to the upper right hand corner of this blog and hit next blog. Check out the next ten pages. You'll find blogs covering every conceivable subject from home building to life as a medical school student, and they will be written in English, Spanish, or even Farsi. The blogosphere combines mass production with complete individualization. And that is cool.
By the way.
This. Is. Awesome.
"We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down. Only when the human spirit is allowed to invent and create, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding economic policies and benefitting from their success -- only then can societies remain economically alive, dynamic, progressive, and free. Trust the people."
Ronald Reagan
"We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down. Only when the human spirit is allowed to invent and create, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding economic policies and benefitting from their success -- only then can societies remain economically alive, dynamic, progressive, and free. Trust the people."
Ronald Reagan
That Schiavo mess.
I have not been blogging about the Schiavo mess in Florida because I am ignorant of the facts and history of the case. But one thing strikes me as interesting.
The U.S. Congress passed a law stating that Schiavo's parents can bring their lawsuit into the Federal courts. Their obvious intent was for the Federal courts to make a full review of the case to protect Schiavo's civil rights.
The judges cannot ignore that directly. So they decided not to order her feeding tubes reinserted, becuase they believe that there is not a strong enough chance that the family will prevail in court to justify this action. So the family has their Congressionally mandated day in Federal court, but Schiavo will be dead so it is irrelevant.
How can Congress write laws that have any value? The judges maybe dead on when they say that there is no chance that the parents will win. But they are completely ignoring the intent of the law as it is written. This is a huge problem.
Whether it is gay marriage, rights to privacy, or Schiavo's civil rights, the judiciary ignores the written law and does whatever it believes is right. Whether you support gay marriage or not, you should be nervous. Unaccountable power is wonderful when it does what you want. But you will understand the unaccountable part of it, when it turns on you.
The U.S. Congress passed a law stating that Schiavo's parents can bring their lawsuit into the Federal courts. Their obvious intent was for the Federal courts to make a full review of the case to protect Schiavo's civil rights.
The judges cannot ignore that directly. So they decided not to order her feeding tubes reinserted, becuase they believe that there is not a strong enough chance that the family will prevail in court to justify this action. So the family has their Congressionally mandated day in Federal court, but Schiavo will be dead so it is irrelevant.
How can Congress write laws that have any value? The judges maybe dead on when they say that there is no chance that the parents will win. But they are completely ignoring the intent of the law as it is written. This is a huge problem.
Whether it is gay marriage, rights to privacy, or Schiavo's civil rights, the judiciary ignores the written law and does whatever it believes is right. Whether you support gay marriage or not, you should be nervous. Unaccountable power is wonderful when it does what you want. But you will understand the unaccountable part of it, when it turns on you.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Regarding that last post.
In my last post I compared two schools of thought in America. That really was not fair of me. One side I defined as pro-spread democracy faster please. The other side I defined as against this. I did not give a positive description of the other side's ideas. This is an accurate definition because they don't have any ideas. They are simply anti-whatever President Bush wants. Don't believe me? Than where are the lefties who rejoice when Lebanese, Iranians, and Ukranians fight for their freedom? Are they not against tyrants? Well they are against tyrants. At least they are against that big meanie President Bush.
My definitions were inadvertently deceptive. It really wasn't fair of me to imply that there was any thinking in the Democratic Party's positions. My bad.
My definitions were inadvertently deceptive. It really wasn't fair of me to imply that there was any thinking in the Democratic Party's positions. My bad.
Is Drezner on board?
There is some sort of dividing line in American politics that seperates those who believe that democracy is a sustainable political system that we can export and those that do not. It is not easy to differentiate between apostles of the two ideas. The National Review crowd is pro-spread democracy faster please, and the Democratic Party is not. But where does George Will come down? Or Buckley for that matter?
University of Chicago blogger-Professor Daniel Drezner is slip sliding to the side of freedom. Check out his blog; it is very well written. Although an obsessive focus on international economics is so 1990s.
University of Chicago blogger-Professor Daniel Drezner is slip sliding to the side of freedom. Check out his blog; it is very well written. Although an obsessive focus on international economics is so 1990s.
Sunday, March 20, 2005
This person collects a paycheck?
The New York Times Magazine has a brief interview every week that is conducted by Deborah Solomon. Below is a passage from this week's interview with a disgraced former White House reporter.
Should I call you Jim Guckert or Jeff Gannon?
Should I call you Jim Guckert or Jeff Gannon?
My Amex card still comes in the name of James Guckert, but I want to be called Jeff Gannon. That is who I am.
Or rather it is the pseudonym under which you gained access to White House press briefings for two years, until your identity was revealed. Why do you think they let you in?
I don't know the answer to that. I don't know the criteria they use. I asked to be let in, and they allowed me to come. I was very fond of all the people in the press office. They treated me well. They probably treated me better than I deserved.
Are you suggesting that Bobby Eberle, the Republican operative who hired you to shill for his Gopusa under the guise of his Talon News service, has special access at the White House?
I just don't know the answer to that question.
What could the third question possibly have to do with the answer to the second question? How did Gannon "suggest" anything like "special access"? She isn't conducting an interview. She is asking a set of preconceived questions designed to insult and accuse. Solomon also did this to Samuel Huntington. She seemed to be under the impression that the famous Harvard liberal is an evil Conservative White male. Good job doing your homework, Solomon.
She also tried this on Buckley. It failed because Buckley wouldn't take her seriously. He must have realized that it is futile to argue with the wilfully ignorant.
Saturday, March 12, 2005
My point exactly.
Just after I posted on Bush's focus on foreign policy a recent Associated Press post . The President has brought one of his long time advisors back from Texas. Karen Hughes was a power in the first term and is a famously trusted personal advisor to the President.
And he is putting her in the State Department. That is how we know what his priorities are.
And he is putting her in the State Department. That is how we know what his priorities are.
Another great thing about President Bush
President Bush is an internationalist. I don't mean that in the sense that he believes in the UN, The Kyoto Treaty, etc. I mean that he has focused his presidency on foreign policy, which is what it should be focused on.
Clinton signed treaties, took photos, and definitely took some crises seriously (Kosovo.) But he did not have a real strategy. It was all so perfunctory, a sideshow to his triangulation politics and bad taste in women.
Clinton signed treaties, took photos, and definitely took some crises seriously (Kosovo.) But he did not have a real strategy. It was all so perfunctory, a sideshow to his triangulation politics and bad taste in women.
War. HUH. What is it good for.......
Eyes on Syria, my friends. Do not for one moment underestimate the possibility of the U.S. getting Medieval on Damascus.
The one really, really great thing about President Bush is that the man does not give a damn. He thought we needed to hit Iraq, so we took down Saddam. He thinks we need to reform Social Security, so he is having a barbecue on the Third Rail of American politics. And if he thinks we need to hit Syria, then we will level them.
Although, this situation is unique. The President is quite obviously a Wilsonian supporter of Freedom and Democracy. He is willing to fight for these things. And in Iraq he ignored the World, and went to war. Now we have told the Syrians it is time to leave Lebanon. And on Lebanon, the French are with us.
Lebanon is a former French colony. Any quick look at France's repeated excursions into their former colonies in Africa over the last decade will tell you that the French still feel a sense of responsibility to these peoples. Gallic pride is tied up in these colonies prospering. This is why France and the U.S. are standing shoulder to shoulder on France. Unlike Iraq, we both are demanding freedom for the Lebanese.
If the French start pushing for intervention, let's remember that Syria is an Islamic country. So we will have to bring our own beer when we roll into Damascus.
The one really, really great thing about President Bush is that the man does not give a damn. He thought we needed to hit Iraq, so we took down Saddam. He thinks we need to reform Social Security, so he is having a barbecue on the Third Rail of American politics. And if he thinks we need to hit Syria, then we will level them.
Although, this situation is unique. The President is quite obviously a Wilsonian supporter of Freedom and Democracy. He is willing to fight for these things. And in Iraq he ignored the World, and went to war. Now we have told the Syrians it is time to leave Lebanon. And on Lebanon, the French are with us.
Lebanon is a former French colony. Any quick look at France's repeated excursions into their former colonies in Africa over the last decade will tell you that the French still feel a sense of responsibility to these peoples. Gallic pride is tied up in these colonies prospering. This is why France and the U.S. are standing shoulder to shoulder on France. Unlike Iraq, we both are demanding freedom for the Lebanese.
If the French start pushing for intervention, let's remember that Syria is an Islamic country. So we will have to bring our own beer when we roll into Damascus.
TR: The Best Man for the job.
Theodore Roosevelt is the most entertaining of U.S. Presidents. Reading three books a day, hiking miles for fun, starting wars, and writing book after book, the man never slowed down.
Harvey Mansfield has a very interesting study of TR's manliness in the current edition of The New Criterion. It is a truncated picture of TR, but by narrowing his focus Mansfield is using TR to address Pragmatism and masculinity. It is not the best introduction to TR for that reason. If you have a moment read "TR: The Last Romantic" by H.W. Brands. The writing is superb, the subject is a character, and you will wonder how we went from a President Roosevelt to a President Clinton.
Harvey Mansfield has a very interesting study of TR's manliness in the current edition of The New Criterion. It is a truncated picture of TR, but by narrowing his focus Mansfield is using TR to address Pragmatism and masculinity. It is not the best introduction to TR for that reason. If you have a moment read "TR: The Last Romantic" by H.W. Brands. The writing is superb, the subject is a character, and you will wonder how we went from a President Roosevelt to a President Clinton.
Friday, March 11, 2005
Interesting....
Check out Strategypage's page on the Korean Penninsula. The March 3rd entry has some interesting info about North Korean political instability.
It is very hard to make judgements about this sort of thing. The mainstream media does not seem to have any news that would back this assertion up. But they also were, and are, clueless about the liberation movement in Lebanon.
So how can we judge information on North Korea? The media will miss the story until it has already happened. Is falling back on the assmption that all people demand respect and some sort of freedom, ergo the North Korean story sounds true, anything more than falling prey to your own bias? Is that political philosophy or is it mirror-imaging?
NOTE: I had to edit this for grammatical purposes after the initial posting.
It is very hard to make judgements about this sort of thing. The mainstream media does not seem to have any news that would back this assertion up. But they also were, and are, clueless about the liberation movement in Lebanon.
So how can we judge information on North Korea? The media will miss the story until it has already happened. Is falling back on the assmption that all people demand respect and some sort of freedom, ergo the North Korean story sounds true, anything more than falling prey to your own bias? Is that political philosophy or is it mirror-imaging?
NOTE: I had to edit this for grammatical purposes after the initial posting.
Friday, March 04, 2005
I cannot believe I am writing this...
They are going to sink the USS America for good reasons. They will get information that will help us build better Aircraft carriers.
But.
Lord help me.
Should we really dump huge ships at the bottom of the ocean? You know. Is that environmentally sound?
Ok. It could be. If it was drained of fluids, explosives, and other chemicals, etc. But do you think the Navy is doing this correctly? Me neither.
But.
Lord help me.
Should we really dump huge ships at the bottom of the ocean? You know. Is that environmentally sound?
Ok. It could be. If it was drained of fluids, explosives, and other chemicals, etc. But do you think the Navy is doing this correctly? Me neither.
The Man of the Western
Just about every conservative hated Million Dollar Baby.
STOP READING IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT. SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, it is not very religious. Yes, it is about assisted suicide.
It is also a very brilliant film that makes you think about life and it's value. Great art asks questions. That is an over used cliche. But it is true. This movie makes us think about friendship and pain.
One thing hit me hard. The priest is a failed man of the cloth. When Clint goes to him, he frames everything in Clint's interest. "You will be lost." This is not persuasive. But at the end the movie never implies that Clint is not "lost." But he chooses to do what his friend wants at the risk of his own soul. Would that we were all such friends.
STOP READING IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT. SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, it is not very religious. Yes, it is about assisted suicide.
It is also a very brilliant film that makes you think about life and it's value. Great art asks questions. That is an over used cliche. But it is true. This movie makes us think about friendship and pain.
One thing hit me hard. The priest is a failed man of the cloth. When Clint goes to him, he frames everything in Clint's interest. "You will be lost." This is not persuasive. But at the end the movie never implies that Clint is not "lost." But he chooses to do what his friend wants at the risk of his own soul. Would that we were all such friends.
Slow Weekend
I will not blog much this weekend. I will be at my Air Force Reserve Drill.
Yes, I will suffer through my 5-star hotel, scantily clad co-eds, and fountains of whiskey.
Pray for me.
Yes, I will suffer through my 5-star hotel, scantily clad co-eds, and fountains of whiskey.
Pray for me.
Well.
Read this for an unconservative thought.
Really, marriage is a social construct that needs to be deconstructed. No seriously.
Well no. Not really.
Hey, sorry you hate your middle-aged life. That is no reason to piss in anybody else's Wheaties.
Really, marriage is a social construct that needs to be deconstructed. No seriously.
Well no. Not really.
Hey, sorry you hate your middle-aged life. That is no reason to piss in anybody else's Wheaties.
Lebanon
This is a definite vindication of the Bush doctrine. The Lebanese are demanding democracy because they see it happening in Iraq. And the Syrians are not cracking down because they don't want to see F-16s dropping bombs all over Damascus.
Bottom line: Bush is the most audacious President we have had in a long time. And it is working.
Bottom line: Bush is the most audacious President we have had in a long time. And it is working.
First they came for the....
I have never blogged about campaign finance reform.
If the law says that you cannot buy a commercial to make a political statement, the law says you cannot speak.
There. I did it.
Now the law is saying that a blog is a "contribution", that can be regulated by the government. So if I were to blog that Vice-President Cheney's outstanding personality is an inspiration to all of us who are hair-challenged and then link to his website picture, that would be a "contribution." And the government can tell me not to write that.
Garbage. All four of my regular readers out there know that I am not the ACLU-type of whiner. But I will not follow any law that tells me not to write about politics. They can throw my fat ass in jail.
Although that is not exactly the way I would choose to improve my sex life.
If the law says that you cannot buy a commercial to make a political statement, the law says you cannot speak.
There. I did it.
Now the law is saying that a blog is a "contribution", that can be regulated by the government. So if I were to blog that Vice-President Cheney's outstanding personality is an inspiration to all of us who are hair-challenged and then link to his website picture, that would be a "contribution." And the government can tell me not to write that.
Garbage. All four of my regular readers out there know that I am not the ACLU-type of whiner. But I will not follow any law that tells me not to write about politics. They can throw my fat ass in jail.
Although that is not exactly the way I would choose to improve my sex life.
