Light on the Sacred, Heavy on the Profane
Thursday, January 29, 2004
 
Sharon Must Be a Skilled Politician


Cause my local bartender, who's Israeli, tells me he and his family support Sharon's wall and disengagement plan. His family are all bleeding heart leftys who blame the intifada on right-wing Brooklyn hasidim who settle in the West Bank. But they do want to see the violence stopped, or minimized. They see Sharon's wall as the only game in town.
 
The Emperor Gets It, Joe Doesn't


The Emperor summarizes the Democratic Primaries so far, and hits the nail right on the head:
Holy Joe? All we can say is "Holy Moses, Joe, when the fuck will you realize that you've been stomped into the ground and concede?"

You've got two main things going against you in this field:

1) You're not a circus freak, at least not obviously so, so you're more likely to put voters to sleep before they even find the ballot than you are to make them vote for you.

2) You're Jewish. I mean, how flippin' ignorant do you have to be to throw your name in the hat when it comes to choosing the presidential candidate for the party of anti-Semitism? Did your mother drop you on your head too many times when you were a kid, you tembel? Are you completely meshugah, or are you just a sucker for punishment? You might as well try to run on the al-Fatah candidate. Actually, considering where the sympathies of the Dhimmicrats lie, that might earn you some votes.

Exactly. If you ask me, in running for President Joe Lieberman is only providing cover for the Jew-hating leftists that are so prevalent in both the leadership and the grassroots of the Democratic Party.

But Joe can do what he wants. It's a free country, no thanks to the Democrats.

Monday, January 26, 2004
 
Angry Sightseeing: Only in DC


So I went down to DC a day before CPAC started, so I could do some sightseeing. No museums or anything, that would take too long. Just a couple of hours walking around, looking at the buildings I hadn't seen in person since I was 10 or so. The Capitol building was beautiful, though it wasn't on top of much of a hill. Why do they call it Capitol Hill? The White House was nice, the Lincoln monument was regal, the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial was sad, The Washington Monument was, well, phallic.

But every now and then, one walks past a building like the headquarters of the EPA, and he wants to scream, "You fucking commies! You filthy fifth columnists! Don't you dare try to impose your murderous ideology on the most free nation on Earth under the guise of Environmental Protection!" Or perhaps one is peacefully meandering down the street when he realizes he's passing the front door of the headquarters of the IRS. His fists clench, the bile rises in his throat. Do you know how difficult it is for one to fight down the urge to pick up the nearest tree branch and use it to knock down the first person he sees exiting that door? Also to resist violently violating that person's nether regions with it, all the while screaming over and over, "Motherfucker, Get your hand out my pocket!"

It's tough, I assure you.
 
Better Late Than Never


Driving down to CPAC with KaShei, we listened to the State of the Union Address. One thing I heard bears commenting on:
We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare. Yet it is mistaken, and condescending, to assume that whole cultures and great religions are incompatible with liberty and self-government. I believe that God has planted in every human heart the desire to live in freedom. And even when that desire is crushed by tyranny for decades, it will rise again. (Applause.)

As long as the Middle East remains a place of tyranny and despair and anger, it will continue to produce men and movements that threaten the safety of America and our friends. So America is pursuing a forward strategy of freedom in the greater Middle East. We will challenge the enemies of reform, confront the allies of terror, and expect a higher standard from our friend. To cut through the barriers of hateful propaganda, the Voice of America and other broadcast services are expanding their programming in Arabic and Persian -- and soon, a new television service will begin providing reliable news and information across the region. I will send you a proposal to double the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, and to focus its new work on the development of free elections, and free markets, free press, and free labor unions in the Middle East. And above all, we will finish the historic work of democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, so those nations can light the way for others, and help transform a troubled part of the world. (Applause.)

America is a nation with a mission, and that mission comes from our most basic beliefs. We have no desire to dominate, no ambitions of empire. Our aim is a democratic peace -- a peace founded upon the dignity and rights of every man and woman. America acts in this cause with friends and allies at our side, yet we understand our special calling: This great republic will lead the cause of freedom. (Applause.)
UPDATE: Blogger ate the rest of the post last night, so this is how it ended.

When I heard this, I turned to Kashei and said, "This is the first I've heard of this." She looked at me as if I was a moron. "From the President, I mean, or anyone else in government." "Us folks who read National Review have known this was the plan from Day One, but what percentage of America reads National Review?" (paraphrases)

Kashei and I are aware that we live in bubbles. She asks her nonpolitical friends about current events, so she can tell what the non politically obsessed are thinking. For my part, my nonpolitical friends are all commies. There are, for the most part, no political discussions among us. I don't watch TV, I don't read the New York Times, and the lefty blogs I read are not only close to the center, but are few and far between. My only exposure to what the networks, the NYT, and the lefty blogs are saying is what I pick up from strangers in bars, who just assume I'm a commie, too. They start spouting off to me, "Where are the WMD's?" and this is the first I hear about WMD's being the rational for the Iraq campaign in the War on Terror. I just don't realize how powerful the echo chamber of network TV and lefty newspapers is until I hear everybody asking about WMD's.

Those of us who are politically active on the right knew from the start that the rationale for the Iraq campaign was, ostensibly, enforcing the cease fire agreement obtained at the end of Gulf War I. We also knew there were real reasons why the Iraq campaign was necesssary:

Firstly, installing a democracy in the Middle East, thereby encouraging the Iranians to overthrow the mullahs.
Secondly, obtaining military bases in Iraq, thereby giving us the ability to invade Ba'athist Syria should that become necessary.
Thirdly, to upgrade Iraq's oil drilling facilities with today's technology and reintroduce it's supplies to the world oil market. This last step is directed at squeezing "Saudi" Arabia's economy. Iraq has the potential to become the lowest cost producer in the region, supplanting "Saudi" Arabia and enabling Iraq to increase production past OPEC targets, thus lowering the price of oil. As the price of oil is lowered, "Saudi" Arabia's princes have less money to fund Wahhabi madrassas and Islamic terrorism. In addition, once the princes realize we have them by the short and curlys, they will be more cooperative in the War on Terror.

So the President has effectively silenced the "Where are the WMD's?" refrain. In the short term, this gives him an advantage going into his reelection campaign, no doubt. But, he could instead have cited the evidence we have so far and the difficulties we've had in searching for them. Or perhaps he could have said that what WMD's we are looking for were supposed to be destroyed under the terms of the Gulf War I ceasefire agreement. Without evidence of their destruction, the UN assumed that they exist. Perhaps they were destroyed, but the burden of proof was on Saddam.

The President would have been wiser to choose one of those courses, because he gave up a long term strategic advantage in revealing, in part, our true motives for deposing Saddam Hussein. For now, we rely on many nations to help us with our War on Terror. Some are true allies, some are allies in name only and some are terror sponsors that we have co-opted, for now. It seems to me that if we need the help of terror sponsors, it might not be wise to show our hand when it comes to regime change. After all, if Pakistan knows it's on our regime change list, why would they continue to help us round up insurgents around the Afghanistan border? President Bush will surely scare these nations away from us with too much talk of "transform[ing] a troubled part of the world."

So it appears that President Bush has once again let his short sighted political considerations interfere with long term goals and/or important principles. (See: Campaign Finance Reform, Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants) But there is a small silver lining to this cloud: It might be better for our so-called friends to wonder if they're on our regime change list than be ignorant to the fact that the list is a LOT longer than Iraq, Iran and North Korea. We might be able to wring more concessions and cooperation from them.

But, all in all, I think those 3 paragraphs of the SOTU address belong on the steadily growing list of Dubya's dumb moves.

Having said that, isn't it funny that the commie-symp media actually helped our war effort over the past bunch of months? The WMD's were a great cover story while it lasted. I hope they keep up the refrain for the next 5 years.
Sunday, January 25, 2004
 
It's Always Nice to Meet the Man who Kicked Al Sharpton's Ass on TV


OK,OK. 9 days without posting. What can I tell you? I've been busy.

Went to the fundraiser for The Congress of Racial Equality on Jan 19, Martin Luther King Day. There they gave awards to: David Keene, of the American Conservative Union, Brigadier General Vincent Brooks, of the US Army and Justice Janice Rogers Brown, of the Supreme Court of California

Had a wonderful time, thanks to my company, Bob and Stephanie, despite Stephanie ragging on me for using the bathroom so many times. (Does she think being a drunk is an easy hobby?)

2 things stand out:

When Justice Brown accepted her award, her speech contained lines of advice her mother told her. One of those was:
"Someone will tear down in one day what you spent your entire life building. Build it anyway."
When General Brooks accepted his award, after his speech he said:
I only accept this on behalf of all the men and women serving in combat."


Both "quotes" are actually paraphrases, but rest assured, the spirit of their remarks echoes in the above words. In addition, I had the distinct pleasure of meeting Roy Innis, who is the man mentioned in the title of this entry.