It's Official: We're in a Quagmire

I know it's true because the Iraqi Foreign Minster, Naji Sabri said so in a press conference. I wasn't so sure when it was just Western commentators and journalists, but when a source as reliable as an Iraqi Foregin Minister says that coalition troops are in a quagmire, I know better than to question his expertise. Amazingly, I also learned that coalition forces are losing and retreating on all fronts.

Heh. Imagine that.

Meanwhile, in the real world, despite all the questioning and worry, the war effort seems to be progressing rather well. And, thanks to careful planning, amazing technology, and soldiers who care, the damage to Iraqi civilians has been minimized.

Let's keep it that way.

A little more believable outlook on the war.

Jay Nordlinger on NRO

Jay Nordlinger's "Impromptus" are some of my favorite reads on NRO. They're usually witty, intelligent, and relevant.

Today, he really nails it on one of his observations:

I will give you something slightly sappy: I am not only supportive of George Bush, Tony Blair, and the rest; I am not only proud of them; I'm grateful to them. I actually think they're making me and my loved ones safer - by dealing with a menace that would only grow worse. We at National Review were maybe three miles from the World Trade Center, where 3,000 people were murdered in cold blood. We were lucky. Multitudes weren't.

And this is an administration that is actually doing something about it. And Bush & Co. will not, I believe, stop.

Thing is, they'll never get full credit: because history will never know what Saddam Hussein would have done had he been allowed to stand. This is one of the difficulties of "preemptive war." Everyone knows what Hitler did, by 1945. But if he had been dealt with in, say, 1938, how many would say that the anti-Hitler powers had overreacted and overstepped their bounds?

This sums up much of my own opinion about not only our leaders, but about the war in general. As always, Jay Nordlinger is well worth the time.

Read Jay's "Impromptus."

Name Calling is Fun

NRO is running a sort of glossary of insults issued forth from Iraq's Information Ministry.

Cool.

Definitely worth reading.

Michael Moore Revisited

Okay, I know that I'm way late to this game, but I just couldn't resist linking to the Debbie Schlussel critique of Michael Moore on TechCentralStation. For anyone who still believes that Moore makes documentaries, read her article to see the truth.

Enjoy

Update: Matt's right. That commentary is a good read.

Here's the link.

Peter Arnett Gets Canned

I'm doubting that NBC fired Peter Arnett on principle. They spent all of yesterday defending his actions and saying that he had done nothing wrong--then they said they were severing connections with him and that he had shown poor judgement in giving the interview.

I'm not as apt as others to say that it was treason, although I would say that it came pretty close to the line. It was insurmountably stupid, though.

The offensive part, when looking at the NBC decision is why it even took that day to figure out what to do. It shouldn't have been a decision based on popular opinion or some polling results. NBC should've stepped up to the plate and severed ties the instant Arnett began to divulge his "observations" to an Iraqi TV station. Did broadcasters, even as some strange professional courtesy, give interviews and opinions like this during any other war that America has fought? God, I hope not.

Nearly as offensive as his poor judgement, though, is just how wrong-headed he was in what was being said.

Well, what's done is done...

Read the story.

Update: In related news, Drudge is reporting that Geraldo Rivera is being expelled by the US military for giving away future military plans during a live interview. This is a pretty good reason, but couldn't they have just sent him away for being a jerk?

Another Update: Despite Geraldo's own claims, it does appear that he's been asked to leave the unit that he was not quite embedded in, although military sources would not confirm the reason for his dismissal. I still say they played the asshole card.
Read about it.

Yet Another Update: National Geographic makes a very blunt statement on their firing of Peter Arnett. Very well stated and with none of the equivocation that revolved around the NBC dismissal. Read it.

Slowly Rising Through the Blogosphere

This is sort of cool. Last week, when I checked, I was at 1043 on the Truth Laid Bear ecosystem. Today, I've popped all the way up to 993, directly below "Garden Spot" and directly above "Brandeis Vangaurd."

Okay, so maybe it's not really that cool, but it's a slow day at work and you take what you can get.

Unfortunately, as a couple of blog entries clear on other sites, I'm going to drop back down like a really, really heavy thing sinking through something not too terribly substantive, know what I mean?

Ahh, the fleeting nature of something sort of like, but not at all entirely resembling, something that isn't even vaguely close to fame.

Or something like that.

Check out the ecosystem.

On Underestimating the Will of America

There's a Joke in Here Somewhere...

Goofy Peaceniks #5

Okay, this one is a particularly vile peacenik. In fact, I'm just going to give you a big quote from the article:

"The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the U.S. military," Nicholas De Genova, assistant professor of anthropology at Columbia University told the audience at Low Library Wednesday night. "I personally would like to see a million Mogadishus."

I truly don't usually condone violence in these conversations. When I do, it's usually joking. This time it isn't.

What good old Nick is advocating is the death of millions of Americans (the hyperbole in itself is annoying, but, considering that 18 American soldiers lost their lives in Mogadishu, the math is correct). He wants to see the blood of young Americans flowing, and, no, there is no other way to interpret his remarks.

Fuck him.

Being anti-war is not the same as being anti-American, but this crosses the line. Do I take it personally? Fuck yes. In fact, I debated using the "Goofy Peacenik" title for this one; it seems just a little too cutesy and gentle to describe such a disturbed asshole.

Well, Nick, I would "personally like to see" a million members of the military line up for just one good shot at you. And, if we let vets get in on the fun, sign me up. Luckily, I don't have pacifism to hide behind.

Don't tell me that you want to see Americans die. There are much better ways to protest a war you don't agree with.

Update: Read a much more polite (and, in many ways, intelligent) look at these "teach-ins" on NRO.

Another Update:The professor, in responding to critics, confirms his basic anti-American attitude. I really don't like this guy.

Boat Trip

When I went to see Boat Trip with a friend recently, I remarked to the ticket seller that we wanted to see the movie that symbolized Cuba Gooding Jr's career going down in flames. His response was that I should have come last year for "that dog movie."

He was right.

The only star-powered movie that I've seen lately that was worse was Pluto Nash.

Didn't Cuba once have a career? On Oscar award winning career? He has a great smile, and, according to my companion for the evening, he has a hell of a body. He's likable and talented. What the hell happened?

BT plays on every straight and gay stereotype imaginable. This in and of itself could lead to a funny script, but instead leads to a bloated, messy, incoherent script with just a handful of honest laughs. The Swedish tanning team inclusion was not a stroke of genius, it was just annoyingly juvenile. The giant sculpted ice penis wasn't brilliant satire, it was just a giant sculpted ice penis. My compatriot and I walked out of the theater in silence.

"What'd you think?" I asked.

"It was," she paused, searching for the right phrase, "a bad movie."

We giggled and said that we should tell everyone we knew that it was great, just so that they would have to endure the badness of it, too. It was the best laugh of the entire evening.

Pres. Bush is an Machine!

Just caught this link from Jonah on NRO. Abso-freakin-lutely hilarious.

President Bush at his best.

Check it out.

Iraq Goes Back on Defense

Apparently that 1000 vehicle Iraqi offensive spearhead near Baghdad didn't work out so well for the Iraqi Army. It was my contention that the leaders did not believe they could win the battle, but that they wanted to cause grievous damage to coalition forces. I'm going to quote myself liberally here--I know, it's sort of tacky, but it's so much easier than rewording and retyping the damned thing.

...I don't think Saddam thinks he can win this battle, either. I think he simply intends to cause as much damage as possible with the overall aim not of breaking our troops, but of breaking our national will to carry out this fight. I also think that he's been terribly mislead by media reports of demonstrations in the US without the balanced reports of quiet support for the war effort. He was also mislead by nearly a decade of tepid responses to terrorist attacks. I truly believe that he thinks he can win this war not through combat, but through PR and the media. No matter what he thinks and what he intends, though, this looks like losing strategy for him. Whereas one of our biggest worries was the danger inherent in fighting the war in the streets of Baghdad, he's given us a gift by sending a huge force out to meet us.

Death Penalty

Jonah on NRO asks one of his copundits (Rod Dreher) whether a story in CNN makes him re-think his opposition to the death penalty.

The criminal in question murdered his father, abducted two nuns, then murdered one of the nuns. He cut the head, hands, and feet from the body of the nun that was killed.

What a brutal, horrible murder. What a frighteningly evil man. Frankly, my first instinct with a person like this is that they need to face the death penalty. It does make me question my anti-death penalty stance. The questioning, though, leads me back to my original stance: the death penalty is wrong. Not just because of the potential for human error during trials, the potential that an innocent might be executed, but because it is not morally correct for a society to take a person's life when an effective alternative exists.

I support the war effort because you can't contain a regime indefinitely. To remove the regime, there often is no other option than to fight. There is such a thing as a just war.

The murderer, on the other hand, doesn't have to be killed to keep society safe. Incarceration can do that quite effectively.

For most of my life, I was very pro-death penalty, and the conversion to another view point is a recent event. I still won't argue too loudly against the death penalty and I certainly won't demonstrate during an execution. Those candle-light vigils disturb me; I wonder just how it must feel to the victim's families to see people out supporting the murderer who robbed them of their loved one. Yes, there are times when my gut wants to see the bad guy pay that ultimate cost.

And, yes, this is one of those times.

Read the story in CNN.

Sports

Now, for something a little more calm. I don't usually post concerning sports, but I'm going to go ahead and give you one good sports post from a denizen of Denver.

1- Jake Plummer? Is that really the answer, or is it just trading one set of bad habits for another set of bad habits? I hope I'm wrong about that.

2- Patrick Roy, on the other hand, is continually the right answer. Still amazing after all these years.

3- Denver Nuggets. Insert your own pithy comment here.

5- Duke, how could you let me down? All I wanted you to do, for the entire season, is beat the living snot out of Kansas. Damnit.

6- Rockies, are you planning to be any better this year? The honeymoon is definitely over. You still have one of the most gorgeous stadiums in the league, you still have a lot of fans willing to shell out the cash to see you, now you need to make it all worthwhile.

Okay, now that that's all out of my system, we can get back to the regularly scheduled warblogging.

Tim Robbins: Wacky Bastard

A little while back, I linked to a story in the Washington Post that exposed Susan Sarandon's mother as a staunch conservative, and proclaimed appropriate admiration for her.

Well, apparently, Tim Robbins isn't as fond of his kinda-sort-mother-in-law-only-not-really (he and Sarandon aren't married, they're just very very committed to one another). At a post-Oscars party, he threatened the physical well-being of the reporter who interviews Sarandon's mother.

"At least you got Jeb Bush to call her -- that was great," Robbins spat -- the bitterly cynical studio executive in "The Player." He moved within inches and said into our ear: "If you ever write about my family again, I will [bleeping] find you and I will [bleeping] hurt you."

Something about the "v" is for "victory", er, no, I mean "v" is for "peace" flashing Robbins threatening a reporter makes me feel good; apparently some things are worth fighting for even if you're Tim Robbins. The bar for conflict has been set by the anti-war protestor, and it is spectacularly low.

Read the story.

Patriotic Hackers

Okay, I honestly don't know how useful it is to launch DOS attacks against news sites like Al-Jazeera. I don't know what long-lasting good could come from hijacking their DNS and redirecting requests for their site to another, more patriotic site.

But I know it looks like fun.

Read the story.

Not Quite Retracting the Retraction. Yet.

The chemical facility at Najaf is proving to be a little problematic for me. I jumped on the early stories of it being a chemical weapons plant and chemical storage facility. Then I snarkily retracted the post when it was reported that no illegal munitions were found there. Well, today's New York Times ran a story about the people searching Najaf for weapons, and it doesn't seem quite conclusive one way or the other. So, I'm not retracting my retraction, but I'm going to watch with great curiosity to see that they find in this place.

The story details what they've found so far, though, and what they've found doesn't lend itself to entirely dismissing the idea that chemical weapons are stored at Najaf.

We'll see what happens, and as the story develops, I'll be sure to link to the stories with all the proper retractions, mea culpas, or victory dances.

Read the story.

Damn, I Like Tiger

Tiger Woods issued a statement supporting not only the troops in Iraq, but the President and his staff as well.

Very nicely done.

Read the statement.

Racist Assholes

Apparently, racism in the name of anti-war demonstartion is absolutely acceptable. Sort of like anti-Semitism in the name of a peaceful Middle East is acceptable.

Well, personally, I find both to be disgusting.

Check out this anti-war flier.

This is only aggravated by the fact that the anti-war left spent most of last year chearing for Colin Powell, calling him the "lone voice of reason in the administration." Of course, as soon as he proclaimed the necessity of war, he became a "Tom" and worse.

Condi, since she's always been a little hawkish, of course, has always been fair game.

Goofy Peaceniks #4

Montana Senator Max Baucus has been a vocal supporter of President Bush in the war with Iraq. Though a Democrat, he ran a fairly conservative campaign (on issues, not on campaign spending), and has been pretty friendly with Republicans on issues regarding national security. His wife, though, is taking a very different path.

I'm all for people expressing their minds. As I've said before, this is an issue on which reasonable people can agree to disagree--there are strong arguments against the conflict just as there are compelling reasons for action. We all know where we stand. Wanda Baucus, Sen. Baucus's wife, decided to display a light anti-war ("Peace is Patriotic") message in the window of their home. Still, no problem.

But, in an interview with the Washington Post, she shows remarkable ignorance for such an obviously intelligent woman.

"I don't think we have any business being in a preemptive war against Iraq," she said. "Anytime you drop bombs, there are going to be a lot of innocent people hurt. A billion Muslims all over the world are in pain to see their brothers losing their homes and their families losing the stability of their civilization."

It gets better, though. When asked specifically about Saddam Hussein, she has these gentle words for the dictator:

"I think he is very proud of the history of his country. I think it's we Americans who don't know the facts about what anthropologists call 'the cradle of civilization.' When we watch the bombing on television, we really don't seem to understand or appreciate that some of these places are sacred. . . . I disagree with those who say that Saddam Hussein doesn't think about this. He cares about these places and their people."

He cares so damned much about those people that he's willing to drop chemical and biological agents on them. Or to order troops to use artillery against Shiite Muslims in Basra just yesterday. Or, if he disagrees with them politically, just drop them in the nearest industrial plastic shredder. And, when he gets a little bored, he can start a war with one of his neighbors--I'm sure that Iran and Kuwait still remember his combat tactics, even if Mrs. Baucus doesn't.

Hell, that doesn't sound so bad to me. (For those with wonky sarcasm detectors, that was just all sarcastic as hell.)

Saddam Hussein runs a secular government in which religion is used only as a tool to maintain authority. His respect for the people and places of his country runs a distant second to his passionate love of absolute power and the trappings of power--the money, the perks, and the fear. Saddam, in the worst possible way, only cares about his own demented ambitions.

Wanda Baucus isn't so notable for being anti-war, but for being so willfully blind to the situation. Even if I didn't think that Iraq harbors those darned weapons of mass destruction, even if I didn't believe that Saddam would happily provide them to terrorists to destabilize his enemies, and even if I had somehow forgotten Iraq's willful defiance of UN resolutions and attempted assassination of Pres. Bush the First, I would still support this war. Why? Because the people of Iraq deserve to be liberated from this psychotic tyrant who terrorizes his own country.

Because, just as in Kosovo, there are some things worth fighting for that don't involve national security.

Read the story.

Updating

I'm spending the first part of today updating the links to the left. Lots of new stuff for y'all.

I'm spending the first part of today updating the links to the left. Lots of new stuff for y'all.

Goofy Peaceniks #3

A group of students at the University of Connecticut have pitched tents on their campus and are threatening to sleep there until the war is over.

"Why?" You might ask.

Because it might "inspire people to become more educated about an unjust war."

So, on some level, when I see dirty, disheveled students camping out for peace, I'm supposed to say to myself, "Oh, my God, how can we be fighting a war to liberate Iraq from a mad man who feeds people feet-first into an industrial plastic shredder? I must oppose this war at once!"

Again, a picture of tremendous condescension. Again, an anti-war protestor uses the "if only the American people were educated" card. Is it so unfathomable that an educated and intelligent person would disagree with them? For that matter, is it so unfathomable that the "education" they speak of has nothing to do with facts or actual events, but is based on a group of peaceniks sitting around, patting each other on the back, and espousing weird conspiracy theories?

When they say that they don't trust our President, they, in effect, say that they are more trusting of Saddam Hussein. When they say that the whole war is being fought for oil, they ignore the economic realities that say that the oil would be much cheaper to obtain without a 75 billion dollar war. Is it so amazing that the party of Lincoln might lead us once again into a just war to liberate a people richly deserving of freedom? Or that the President, whether right or wrong (an entirely different conversation), could be acting in what he considers to be the best interest of the people of the United States and the security of the world? Apparently not. To these people, it's much easier to believe that Saddam Hussein is unjustly set upon by the horrible forces of capitalism.

Read the Story.

"I went into battle with a clean conscience."

That's the closing sentence of an article in today's Rocky Mountain News. I'm not sure that anyone else is carrying Charlie Brennan's story, but it's a great look at the invasion from the standpoint of a journalist embedded in the 3rd Infantry Division. The soldiers of the 3rd ID will end up bearing much of the brunt of combat starting in the next couple of days, and have moved across Iraq with more speed than I ever would have imagined possible.

While it is not a bright and cheery article, it's not a gloom and doom job, either. Instead, it's just a realistic look at what it must feel like to be there right now.

Excellent article.

Read it in the Rocky Mountain News.

Good News on the War Front

Shiites are rising up against Saddam's troops in Basra and being backed up by British forces. This kind of rebellion is precisely what could help coalition forces take Southern Iraq without being too bogged down in urban combat. It's also the sign of an army of liberation, not an army of conquest.

Read the story on Fox.

Update:Here is another story about the Basra uprising. (With thanks to K-Lo at NRO for pointing it out in the Corner.)

More Evidence of Insanity

The Detroit News published a story about a man who claims to have been part of an effort to hide enough enriched uraniam to produce two nuclear weapons. He also speaks to a frighteningly hellish torture for political prisoners in Iraq.

This is more evidence of the duplicity of a regime bent on producing nuclear weapons, and of the lengths to which it will go to retain power. Many have chided President Bush for his "Axis of Evil" comment, but it's hard to not use the term "evil" when discussing the inhuman tortures devised by the regime.

Read the story.

Impromptus Are Up

Jay Nordlinger's Impromptus are up on NRO. It's not as funny as it sometimes is, but it's as good a read as ever.

Check it out.

Canadians Rebuke Own Government

It would appear, according to a story published in the National Post, that Canadians are far more supportive of Americans than their government would indicate. Not only do the majority wish for better relations with the US, but also that 60% of Canadians also wanted their government to have committed troops to the war in Iraq.

I admit that I'm stunned. Canada tends left politically, and this is a much stronger show of support than I would've expected. And gratifying as well.

So, to all you Canadians who wish your government was doing the right thing, I say thanks. The moral support is almost as important as material support.

Read the story.

A Little Perspective

I've heard a lot of doom-saying from journalists, friends, and even sports casters (it's true--the gentleman on the sports channel I was listening to was interviewing the head coach of the Denver Nuggets (okay, I know, insert your own basketball joke here) was asking the coach to discuss the war). It's as if everyone in the world thought that the war would really just be a few dropped bombs a couple harsh words and a sudden regime change. Nope, folks, it's really and truly a war.

I know, we haven't seen one of those around these parts for a while.

Well, David Warren has written an essay that puts this war in perspective and hopefully reminds everyone that we're achieving huge gains in a short amount of time. Really, this war is unprecedented in both the way it's being fought and in the speed with which things are unfolding. There is no doubt that the most difficult battles are still ahead of us, but that in no way diminishes a force that has fought with an amazing precision and humanity. Mr. Warren reminds us that, on D-Day in Normandy, we lost men at a rate of 500 every minute. (I must admit, my head is shouting, "Is that right?" If anyone can confirm this number, I'd appreciate it.)

Let that percolate in your head for a moment, and then think of how this invasion is unfolding. Don't doubt that every soldier lost is a tragedy in itself, but be thankful that, so far, the losses are minimal. And say a silent thanks to the strategists that are managing this war; let's hope they continue to do as well for us throughout the war.

Read his story.

My Favorite Frat Boys

Just two frat boys havin' some fun.

I don't know who to credit with this pic that came to me in an email today, but I'd love to give a shout out to 'em. If you know who it is, drop me a line.

Oscar Ads and Such

The Beyonce Pepsi ad was really really good. I liked it.

It doesn't make me want to drink a Pepsi, but I do sort of want to see that ad again.

Update: And the Tiger Woods goes fishing ad cracked me up, too.

Could it be that watching the Oscars (which I'm doing, although I'm not entirely sure why) is almost as good as watching the Super Bowl for its advertising?

Next Update: The Oscar orchestra playing "Staying Alive" when John Travolta took the stage, on the other hand, just sucked. Not a song that translates well from disco to orchestra. That being said, I have a strange crush on Queen Latifah. Not only does she have a great voice and tons of joyous attitude, she's sorta sexy, too. Did I just admit that in public?

Another Freakin Update: The MasterCard ad that screwed up the great Simon and Garfunkel song "Homeward Bound" should be burned. The images were cute, but the mangling of a great song is unforgivable.

Take That, Mr. Blix!

Coalition troops have shown themselves to be far more efficient in ferreting out illegal munitions than did the various inspection regimes that were chauffeured around the country at irregular intervals over the last decade.

Hans Blix, who had no comment, was still preoccupied with that whole "global warming" thing.

Read the story on Fox.

And, yes, if this report proves to be incorrect, I'll post an appropriately snarky apology and retraction later.

Oscar Political Commentary

The Oscars have been remarkably restrained in the realm of political commentary, having not even once managed to offend me so far.

Of course, Michael Moore is still probably coming up. He could conceivably make up for all the rest. If I manage to stick with it that long, I'll let you know.

Underappreciated Movies

NRO ran an article on movies overlooked by the Academy this year. Although I'm not sure why he picked Red Dragon and Goldmember, I'm thrilled that he picked up on We Were Soldiers and Super Troopers.

Take a look.

The Human Sheild Speaks

Daniel Pepper, the former volunteer human shield who's been making so much news lately, was published in the Daily Telegraph. His story is one which should be read by every anti-war protestor--a story born of personal experience of the realities of Iraq. Most protestors operate on a few assumptions which are patently false:

• That the US is involved in the war only for oil
• That the Iraqi people don't want the US to overthrow Saddam
• That Saddam is a scapegoat for other American problems and that the grievances against his regime have been wildly overstated.

If the US were truly interested only in oil, it would be easier and far cheaper to have supported an end to sanctions. The redcution in the price of oil from the successful conclusion of this war will not make up, in any way, for the costs of executing this war. The Iraqi people have gone on record in private conversations with journalists and other Westerners saying that they don't want to live under Saddam. The list of crimes his regime has committed is long and well documented. While he may never be mentioned in the same breath as Hitler or Stalin (mostly for lack of opportunity, not for lack of ambition), he certainly fits the mold of a Pol Pot or an Idi Amin.

Daniel Pepper's observances and experiences certainly help put the entire affair in perspective. And it's good to note that a person like him can be persuaded by first hand knowledge even if he doesn't truly consider himself pro-war at this point.

"Last Thursday night I went to photograph the anti-war rally in Parliament Square. Thousands of people were shouting "No war" but without thinking about the implications for Iraqis. Some of them were drinking, dancing to Samba music and sparring with the police. It was as if the protesters were talking about a different country where the ruling government is perfectly acceptable. It really upset me.

Anyone with half a brain must see that Saddam has to be taken out. It is extraordinarily ironic that the anti-war protesters are marching to defend a government which stops its people exercising that freedom."

Read the story.

As a quick note, I also don't consider myself pro-war. I consider myself to be pro-necessity. Not every political situation has a peaceful resolution and not every political situation requires an armed response.

Snarky Retraction and Then Some

It appears that the previous report of a captured chemical plant was a little bit exaggerated. Though there seems to be no explanation for the presence of traps or an Iraqi general, there also seems to be no evidence of the recent production of chemical weapons.

Darnit.

On the other hand, no one seems to have an explanation as to why certain Iraqi officers were carrying Cipro pills when they were being treated by American doctors. Cipro is a drug used to fight the effects of biological weapons like Anthrax.

Read the story.

Nor has anyone explained why Russia has been arming Iraq during a UN embargo. This goes even a few steps beyond night vision goggles and jamming equipment. Putin has some serious explaining to do.

Read the story.

Anti-War Demonstrators

James S. Robbins has the definitive look at American anti-war demonstrators over on NRO.

This weekend, I witnessed one New York demonstrator saying (again, I'm paraphrasing) that the US shouldn't be spending money on war, but on education. Okay, I've heard that one before and my answer is that you don't have to choose between the two, you have to understand the necessity of both. Fine.

He kept going, though.

"Because if all those people had an eductation, there' s no way they would support the war."

How elitist. How incredibly arrogant this concept that if a person is reasonably intelligent and reasonably educated, there is no way that they could disagree with him.

I think it's fair to say that I have opinions on this subject as strong as most Americans, but I realize that there are intelligent, educated people who came down on the other side of the argument as me. I still respect the many of my friends who are anti-war. I would wish that the hard anti-war left would have the same level of respect for those of us who disagree with them.

Read the Story on NRO.

Peter O'Toole

Still, perhaps, the most graceful actor ever. His acceptance speach was a picture of refinement. And how terribly deserving of the honorary Oscar, as he never did manage to recieve the best actor award he so richly deserved.

Another wonderful Oscar moment.

Michael Moore

This may have been the greatest Oscar moment ever. So amazingly beautiful that I barely know what to say.

Michael Moore won, as expected, and was greeted with a standing ovation. When he began to speak, however, the mood rapidly changed. He began by noting that he liked living in a world of reality while we live in "fictitious times." When he noted that we had a fictitious election, there was laughter and applause. When he said that we have a fictitious President, there was still applause, but a smattering of boos. When he kept going on, talking about the fictitious war, the boos spread wildly and the applause almost completely died.

He was, essentially, booed off stage.

I'm shocked and thrilled and surprised and giggly. This wasn't the moment that I expected it to be, but it was worth sitting through all the boring (sometimes funny, occasionally interesting) crap.

Again, this was the best Oscar moment ever.

Host Steve Martin followed it up by noting that the Teamsters were out back busily helping Michael Moore into the trunk of his limo.

Heheh. Yes.

Update: Yahoo ran this story which mentioned the ovation, but completely ignored the booing. How tremendously disappointing. How tremendously biased.

Babs

Barbra Streisand stated, while handing out the award for "Lose Yourself," stated that she was proud to come from a country that allowed each of its citizens the right to speak out, perform, and dissent (this is paraphrasing, folks), and I couldn't agree more. In fact, it was beautiful.

Here's to you, Babs.

U2's Performance

Damned if U2 doesn't just prove time and again that they are one of the most captivating bands in the world. What a beautiful performance "The Hands that Built America."

Damned if U2 doesn't just prove time and again that they are one of the most captivating bands in the world. What a beautiful performance "The Hands that Built America."

Kate Hudson

Kate Hudson may be the most amazingly beautiful willowy blond in the world. I'm in love. Okay, maybe not love, but it's close enough for government work.

Kate Hudson may be the most amazingly beautiful willowy blond in the world. I'm in love. Okay, maybe not love, but it's close enough for government work.

If true...

Breaking into the fun of the Oscars was an article in The Sun claiming that Iraqis had begged Russia to send medical help for Saddam Hussein. This is a paper notable for their wild stories and less-than-reliable reporting. Once in a while, they get it right though. Hopefully this is one of those times.

Props to K-Lo from NRO for pointing this story out.

Read About it.

Paul Simon or Gollum?

I left the room for a moment and came back to hear someone performing who sounded much like Paul Simon, but bore a startling resemblance to Gollum. Can anyone confirm?

I left the room for a moment and came back to hear someone performing who sounded much like Paul Simon, but bore a startling resemblance to Gollum. Can anyone confirm?

Liberators

When I read this story on Fox, I felt a sense of horror. The images of the frightened and the starved people. The thought that some were frightened to welcome the Americans because of fear--fear, probably, that we might abandon them again or that Saddam might still exact some revenge for their disloyalty.

In one sense, it's heartening to see that many are welcoming us not as conquerors but as liberators.

No, my horror wasn't at the military action itself, but the overwhelming sense that we should have done this so long ago. As we've sat back and debated (and, yes, on a logical level, I still believe the debate was worth it and the time was well spent) these people were being starved by their own leader. These people were being frightened into submission. And they still don't necessarily believe that we've come to help them.

We can't afford, on a moral level, to let them down again.

Read the story.

Atheism v/ Theism

This was written in response to the Ravingatheist's naming of me as

If you have no interest in a conversation concerning the existence of god, then you might just want to skip ahead. This is lengthy.

An open response to Ravingatheist;

We have to start from the bottom of your commentary as that really shapes the rest of the conversation in my mind. I stand by my assertion that atheism is a "faith-based belief." Faith is defined as a "confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing." That seems to descrive your position pretty damned well. The article that you linked to didn't really address that at all-I'm not accusing you of having religious beliefs but I am saying (again) that you've made a choice based on insufficient data. This is simply to begin a basis for conversation; there is no possible way to divine the existence of god.

The logical proofs that you cite are nothing of the sort. They merely are you asserting that "just because someone says it's so doesn't make it so." Well, just because you say it isn't so doesn't change the situation either. I can sit here and tell you that there is no such thing as an alien, and, based on my own personal experience, it would be a very logical statement. That doesn't mean that there is no alien life on an as yet undiscovered planet orbiting some little-noticed star. My belief or lack of belief doesn't change the reality of the situation-the reality merely remains unknowable. Your sort of rules for what god would or wouldn't look like are simply assumptions and games. If god exists, your understanding may be entirely based on a faulty understanding, especially since you choose to base your entire logic on what your understanding of a Judeo-Christian god is comprised of-while not even acknowledging the incredible variance of descriptions within the various interpretations of those religions.

Science and logic once proved that the world was flat. And that the Earth was the center of the universe. Both of these very logical conclusions were also very wrong.

To me, it is much more difficult to believe that the entire universe just is. Where did it begin? The big bang? Fair enough; only it leaves the question of how all the matter in the universe was condensed into such a tiny space and what conditions changed to cause the great explosion of matter and what existed before and-well, again, where did it begin? There is no scientific theory that satisfactorily explains any of those questions. That is not to say that there isn't an explanation that doesn't require the existence of a supernatural entity outside our understanding, just that, perhaps, it hasn't yet been found. Until science can find a plausible answer, though, the most plausible answer is still the one that you refute: god.

My unwillingness to shill for a specific religion, though, comes not from a lack of faith in a deity, but from a lack of faith in myself. That is, I fully realize that any conceptualization I might have of god is limited by my own senses and understanding of the world. I know that I am fallible and that my explanations will likely fall short of the reality. This leads me to question, on a daily basis, the shape of my beliefs, and to form an ethical system based on my understanding. Don't mistake my lack of preaching as a weakness of faith. My religion does more than comfort me on occasion, it informs my life with a sense of curiosity and purpose along with a sense of my own limitations.

This does not mean that I have to accept any action from other religious believers as you somehow seem to think. I'm not sure where you got that idea, because it certainly wasn't from anything I said. Religious belief is no excuse for murder or oppression; I'm as firmly opposed to terrorist bombers as I would have been to the Crusades. And, in fact, religion is usually used as an excuse for these actions, not the real reason behind the actions. Most "religious" wars have a economic or political basis beyond religion. Even the excuse, however, is repugnant.

Who knows, maybe the terrorists are right. It could happen, I suppose, But if they are, then I'd much prefer hell to their heaven. Either way, I never said that judgements couldn't be made about a person's actions simply because they espouse some religious belief-that's just you playing games. Belief in god doesn't change my responsibility as a human being.

As to your notes regarding inappropriate laws favoring religions or religious beliefs harming others, you'll get no argument from me. In fact, my first post to your site was a support of the idea that "Under God" should not be mentioned in the pledge. I support gay marriage and am opposed to the death penalty (for religious reasons).

Finally, your posts and comments from others on the site, prove that your site is antagonistic towards believers of all kinds and condescending as hell. From your assumption that your logic refutes the existence of god to the language you use to describe nearly any individual that admits in any public forum to prayer or belief shows your animosity.

I won't try to convert you to my way of believing; I think that would be as fruitful (and useful) as trying to convert a Hindu or a Muslim. But I would note that your faith in the non-existence of god is expressed with as much religious fervor (look it up-that also doesn't require the involvement of a god) as any televangelist. Your faith in your own beliefs is so complete that you won't even contemplate the potential for being wrong, even when you haven't really seen enough evidence to know the answer with certainty.

Respectfully, and with thanks,

ZB

Dreher Leaving National Review?!?

This can't be right.

Rod, buddy, pal, say it ain't so!
Apparently Rod Dreher is leaving NR to join the Dallas Morning News. He's citing some crud about "closer to family" and "putting down roots" and "not mess(ing) with Texas." Damn him for his selfishness, anyway.
Well, here's wishing the best for him and hoping he does manage to write somewhat regularly for both the online and dead tree editions of my favorite periodical.

Sen. McCain Gets it Right

I just read the transcript of Senator McCain's remarks from yesterday, and my big McCainfest continues in earnest. He answers Byrd beautifully with an impassioned speech. I wish I could've heard it.

The parts concerning Bosnia were particularly telling to me. It seems that there are only two ways that a strong-left liberal will support a war: if it's brought forth by a Democrat and if it has no smell of national interest about it. Somehow, if national security is at stake, the military action is tainted. That's the only way to understand how the military action (far less defined and focused as the current military action) in Bosnia, for instance, was acceptable and the action in Iraq is not. In both cases, a tyrannical regime repressed its own people with brutal measures unthinkable in the US. In both instances, that regime was also guilty of attempted "ethnic cleansing." And in one of the instances, US national security was involved.

Anti-war liberals may want to examine that hypocrisy before they continue their ranting and raving. What are they really upset about? I think their response is far more politically oriented than it is morally oriented; their hatred of President Bush colors every decision they make, their disappointment in having lost the national debate-- not only about the war, but in a very general sense-- has left them in a terribly contrarian mood.

Read Sen. McCain's Remarks

Paleos v/Neos

David Frum has written a beautiful takedown of the paleoconservatives on NRO. Well worth your time to read as it is, by turns, humorous, astonishing, eye-opening, and passionate. Mr. Frum is becoming one of my favorites over at NRO.

I'd spent many years of my life telling people that, no, Pat Buchanan wasn't really a racist, even though I disagree with much (if not most) of what he has to say. And, no, Novak isn't an extremist, even though sometimes he goes a step too far. Not anymore. I was wrong, and mainstream conservatives like me cannot allow these racist, defeatist isolationists to hijack our party.

Read it on NRO.

Didja miss me?

Living in Denver, my life was on hold for a day. The snow prevented me from going anywhere and the downed phone line prevented me dialing in and updating the blog. I have no way to convey just how bored I was with no Internet connection and very little to do. I ended up taking a long walk (although a very short distance) only to learn that the only business open in the area was 7-11, shoveling my car most of the way out, and reading most of Heavier than Heaven, the Kurt Cobain biography.

The book is pretty good, but let me tell ya, I think Kurt was pretty much a jerk. The book isn't building any sympathy for the guy in me. As much as I always like Nirvana's music, I also thought he was a complete jerk for abandoning a wife and child by killing himself. I also felt the same way about his addictions as I do Robert Downey, Jr; these men had every opportunity to find a way to quit and chose to keep using. Sooner or later, sympathy turns to revulsion in my mind. I've used, I enjoyed, and, before I got married, I stopped and have never gone back.

Anyway, sorry for the unplanned day off there, but I'm back and I'll be posting throughout the day.

Ravingatheist has kindly awarded me the title of:

Ravingatheist May Have to Wait

I'm leaving work, and I'm not sure if my phone is up at home. I may not get to publish my response to Ravingatheist today. If not, I apologize and I'll put it up first thing in the morning.

I'm leaving work, and I'm not sure if my phone is up at home. I may not get to publish my response to Ravingatheist today. If not, I apologize and I'll put it up first thing in the morning.

Goofy Peaceniks #2

Some protestors in San Francisco staged a "vomit in" today.

Gross. Very very disgusting.

And, again, just another reason I can't take the hard-core anti-war left seriously. This is not conversation, this is not dialogue, this is not a viable argument, this is simply a shock tactic used by a child to get attention. These folks didn't get their way and now they're throwing a little bit of a tantrum

Yuck.

Read the story.

Those Wacky Surrender Monkeys

You've got to hand it to the French: they try so darned hard to be relevant.

Saddam is arming his army with chemical weapons (which, incidentally, they don't actually have seeing how well the inspections were working and how Saddam assured us that his military no longer has chemical weapons and stuff). The French, in an odd attempt to reassure us, wanted to let us know that they'll be right there for us if the Iraqis use those non-existant weapons of mass destruction--even though, darnit, those inspections were working so well that we should've kept at it for a while.

Okay, just for the record: we don't need your help, we don't really want it (except in that condescending it'll-make-them-feel-better sort of way), and if the inspections were working we wouldn't have to be having a conversation about those supposedly non-existant weapons, anyway.

Now, why don't you just go sulk in the corner like a good little surrender monkey.

Read the CNN article.

Oh, and, yes I know I'm being an asshole again--but I'm really tired of the condescending attitude from that part of the world and I really hate driving in snow. Not that the two are necessarily connected, but the snow part is making me feel a little pissy.

Here's to Our Friends

So, Canada has said that the 30 men it sent to the Middle East won't actually be allowed to fight to topple Saddam.

Fine.

Brave little Poland, on the other hand, is sending 200 men to directly support the efforts. Australia has committed 2000. Turkey is moving towards allowing coalition forces to stage from their country. And, of course, the British leadership has committed to help as well.

It's good to see that there are pockets of bravery left in the world.

Follow Up

In a sort of follow-up to that last post, I'm linking to a Washington Times article discussing the efforts being taken to minimize the resistance that our forces will see when the invasion begins.

Read the Story.

(Thanks to Drudge for this link.)

War is Coming

But how much of a war?

What could be interesting is to see just how many of Saddam's troops fight, how many of Saddam's troops carry out his orders. Given how much effort is going into giving those troops an out, and given the willingness of those soldiers to surrender both recently (before war was engaged) and during the first Gulf War, it wouldn't be terribly surprising to see the takeover of Iraq happening more quickly than pundits are imagining. Obviously, I'm hoping for the best-case scenario where the march to Baghdad is almost effortless.

The inevitability of regime change is unarguable, the question is just how difficult the task will be.

Let's all hope that it goes quickly and well.

Disagreeing w/ Buckley

I realize that William F. Buckley Jr. is something akin to a deity in most conservative circles. Well known for his analysis and political mind as well as his superb writing, he's been the torchbearer for mainstream conservatism for decades. I can't overstate my admiration for him.

And, yet, I think that he's wrong in his analysis (mostly positive) of the President's speech last night.

"Mr. Bush would have done better to speak more modestly about expectations. Sitting down on vast oil reserves does not bring prosperity or freedom, as we are quickly reminded merely by citing Venezuela, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia. What Mr. Bush proposes to do is to unseat Saddam Hussein and to eliminate his investments in aggressive weaponry. We can devoutly hope that internecine tribal antagonisms will be subsumed in the fresh air of a despot removed, and that the restoration of freedom will be productive. But these concomitant developments can't be either foreseen by the United States, or implemented by us. What Mr. Bush can accomplish is the removal of a regime and its infrastructure. The Iraqi people will have to take it from there."

I understand, and respect the point. And I disagree. I personally have a hard time imagining a democracy flourishing in Iraq or in many of the countries in the Middle East. I wonder what the cost will be to the United States in attempting to shepherd Iraq towards democracy. I wonder if it can be done.

And then I remember that I never believed that I would see the downfall of the Soviet Union in my life time. I never could have imagined that some of our most reliable allies wouldn't be in Western Europe, but in the Eastern Bloc. The former President Reagan had a vision that most people never imagined he could achieve. Most people would have scoffed at the mere thought that he would even have the mental prowess to put in place the strategy for the downfall of communism.

And, yet, he changed the world along with stalwart allies in Britain and Poland.

I think that President Bush, dismissed by so many as a stupid or incompetent leader, has just as wildly ambitious a vision: the export of democracy to help ensure a safer and more just world. His strongest allies have proven to have as much (if not more) backbone as any with which President Reagan was blessed. Though he's only taken the first steps toward that vision, I firmly believe that Bush will do everything in his power to attain his goals for the good of the United States and the world as a whole.

When I voted for Bush, I had hoped only that I would vote for a man who would restore dignity and decency to the Oval Office. Since then, he's impressed me as a man of vision and action. As much as he believes that God will help him endure the trials ahead of him, I have come to believe that he will be one of those leaders that will leave the world a better place than when he came to power. I'm not only glad that he communicated that vision, those awesome goals, to the rest of the world, but that his faith, like Reagan's, is in the potential of all humanity when given an opportunity to enjoy liberty.

Susan Sarandon's Mom is Cool

Who would've guessed that Sarandon's mom was a republican? And well-spoken and respectful of her daughter's political stances.

If only she were forty years younger.

Read her Washington Post interview.

Why is it so fun?

What is it about the term "cheese eating surrender monkey" that's so fun to say? Why does it make me grin whenever I say it in polite company (read: around my girlfriend's friends)? Why is it just so damned perfect?

Thank you Groundskeeper Willie (and thank you Jonah for popularizing it for us all).

Nuclear Fears

The thought of terrorists actually leveling a US city with a nuclear weapon is terrifying. A few years back, many people may have thought that the technical skills combined with the organizational skills required to assemble, deploy, and detonate a nuclear weapon was beyond the ability of a terrorist organization. September 11 proved that assumption horribly wrong--the terrorists were far more organized and capable than most of us had ever imagined. Combine that with the potentially easy-to-acquire bomb-grade material in the former Soviet Union, and the potential for the worst-case scenario is obvious.

And, again, terrifying.

Living in Denver, I'm neither in a safe place--a city unlikely to be hit--nor am I in one of those cities most likely to be hit. With that knowledge, I go about my daily life and refuse to think about it. I can neither fix the situation nor live my life in fear, so ignore it most of the time. Today, the Washington Post ran a frightening article on the subject and brought it back to the forefront in my mind.

Read Fred Hiatt's article.

Adults in the White House, Revisited

As I've said before, it's refreshing to have adults in the White House. People who plan for the next step, people with something resembling foresight, and people who actually want to achieve goals. And, again, the time spent wrangling with the UN hasn't been wasted; it's been used to create some highly innovative plans for not only carrying out the war in a way to leave as much of the infrastructure of the country (water, electricity, hospitals, and the like) in place as possible, but also for quickly rebuilding the country and bringing it back into the world community. Hopefully, it's also a great first step towards a liberal, democratic Iraq--a little seed of democracy sewn in the Middle East.

Read about the President's plan.

Happy St. Patrick's Day

Or, as The Onion would say, "Happy Reinforcin' o' the Stereotypes Day."

Or, as The Onion would say, "Happy Reinforcin' o' the Stereotypes Day."

The Jacko-Liz Taylor Split

I can't decide whether it's worse that this morning's news--even the entertainment news--included an article about the Michael Jackson-Liz Taylor split, or the fact that I actually read the damned thing.

I feel so dirty.

Read about it.

Jay Nordlinger, Funny Man

In Jay Nordlinger's "Impromptus" on NRO today, there's a great line concerning the move to impeach President Bush.

"I guess Democrats impeach Republicans for acting like U.S. presidents; Republicans impeach Democrats for not acting like them."

Read more.

Celine Dion is Immanentizing the Eschaton

I think I've spotted one of the signs of the apocalypse. Four tickets for a Celine Dion concert in Vegas were auctioned for a quarter million dollars.

I can't explain to you just how much that frightens me.

Read about it.

The relevance of the UN

Just a quick note, VodkaPundit has posted an intelligent analysis of the relevance (or irrelevance, really) of the UN.

Definitely good readin'.

The UN and Saddam On Notice

I just got home and turned on the TV to watch a little hoops before I go hang out with my ex-wife. What do I see? President Bush putting both Saddam and the UN on notice: if the UN doesn't pass a resolution by close of business tomorrow, we will stage an invasion with our allies.

Wow. An ultimatum to not only Saddam but to the UN, even while still leaving everyone a way out: the UN can still pass a powerful resolution or Saddam can still abdicate his position.

Whether you agree with his position or not, you have to be a little awed by act. One of my girlfriend's friends has told me a number of times (while I try to keep my mouth mostly shut--pissing off your girlfriend's friends is pretty much like pissing her off, too) that Bush is a coward. I'm sorry, but that is not a word you can use to describe a man who puts the UN on notice and says precisely what he means.

Bush is putting his own career in danger, putting his faith in his advisors and his own vision, and believing that, in the end, he will be vindicated. That's courage.

Bill Clinton, while he snipes from the sidelines, on the other hand, signed an executive order saying that it was official US policy that Hussein be removed from power. And during his two terms in office, he did absolutely nothing about it. If she thinks that Bush is a coward, I wonder what word she would use for Clinton?

Why MTV and Hans Blix Just Can't Be Taken Seriously

If you are so inclined, you can actually wade through this puff piece interview with Hans Blix. It's a typical soft-sell; MTV serves up easy questions and Hans bats 'em right out of the park. Nothing terribly exciting or surprising. Except for two little details: MTV actually calls the piece "Between Iraq and a Hard Place."

I'm not really an elitist or anything, but really bad puns have no place in serious reporting. Of course, the goal of this isn't really informational, it's to provide Blix a platform from which to attack current American policies (politely, of course, and with a solemn sense of self-importance) and spout off about how the US is becoming more unilateral in its decisions. Okay, first, a niggle--either you are unilateral or you aren't. As soon as other nations are consulted and brought on board, it's no longer a unilateral maneuver--the UN is not the only avenue towards a multilateral solution.

Damnit.

The real surprise comes when he posits that he is far more afraid of global warming than he is of large conflict. Truly? That is such an absurd position that I don't even know how to begin the argument, but, even more, why would this man be in charge of a team who's mission was to facilitate the avoidance of a war. I mean, with his head all filled with global warming worries and terror that the Kyoto agreement wouldn't be ratified, when would he possibly have time to worry about nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons in Iraq? Am I answering with my own absurdity? Probably, but I honestly don't understand how this man could have been placed in this position.

For him, the threat of the use of force is acceptable, but the actual use of force is never acceptable. Force should never be the first option, but it must be a real option if it is to ever carry any weight.

And, notably, the US isn't the only nation to have walked away from Kyoto. Bad treaties are bad treaties no matter how good they make people feel or how well-intentioned they are.

Risk of Inaction

K-Lo, over in the Corner has been growing impatient with the President and his repeated attempts at diplomacy via the UN Security Council.

Andrew Sullivan, on the other hand, thinks that the appearance of diplomacy is important in giving the appearance of legitimacy to the war and, not coincidentally, in margianalizing France's influence in the world. K-Lo takes pot-shots at the Pres, and Sullivan takes (gentle) potshots at "Rummy."

And I love 'em both for it.

See, I think they're both a little bit right. I think that the attempt to sway the UN has been valuable both in proving that the US is not acting unilaterally and that the UN is a toothless organization with no real concern with enforcing its own edicts. I'm glad President Bush went this route simply because, in contrast with the Clinton White House, it feels as if there are real live adults making decisions. Not making decisions rashly, but with foresite and, hopefully, wisdom. When President Clinton wanted to take action, he consulted no one and sent in the cruise missiles--a strategy as ineffective as it was infantile.

That said, we run the risk of losing credibility in international circles if this drags on much longer. We've given final warnings quite a few times and now need to act to prove that we aren't just another paper tiger. The plans are in place, the allies are lined up, and every moment we wait is a moment that Hussein has to prepare for his own scorched earth policy. He knows he can't truly win--at least I hope he realizes that--but he knows that he can do significant damage on his way down. The danger grows with every day that passes.

So, while I think K-lo is being a little harsh, I agree that we should be done with the talking. The time has not been entirely wasted, but further dickering in Security Council meetings won't have significant results other than to paint the US as unwilling to back up it's own words and deadlines. We can't afford to follow the UN down that road.

How Much Difference a President Makes

OpinionJournal has published a wonderful, passionate examination of how Hollywood celebs changed their political positions when they no longer had Pres. Clinton to pal around with. I'd go further and look at how elected Democrats also flopped positions when a Republican took office.

Kudos to John Fund for a great article.

Read it.

Use a Longer Fuse Next Time

I offer this without (much) in the way of commentary.

I will note, though, that I really don't like "suicide bombers" and that tremendous dislike probably helped keep the giggle factor of this story a little on the high side for me.

Read the story of the suicide bomber with, ahem, stamina issues.

Damned Cell Phones

It took me a long time to join the cell phone revolution. Not because I couldn't see the use of them, but because I hate the idea of being reachable at all times. I hate never being out of contact. I like quiet time, I like alone time, and I like being able to disappear for a weekend without people noticing. With my cell, I suddenly can't hide as well, can't take off without people trying to call me--and guilt keeps me from turning the damned thing off.

My past few girlfriends have found this to be a quite useful way to keep track of me.

Anyway, I read an article this morning on Fox blaming cell phones for a rise in those little white lies we all tell each other when we're running late or suddenly realize that the Abba retrospective playing in the Gaslight district isn't really something that we want to do, and damn us for agreeing to it in a drunken stupor the previous night. I think you know what I'm talking about. As much as I might despise my own little tether, I must speak out for the dear little terrors. It's not their fault. People like me were lying about that stuff already. All the damned time, in fact. Now, it's just a little more public.

To be honest, if I may be so bold, the little white lie is a useful social tool. Properly imployed, it smooths the path for all of us to a much happier society.

Read the Fox article

Senator McCain

If Senator John McCain keeps it up, I'm going to start believing he actually means it when he calls himself a Republican. He has been a loyal, informed, and well-mannered supporter of President Bush throughout the Iraq crisis. His article in today's New York Times is a strong answer to nearly all of the anti-war arguments that I've seen, and presented beautifully.

I hope he keeps it up; he's been a steady, calm voice in an argument that lends itself to over-emotional moments.

Read his article entitled "The Right War for the Right Reasons."

Netflix and Krispy Kreme

What horrible thing does it say about my life when the high point of my day will likely turn out to be recieving emails from Netflix letting me know what DVDs are being shipped out while eating a Krispy Kreme donut for breakfast.

Sad.

And, damn, I better not skip working out tonight.

I'm Back!

I hate it when the blog dies. Well, the service is free, and that brings us to a happy pair of cliches:

#1 You get what you pay for

#2 Beggars can't be choosers

I'm definitely a beggar.

Undermining the UN

Hans Blix must think that he's protecting UN interests.

He must.

I can't believe that he would purposefully undermine UN activities, although it is also difficult for me to see his actions as anything other than precisely that. By leaving certain remarkably important portions of his findings out of his presentations, he is actively (if for the best of intentions) working against the driving reason to even have weapons inspectors in the country: accountability. Saddam Hussein is like a three year old in that he has very little belief that what he does will bring a reaction. And Hans Blix is like a bad parent in that he continually does his best to prove Hussein correct.

Did weapons inspections ever have a chance of succeeding? Probably not. After over a decade of lax enforcement of UN resolutions and with a strong international cry against action, how could Hussein ever felt anything other than confidence? Add to that a weapons inspection group led by a man who made his opposition to force being used to back the resolutions well known to all, and Hussein must have been absolutely giddy in his little, evil-dictator sort of way.

Well, here's the fallout: the war will be bloodier because Iraq has had far more time to prepare than we would have liked, more people will have died by the end of it, and the UN will have shown itself to be even more toothless than many of us had imagined. The UN has basically shown itself to be willing to pass resolutions promising consequences it doesn't have the guts to deliver. How, in anyone's estimation, can this be a good thing?

Read the article that inspired this little rant.

I'm an asshoooooole

And, yes, I'm aware that I'm being sort of an asshole in that last post. I understand that the guy doesn't really deserve the condescension or sarcasm that I'm throwing his way. I understand that some people might sit back and say, "Hey, aren't you just proving his point." I also understand that, well, who gives a rat's behind. I've declared it Be Cruel to the Defenseless Day.

Just thought you'd like to know.

"People Should Be Nicer"

The great Connecticut Daily Campus newspaper ("The Student Newspaper at the University of Connecticut") ran a world-shattering editorial today. The author, Sean Vivier, in an article entitled "People should be nicer" has noticed that, umm, people should be nicer. Next on his schedule is a series of wonderful articles exposing how "Mean People Suck" and "Fucking for War is Like Fighting for Chastity." Or something like that. Read His Holiness, Sean Vivier.

The great Connecticut Daily Campus newspaper ("The Student Newspaper at the University of Connecticut") ran a world-shattering editorial today. The author, Sean Vivier, in an article entitled "People should be nicer" has noticed that, umm, people should be nicer. Next on his schedule is a series of wonderful articles exposing how "Mean People Suck" and "Fucking for War is Like Fighting for Chastity." Or something like that. Read His Holiness, Sean Vivier.

Right Wing Stupidity

See, I happen to believe that most political gestures are pretty empty. Most gestures that are designed to "raise awareness" or "show solidarity" are really exercises in political masturbation--just going through the motions to make yourself feel better. When it comes to American attitudes towards the French, I'm seeing quite a bit of that.

Refusing to buy French goods is a real gesture (especially when giving up an extremely smooth and refined Vodka, for example). Renaming foods that happen to have the word "French" in their titles, seems pretty useless to me. In fact, it reminds me of the great movie Better Off Dead. Now, in this movie, our pathetic and suicidal hero meets a French foreign exchange student. When the student (along with her hilarious host family) is invited to dinner, our hero's decidely odd mother decides to make a very special french meal of french toast, french fries, french dressing, and Perier.

Well, in some of our House cafeterias, french toast will now be known as freedom toast. french fries become freedom fries.

This was, of course, designed to show some level of displeasure with our French "allies." This will, of course, just showcase a remarkable waste of time and energy when efforts could be used better elsewhere.

Understand, I love good France jokes as much as the next neocon, but I would really prefer to leave the empty gestures to the anti-war crowd.

Read the story.

Monday Morning Spam Spam Spam Spam

The good news is, if I were a smoker, Smoker-Insurance wants me to know that I can get Great Rates On Term Life Insurance. I'm thinking of taking up smoking just for the health benefits. Luckily, Chuck@supersizeoffers.com is there to help with The Cheapest Cigarettes On Earth. Here's a shout out to my man, Chuck!

Even better news, at least on the surface of things, was that Jeff Bradley was kind enough to send me an email entitled We will pay you bills (sic). At first, I thought that this was someone who had made the decision to send humanitarian aid to the war zone that is my financial life. Unfortunately, Jeff didn't really want to help, he just wanted to add to my bills. Bad, Jeff, bad!

The bad news is that Value-Brands wants me to Grow 2 Cup Sizes--Free! I had been unaware that my man-breasts were too small. Not a comforting thought.

Kelly would like to know"Is this your mom?" No, Kelly, it isn't. Thank you for asking.

Similarly, Kris wonders, "Is this a picture of you? Again, no, Kris, it isn't. Thanks for--ah, never mind.

Lastly, and most unfortunately of all, Very Virile has apparently finally noted my apparent penis-size issues. They want me to know that I can Enlarge My Male Size with Virility Pro. Maybe now I can finally shake this amateur status and get sent up to the Big Time!

Thanks to all 422 of my wonderful, loving Spammers for making my Monday a little brighter. Or something.

We Haven't Started Fighting...

...but we're already winning.

Saddam's troops don't want to wait until a war starts to actually surrender (okay, that's unfair since they actually believed that the war had started, but still...).

I say let 'em come in. Give 'em a good meal. Pump 'em for information. And know, without a doubt, that this is a war that we will win.

Hopefully the cost won't be as high as we all fear they could be.

Read the story.

A Non-Sucky New York Times Article

The NY Times has a really interesting read. It's a sort of portrait of President Bush in this moment before he will likely declare a war. It's a pretty straight-forward and unbiased view of how he's handling this difficult time.

Take a look.

I wrote a book (no, really, one that was published and everything) last year. It was a hell of an interesting experience. I would love to be the biographer of President Bush. When you get that close to someone that you admire, there is a grave potential of disappointment. It's a risk I would love to take.

Odd Days

Some days you spend simply trying to figure out life. It's not easy.

I spent a ton of time in my car today, driving and listening to old Screaming Trees albums. I found myself thinking about all my relationships--the ones that counted, anyway. It's a pretty small number, and none of them have happy endings. I've been through love, I've been through marriage, I've been through one-night stands.

There is no redemption in that one night, you know. Just more emptiness the morning after.

With every single failure, I've felt a numbing sense of growing apathy. It's not passionate enough to be bitterness or cynicism. It's too sedate for that. More a sense of detachment and bemusement.

My ex-girlfriend (who I've politely renamed), The Girl Who Has Been Renamed, was on the tail-end of a number of bad relationships, herself. I remember her holding onto me so tightly one night, weeping, wanting to know why she couldn't be innocent again. I had no answer but to hold her and wish I could fix things for her, wish I could make everything okay.

It hurt when she left almost as much as it hurt to go through a divorce. Almost.

Eat an Animal for PETA's Sake

Are you one of the millions who happen to think that animals are yummy food? If so, follow the link below and join in the campaign to combat the arrogant bastards at PETA who are trying to tell us how to live our lives, and, on March 15th, eat a tasty animal in honor of PETA.

Beautiful.

Read about it here.

** Munchie Break **

Tasty wasabi flavored peas and Coca Cola.

Mmmmm.

Such tremendous honesty...

"My faith sustains me because I pray daily. I pray for guidance and wisdom and strength."

"I pray for peace, April. I pray for peace."

Many of my friends will despise these words. I am simply amazed by them.

Mr. President

"...I hope it can be done peacefully..."

I believe he may hope it can be done peacefully. I don't believe he believes it can be done peacefully.

I believe he may hope it can be done peacefully. I don't believe he believes it can be done peacefully.

Pledge of Allegiance

Alright, I've been wanting to talk about the Pledge controversy for a while. I just wanted to wait until I'd gotten my thoughts straight on the subject.

For all my agnostic and athiest friends, let me give you just a little back story on myself. I'm, sort of, a good little baptist boy. Sort of. Keep in mind that most of my closest friends are lesbians (including my ex-wife, but that's another story). I have tattoos and a piercing in a very sensitive part of my body. I'm a believer in finding a path to legal gay marriage. I think that most drugs should be legalized and controlled (and prostitution, too). Okay, so I'm a typical conservative member of the Republican party, right?

Maybe not, but I am a conservative member of the Republican party. That part was true.

All that said, in the name of legal consistency, the Pledge most certainly should not be forced on children in schools. I won't apologize for my religious beliefs--the same way that I won't harrass someone else for their creed (unless they're members of something like that Heaven's Gate cult--sorry, I just can't resist all temptations, can I? I also won't force my own beliefs down anyone else's throat. If I were an athiest, I wouldn't want to say those words, either.

I like the Pledge. I like the idea of teaching kids that not only does the government have responsibilities to govern effectively, morally, and intelligently, but we have the responsibility to help keep our government on the right path. Democracy (even a representative one) works best with the help of all the governed--not only in criticism, but in problem-solving. I hate to see the Pledge go. But it is inconsistent with current interpretation of the Constitution and legal thought to deny that there is a major disconnect between the seperation of church and state and forcing kids to say those word, "under god."

It's also worth noting that the "god" portion wasn't in the original Pledge, it was added much later.

Many of my athiest friends are a lot like some of my religious friends: they want to convert you to their way of thinking. I don't want to convert anyone. I don't want to be converted. I'm comfortable with the choices that I've made and the beliefs that I hold dear. And, as for you, well, if you want to talk about your beliefs, that's fine. I'll be happy to listen. But I'm far more interested in how you live your life than the God you do or don't believe in.

Girls Gone Mild

The Girls Gone Wild phenomenon seems to be meeting resistance from the mayor of Panama City Beach, Florida. The mayor, in fact, is threatening to throw women who bare themselves, and the film crews that capture them, in jail. That should take a tremendous amount of fun out of the next video.

All I'm saying is that I'm not buying that one. And I'm disappointed. Damn no-fun havin' mayor.

Darnit.

Read the story here.

Helen Thomas

Can I convey how incredibly happy I am that she was snubbed last night by the White House? I mean, she's stepped so far beyond the bounds of civilized discourse as a reporter recently, that I'm amazed she was even allowed in. She's not a journalist, really; she's far too involved with her own point of view to ever provide anything resembling a balanced opinion.

Kind of like me, but with press credentials.

I certainly don't begrudge her the opportunity to spread her opinions, but if she wants the maintain the respect and position she built up over years of covering the White House, she should understand that civility is her friend.

Read the Wash Times Article

Stalin, My Stalin...

If you're going to write about Papa, this is certainly the best way to do so...

Read Stalin's Obit

(Much thanks to The Onion for keeping world politics fun)

Good Rockies/Bad Rockies

Okay, the Rocks won their game against San Diego today. That is good. The Rocks gave up 10 runs. That is bad. The Rocks scored 16. That is good. The Rocks are probably just teasing me again. That is bad.

See my dillema?

Good Rockies, Bad Rockies. Hell, I would just really like it if they would stop sucking for a living.

Goofy Peaceniks #1

See, it's hard for me to take the hard-core anti-war left seriously. They do goofy things that really just invite giggling. For example, the women holding the signs saying "Women Say Yes to Men Who Say No." Hell, if that's the only criteria for choosing a sexual partner, I'm just going to go do something more important with my time (and then lie about my opinion on the conflict when I'm feeling really, um, needy).

I've heard and read some who had quite a bit intelligent to say on the subject. The questioning of whether following a pre-emptive war policy is a good idea, for example. I'm happy to listen and talk to people who stay within the realm of an intelligent conversation. I invite it and I enjoy it. But the hard line anti-war types I classify with the hard-line right-leaning people who say things like, "We should just nuke the entire Middle East and claim all that oil for ourselves." Both groups of people are irrational and beyond the bounds of a normal conversation.

Message to both groups: if you want to be taken seriously, think and act seriously. Until then, we will mercilessly mock you.

David Frum has a bit to say about the subject on National Review today. Read his article.

Sleep in for Peace!

Anti-war organizers want everyone to take the day off tomorrow. Don't go to work. Don't go to school. Just sleep in or pray or do a bong hit for peace instead.

Now, I'm a little torn. I don't agree with them, but I'm all about sleeping in. On the other hand, if enough people decide to Hit the Snooze Alarm for Saddam, then the roads will be nice and clear for me in the morning. I like driving on holidays when the roads aren't so congested that it takes me forever to get to work.

Damn, I hate these moral dillemas...

If you'd like to read more...

Tony Blair Just Might Make It...

I was never a big Tony Blair fan. His close relationship with our own former President Clinton and his strong desire to pull the UK into the EU (I really wish that we would invite the UK and Turkey to join a widely (and illogically, at least in reference to title) expanded NAFTA, but that's an entry for another day) left me feeling pretty cold towards the guy. Since 9/11, I've been tremendously impressed with him--and a little contrite, too. He is taking a stance that is, by all appearances, wildly unpopular within his own party, heavily criticized by the people he leads, and leaves him vulnerable to a political attack from his opponents.

This man is putting a lot on the line, on a very personal level, to support the US in our time of need. My hat is off to the Prime Minister.

Today, The Sun reported that maybe, just maybe, this wouldn't be the political end of our staunch friend, PM Blair. I still don't like some of his ideas, but I've grown to like Tony Blair, and I hope The Sun's story is accurate.

Read the story.

(And a thanks for National Review Online for pointing this story out.)

Sarah Silverman and Jimmy Kimmel

I'm sitting here watching the Jimmy Kimmel show and laughing my ass off. Sarah Silverman doesn't appear to be overly bright and she's said some stuff that is just wrong. For example, when asked if she's dating someone, her response was, "Some faggot. No, I don't mean it in a homosexual way, I mean, you know, a faggot." Somehow, I don't think Andrew Sullivan would approve. That said, I laughed my ass off when she was sitting in the old folks home singing, "Your gonna die soon."

I've just realized that my sense of taste, at least in reference to late night TV, is absolutely horrible.

I always liked Jimmy Kimmel and I hope this works out for him. It's still pretty rugged, but it seems to be getting better.

And, aside from being funny, Sarah is drop-dead freakin' gorgeous. Makes me long for the days when she would show up on Mr. Show.

Sigh.

Update: Why the heck are you people looking at this entry, and where did you come from, anyway? No, really...

Mike Johnson Review

I finally got around to picking up Mike Johnson's most recent CD, What Would You Do. If you know Mike Johnson's solo work, you know what to expect. If, however, your exposure to him is limited to his work with Dinosaur Jr, you'll probably be surprised by the direction that he goes on his own. The music is calm and melodic, mining the same vein as his work with Mark Lanegan.

Whereas Lanegan's work, though, feels more oriented towards blues and folk, Johnson tends towards country with rock flourishes. A complaint I've had about all his music is that his voice is mixed so low that it tends to get lost beneath the music-a pity since the lyrics are always interesting, sometimes beautiful, and often very touching. Unfortunately, that complaint remains with most of the songs on this new disc. What Would You Do starts out at a snails pace with both "Arise" and "Names" lulling the listener with a quiet, almost hypnotic beauty. Neither of the songs is likely to stay in your mind and you won't find yourself singing them in the shower, but they set the mood well. What follows, "Remember", is one of the highlights of the CD.

Still slow, still calm, it has a sense of darkness and foreboding that feels like that tender caress when she's saying goodbye. The guitar work is precise and perfect. "With the pain of your past/ I will always remember" he sings in his whispery-low voice. It's an intimate voice, low enough that you feel like leaning in to hear him better, to see the look in his eyes as he tells the story. This is Johnson at his absolute best-inviting the listener to join in something very private with music that may not be genius, but still manages to be perfect for that moment.

The only song that really moves into rock territory on the CD is "Come Back Again." It actually manages to sound like a latter-day Screaming Trees without the overt distortion. The rest of the songs range from the serviceable to the beautiful (the instrumental "Requiem" really needs to be on a soundtrack, Jason Albertini's piano being a surprising focal point).

Another memorable moment is the swaying sound of "Deliver Me from My Enemies." Johnson sings with a religious fervor that I wouldn't have expected (although I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the sincerity of it). His is not a forceful voice, it's not a powerful voice, but it does have an emotional honesty that carries its own weight. Unfortunately, "Deliver Me" is followed by "Only for Today," one of the disc's weakest moments-a paint by numbers moment that only disappoints in that it sounds as if you've heard him sing this song before. In fact, the entire disc would have felt tighter if this and it's follow-up "The Introduction" were left to be b-sides or outtakes. It's not that they're particularly bad, but that they disrupt a flow that would've moved into "Dirty Hands" beautifully.

This is a solid effort from an artist who deserves attention, although it still lags a bit behind his earlier release, I Feel Alright. Next time around, you can't help but hope that he goes for a shorter CD with a tighter set of music rather than adding in a few unneccesary tracks. What Would You Do is worth finding, but only after you've managed to bask in the melancholy glory of I Feel Alright.

(7/10)

Terrorist Bitch Speaks at Duke

Why do colleges invite people like Laura Whitehorn to speak at their schools? I'm not talking about people with unpopular or controversial ideas, I'm talking about terrorists.

She is a convicted, and admitted, bomber. She once said that the lives of the people in the ruling class didn't matter. Somehow, her opinions on political topics are desirable. Why?

How about AIDs activists who toil within the system? Who behave in an ethical and intelligent manner to affect change within the system? These people do exist. How about inviting Andrew Sullivan, a gay activist with a sense of humor, passion, and understanding? No, instead Laura fucking Whitehorn is invited.

Would the schools ever imagine inviting a person who had bombed an Planned Parenthood? No, of course not. And rightly so. People who step that far outside the bounds of our laws and our systems deserve to be marginalized. They deserve to be ignored because theirs is the anger of a child; they believe that their wants far outweigh the safety and needs of others.

And don't dare to wave the free speech banner in my face. Freedom of speech does not mean that anybody is obligated to give you a platform for your opinions.

Duke, I'm disappointed in you.

Read the story here.

Despair for Iran

I both despair for and have great hope for Iran. It's obvious that the people of Iran want to move towards a more Western lifestyle and government, but, like so many in the Middle East, are blocked by a repressive theocracy. I have friends who say that I shouldn't want to see democracy imposed on the rest of the world, that I shouldn't assume that other cultures want what I have. Fair enough. But in Iran, the desire is fairly obvious.

Read the story.

Givin' Some Love to a Clinton

Hillary gettin' her war on.

Thanks to Drudge for sharing this link with us all.

Now, while it wasn't the strongest statement of support in the world, it is a step that the majority of elected Democrats aren't willing to take. And, as much as I've called her an opportunistic carpet-bagger in the past, I have to give her credit for taking a pretty unpopular stance in her own party.

Maybe she'll turn out to be the Clinton with something resembling personal strength.

Whatever. Much love to Hillary for this.

Disgusted by Human Shields

Understand that I don't like the human shields. I don't like what they want to do. I think that they are just a baby-step away from being traitors. That said, I would never have disparaged their courage. Now, though, that they are leaving their mission because the danger is growing--well, isn't that the whole point? If it wasn't dangerous, if there weren't the potential for loss, would it be meaningful. I can't say I'm disappointed in them--I had no expectations.

I can, though, say that I'm disgusted by their unwillingness to sacrifice.

Read the story here.

Monday Morning Spam

When I get to work every Monday morning, my inbox is filled with the most amazing offers imaginable, and I marvel at the images that spammers have felt free to share with me. I've had the same email address (not the one connected with this site) for nearly a decade and have watched the spam start from a trickle 7 years ago to the flood that it is today.

First, I'd like to give a shout out to American Lending Partners, but, sadly, I, Paul, am not a Homeowner. Next, in the monday morning spam awards are the kind folks at Your Family Tree who implore me to "Trace (My) Family Tree at no cost." Sorry, the roots of that tree grew pretty shallow. There isn't much tracing possible.

My favorite might be Sarah who wants to introduce me to "C um Loving Girls!" I love the fact that Sarah was bright enough to use that little extra space in Cum to help circumvent spam filters around the globe. Very clever, Sarah. Very clever.

Apparently, news of my (apparently) small penis has gotten around. The good folks at enlargmentmanual.net want me to "Gain the size (I) deserve." I'm a little embarassed at my apparent infirmity, though, and have decided to continue to hide in my home and never date again. Women everywhere are celebrating.

Okay, I know you all get your own damned spam, and don't really need or want to read mine, so I'll let you off the hook here and not list the nearly 588 ads that filled my mailbox over the weekend. Happy Monday, y'all.

More Human Shield Bits

Mark Goldblatt at National Review has a great article on one of the human shields. It's worth reading for entertainment value if nothing else.

Read it.

High School Censorship

A kid was told to go home when he wore a shirt that could have been construed of supportive of terrorism. His parents are, of course, suing because his "right" to free speech was violated. After reading the article, I'm not sure how I feel about this.

See, I don't believe that high school students have the same rights that adults do. They can't vote, they can't drive, they can't seek medical care without the approval of a caretaker. They simply do not have the same rights that adults do, nor do they have the same responsibilities that adults do. So, the right to free speach is not a complete right--but schools should allow some room for, and even encourage, exploration and individualistic thought. The school needs to shepherd kids, always keeping their well-being in mind, but moving towards the skills of critical thinking and ethical consistency.

After reading the article, I really don't think the school should have sent the kid home. In the same breath, I think it's well within the rights of the school to do so.

Read the article.

Dawn Olsen Goes Kinda Sorta AWOL

Check it out.

Not that she knows me or cares what my opinion on the subject is, but I wish Dawn would reconsider. She's been one of the most consistently interesting (even when I don't agree with her) commentators that I read regularly.

Damnit.

Peter Forsberg, You're My Hero

Twenty-five or thirty games ago, I was ready to write the Avs off for the season. I figured they'd dropped far enough back that it would be damned near impossible for them to crawl back into the upper echelon. How freakin' wrong was I?

Now, I'm not ready to say they're going to take home another Cup, but it is impressive just how good this team has been in the second half of the season. Peter Forsberg, in particular, has been (to help perpetuate a cliche) on fire. The entire team is playing much better defense and Patrick Roy is playing like the St. Patrick of old. It should teach me not to count a team with that much talent out of the running until the games are all played.

If we're really, really lucky, we'll get another match-up with the Detroit Red Wings in the play-offs. Last year was heart breaking for us Colorado fans, and we want a re-match!

Nekkidness

Now, I'm not sending nekkid pictures out or anything, but have I conveyed to y'all just how much I like nekkid women?

A lot. That's how much. A whole lot.

Thank you for listening.

Country Lost in Time

I wish I could start ignoring the clock, too. Of course, if you asked the people at the office, they might tell you that I already have a pretty tenuous grip on the concept of punctuality, anyway.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/02/28/offbeat.venezuela.time.reut/index.html