45th Anniversary: La Brigada Asalto 2506

And the Bay of Pigs Invasion.

Val Prieto & co. at Babalu Blog (where else?) has it covered:

My father in law was a member of La Brigada 2506 and fought in the Bay of Pigs in what was called Operation Mongoose by the US Government. He has a million stories to tell, everything from the moment he decided to join La Brigada and fight for the freedom of Cuba, to the training, the embarcation, the invasion, the battle on the beaches, his capture and incarceration and the subsequent torture -- physical and mental -- at the hands of fidel castro, to his release and reunification with his wife and daughter here in the States. My words can do his story no justice, but someday it will be told. Until then, Edgar, Happy Birthday. The following articles are for you and your brothers and sisters in arms to assure you that this generation, our generation, has not and will not forget your sacrifice and love for una Cuba libre.

Mark Steyn on Iran

A perfect metaphor:

You know what's great fun to do if you're on, say, a flight from Chicago to New York and you're getting a little bored? Why not play being President Ahmadinejad? Stand up and yell in a loud voice, "I've got a bomb!" Next thing you know the air marshal will be telling people, "It's OK, folks. Nothing to worry about. He hasn't got a bomb." And then the second marshal would say, "And even if he did have a bomb it's highly unlikely he'd ever use it." And then you threaten to kill the two Jews in row 12 and the stewardess says, "Relax, everyone. That's just a harmless rhetorical flourish." And then a group of passengers in rows 4 to 7 point out, "Yes, but it's entirely reasonable of him to have a bomb given the threatening behavior of the marshals and the cabin crew."

Random Illegal Thoughts

Visiting Permanently and Other Things I Don't Understand, a good post on immigration issues by the good doctor, Dr. Demarche.

I agree that we should secure the border first, then decide what to do about the illegal aliens already here. Why is securing the border controversial?

I have a retired Japanese-born friend who became a naturalized US citizen and made his career here in the US. His oldest son is Japanese, but grew up here, then decided to try Japan out for a while. He wasn't able to fit in there, and so is trying to move back to the US. But since he left the US, he hasn't been able to get a visa to come back. They have applied, and have waited three years already. No telling when his visa will be approved. His entire life is pretty much on hold. But had he just come on a tourist visa and stayed illegally, well, that would be fine, apparently. I'm thinking of counseling him to do so, actually. Why not?

Why can the latino & immigrant communities stage demonstrations with tens of thousands, but there's no group that is organizing counter-demonstrations with tens of thousands? Could such a group be started, and what would it look like? In fact, every interest group out there has an organization or ten, but there's not one for your basic American citizen. At least, not one I know of. Organization counts; a small, strident group can have more impact than a large, quiet one. I'm tired of being in a quiet group.

Signs and slogans for a good border security / anti-illegal immigration rally:

Why are YOU above the law? (maybe written over an image of the Mexican flag?)

Amnesty = Injustice

Justice for Law-Abiding People

Say 'NO!' to the Reconquistadores!

I (heart) *LEGAL* Immigrants!

Thank You *LEGAL* Immigrants!

What's wrong with illegal immigrants? What's wrong with vigilantes?

*Border Security
*Easier Immigration
*NO Amnesty

Don't break into my home at night, then ask me to feed you breakfast.

Want more crime? Reward it!

We Are Either
A Nation of Laws
- Or -
A Lawless Nation

A quiet, law-abiding group of links:

Protesting, A Job for Immigrants?
Reconquistadores
A little bit of agitation at Michelle Malkin's
Why so many US flags?
Big Instapundit roundup

Feel free to add your own slogans and links, and comments of course, in the comments.

Reading about the Iraq Invasion

I'm doing a little research on the war in Iraq and I'm interested in reading the best factual work I can find, as well as the best arguments for and against the invasion of Iraq.

I'm specifically looking for books, articles, papers, etc., whether online or off.

Any suggestions?

Happy March 10th!

Why? Oh, I guess because it's Friday, and since my last class for the week was yesterday, my spring break starts today, and, er, my, aren't the pear blossoms pretty?

Has anyone else noticed that the Japanese put a lot more meaning into blossoms than we in the West seem to? For example, plum blossoms are the first of the year and represent first love. We put more meaning into flowers, I think, like what different colors of roses mean. Anyone have an angle on that?

Also, just out of curiosity, what would represent first love / young love in the West? Anyone know of a flower / blossom / other symbol that fits?

Well, off to work. See ya 'round, and enjoy the day!

Moderate Muslims?

I posted about the Free Muslims Coalition earlier, noting a moderate Muslim group. Interestingly, a Washington Post article by Fleming Rose, the Jyllands-Posten editor who commissioned and published the 12 cartoons, points out some moderate Muslim victories in Denmark:

Since the Sept. 30 publication of the cartoons, we have had a constructive debate in Denmark and Europe about freedom of expression, freedom of religion and respect for immigrants and people's beliefs. Never before have so many Danish Muslims participated in a public dialogue -- in town hall meetings, letters to editors, opinion columns and debates on radio and TV. We have had no anti-Muslim riots, no Muslims fleeing the country and no Muslims committing violence. The radical imams who misinformed their counterparts in the Middle East about the situation for Muslims in Denmark have been marginalized. They no longer speak for the Muslim community in Denmark because moderate Muslims have had the courage to speak out against them.

In January, Jyllands-Posten ran three full pages of interviews and photos of moderate Muslims saying no to being represented by the imams. They insist that their faith is compatible with a modern secular democracy. A network of moderate Muslims committed to the constitution has been established, and the anti-immigration People's Party called on its members to differentiate between radical and moderate Muslims, i.e. between Muslims propagating sharia law and Muslims accepting the rule of secular law. The Muslim face of Denmark has changed, and it is becoming clear that this is not a debate between "them" and "us," but between those committed to democracy in Denmark and those who are not.

Still, I think the cartoons now have a place in two separate narratives, one in Europe and one in the Middle East. In the words of the Somali-born Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the integration of Muslims into European societies has been sped up by 300 years due to the cartoons; perhaps we do not need to fight the battle for the Enlightenment all over again in Europe. The narrative in the Middle East is more complex, but that has very little to do with the cartoons.

This is good to know, and it is good to know the moderates seem to have won some battles in Denmark. What will the net effect be? I don't know, but I do think this cycle of events has kicked a few more Westerners awake, particularly Europeans. I hope it leads them to address the real issues, with moderate Muslims where they can be found, instead of burying their heads in the sands of submission (aka, tolerance). I also have to agree that the narrative in the Middle East has little to do with the cartoons.

On the other hand, Muslim commentator Mansoor Ijaz tells us in the LA Times:

The first truth is that most Muslim ideologues are hypocrites. What has Osama bin Laden done for the victims of the 2004 tsunami or the shattered families who lost everything in the Pakistani earthquake last year? He did not build one school, offer one loaf of bread or pay for one vaccination. And yet he, not the devout Muslim doctors from California and Iowa who repair broken limbs and lives in the snowy peaks of Kashmir, speaks the loudest for what Muslims allegedly stand for. He has succeeded in presenting himself as the defender of Islam's poor, and the Western media has taken his jihadist message all the way to the bank.

...

The second truth — one that the West needs to come to grips with — is that there is no such human persona as a "moderate Muslim." You either believe in the oneness of God or you don't. You either believe in the teachings of his prophet or you don't. You either learn those teachings and apply them to the circumstances of life in the country you have chosen to live in, or you shouldn't live there.

...

But to look at angry Islam's reaction on television each night forces the question of what might be possible if all the lost energy of thousands of rioting Muslims went into the villages of Aceh to rebuild lost homes or into Kashmir to construct schools.

In fact, the most glaring truth is that Islam's mobsters fear the West has it right: that we have perfected the very system Islam's holy scriptures urged them to learn and practice. And having failed in their mission to lead their masses, they seek any excuse to demonize those of us in the West and to try to bring us down. They know they are losing the ideological struggle for hearts and minds, for life in all its different dimensions, and so they prepare themselves, and us, for Armageddon by starting fires everywhere in a display of Islamic unity intended to galvanize the masses they cannot feed, clothe, educate or house.

On moderate Muslims, specifically, I don't think Ijaz understands what we mean by 'moderate Muslims,' so I guess I should explain what I mean: tolerant Muslims. Since he is advocating Muslim tolerance, I think his definition is different. I think he means 'half-way Muslims,' which is not what I mean at all.

Still, that last paragraph is excellent: Islam's mobsters and terrorists are terrified that the West has it right, so terrified that they must, at all costs, prove to themselves that they are still relevant by destroying the West, first by humbling it into submission, then gradually by taking over. I don't know if the West has 'perfected the very system that Islam's holy scriptures urged them to learn' or not. I don't know enough to comment on that part, but I agree with the rest. The terrorists themselves are acting out of the all-consuming fear that the West has made them irrelevant.

If Rose is to be believed, some Muslims, like the moderates in Denmark, see this and are taking action to become relevant to the West not through violence, but through assimilating to it and practicing their religion within the boundaries of liberal democracy. This inspires hope that peaceful resolutions can work, hope that we are winning over some Muslim hearts and minds, but the rest of the world right now leaves me very uneasy about the foundations of that hope. Is it silly to say that I hope my hope is well-founded?

Well, anyway, here's hoping ...

Free Muslims Coalition

This looks like a promising organization. Here's what seems to be their manifesto:

Taking our religion back one Muslim at a time

We believe in the re-interpretation of Islam for the 21st century where terrorism is not justified under any circumstances.

We believe in the separation of religion and state.

We believe that democracy is the best form of government.

We believe in the promotion of secularism in all forms of political activity.

We believe that equality for women is an inalienable right.

We believe that religion is a personal relationship between the individual and his or her God and is not to be forced on anyone.

Rent-a-mobs, Eh? Oh, and, Yes, Egypt Too

Instapundit links an Amir Taheri article on the Cartoon Wars:

The Muslim Brotherhood's position, put by one of its younger militants, Tariq Ramadan--who is, strangely enough, also an adviser to the British home secretary--can be summed up as follows: It is against Islamic principles to represent by imagery not only Muhammad but all the prophets of Islam; and the Muslim world is not used to laughing at religion. Both claims, however, are false.
...
The claim that the ban on depicting Muhammad and other prophets is an absolute principle of Islam is also refuted by history. Many portraits of Muhammad have been drawn by Muslim artists, often commissioned by Muslim rulers. There is no space here to provide an exhaustive list, but these are some of the most famous ...
...
Now to the second claim, that the Muslim world is not used to laughing at religion. That is true if we restrict the Muslim world to the Brotherhood and its siblings in the Salafist movement, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda. But these are all political organizations masquerading as religious ones.

Well, that's pretty interesting. He calls the rioters 'rent-a-mobs,' which makes sense to me. I've heard of the same thing in China, where the government buses show up at the schools, the students are told to get on, they head to the US embassy & are issued protest signs as they step off. The students have a field day; government sanctioned anarchy! Sweet! If you look at the photos of some of the Chinese protests last year, a lot of the 'angry protesters' are grinning and really seem to be having fun.

Anyway, remember the claim that an Egyptian newspaper had printed the cartoons back in October 2005? Well, Belmont Club links to scans of it at Egyptian Sandmonkey, an Egyptian blog. Very cool find.

In the comments to that post, a gentleman by the name of Mohamed charges Jyllands-Posten with hypocrisy:

By the way, hypocricy goes both ways, the guardian published an article on Monday about the same paper (yes the same exact hysterical defender of free speech) refusing to publish some cartoons three years ago citing they'd be insulting to christians and would be considered as unneccessary provocation.

Completely different situation. First, the Christians weren't threatening free speech, so what would be the point? The Jyllands-Posten editor made it very clear the Muhammed cartoons were published to test the boundaries, to see if, after the murder of Theo van Gogh for making a film that attacked Islam, Denmark was still free.

Second, a great many newspapers and magazines in the West have already published cartoons lampooning and insulting Jesus, Christianity and Christians. It's been done; it is, in fact, cliche, which is about the same in the publishing world as not being halal, eh?

This Is Evil ...

The People's First Suidaetic Aviation Regiment test pilot

'Anti-Cartoon Criminal Attacks Go Online'

Or so the BBC headline should have read. According to the article, more than 1600 Western websites have been defaced by hacker groups operating out of Muslim countries. The defacements have included many calls for a violent response to the cartoons' publication.

Defacing a website is not 'protest,' it's a crime.

###

Previous posts on this topic:
Following the Cartoon Wars
Questions for Mo
A Caricature of Islam (link roundup)

Following the Cartoon Wars

Instapundit Notes:

1. The New York Press editorial staff shows what they're made of:

The editorial staff of the alternative weekly New York Press walked out today, en masse, after the paper's publishers backed down from printing the Danish cartoons that have become the center of a global free-speech fight.

Hooah!

2. Iraqi blogger Alaa reacts to the cartoons:

In this respect I would like to draw attention to the statement issued by the venerable Al-Sistani, who while deprecating the blasphemous sacrilege, nevertheless clearly lays the blame on the extremists and Takfiris for the harm done to the image of Islam in the World, and need I remind you of the religious status of Al-Sistani. The rage of the Islamic world would be far more appropriate if it is directed against those who blow up mosques during prayer time, kidnap murder and torture innocent travelers, and all the other repertoire of atrocities committed in the name of Islam, It is this that is the real blasphemy and real affront to the name and reputation of our religion and its great founder the Prohpet (PBU), and not some silly cartoons in an obscure Danish paper that nobody would have noticed were it not for this artificial uproar of which the real agenda and purpose is all too apparent .

Both are worth reading in their entirety.

In related blogging, Gateway Pundit has been bloggin' up a storm on this. Please note I have not checked the accuracy of these, but they seem legit.
Gateway Pundit links to a Freedom for Egyptians post claiming the Danish cartoons were published in Egypt five months ago, resulting in no riots.
He then points us to evidence that

[t]he organisation Islamic Society in Denmark toured the Middle-East to create awareness about the cartoons, bringing 3 additional images, which HAD NEVER been published in any media source. Evidently, the originals were not offensive enough for the trip so they had to add these three...

He had scans of the three additional cartoons and has more information on the activities of this group.

While I haven't checked out Gateway Pundit's story, The Belmont Club has verified one of the additional cartoons, and that it was shown by the BBC who mistakenly claimed it was one of the Jyllands-Posten cartoons. The BBC regrets the error, I'm sure.

Belmont Club also gives a very interesting analysis that you'll have to read nearly all of to get to this:

I think this time the terror puppet masters have miscalculated. They should have remembered that the key to every successful protection racket is keeping your own muscle from making independent demands and maintaining the rate of extortion low enough to make it less trouble to pay than to fight.

So maybe this is about a little more than just 12 cartoons of Muhammed. Obviously, in dictatorships, the government has to aquiesce to any public demonstrations. What are the political goals being pursued in this fight? Hmmm ...

For some very interesting thoughts, I've been following the intriguing blog All Things Beautiful. Her posts, Is There Any Difference Between Exquisitely Refined Multicultural Sensitivity And Shari'a:

But upon reflection, perhaps we as a nation can for once sit back during the predominantly European contest of who are the courageous and who are the cowards. Because, as The Telegraph affirms, "for let us not delude ourselves: it is organized violence, or the threat of violence, that has driven the decisions that have been made in the past week".

We as a nation are far beyond the point of rhetoric in proving our resolve to protect and defend our secular democracy and our civil liberties, and, may I remind you all, those of our allies too!

and Is Western Liberalism Modifying Its Core Beliefs:

At the core are the implicit flaws inherent in the dictum of both Multiculturalism and Political Correctness, best summarized by the brilliant, but fatally academic (I'll get to the 'fatally' in a moment) Professor Stanley Fish essay, 'Boutique Multiculturalism, or Why Liberals Are Incapable of Thinking about Hate Speech'.

are particularly insightful, I thought.

Anyway, over at Captain's Quarters, Captain Ed posts:

A few people have already reminded backers of the cartoonists of Christian outrage over Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ", a picture of a crucifix dunked into a beaker of urine. Other artistic depictions of Christian iconography have also gathered vitriol from religious and conservative circles, such as Chris Ofili's "Holy Virgin Mary".

However, the two issues differ in one important aspect. The exhibitions of the two artists mentioned received federal funds for staging these pieces of "art", and the reaction to their poor taste came from the support of the National Endowment for the Arts. No one disputed the right of the artists to create their offensive displays, but what really rankled most was that their money went into funding their exhibitions.

Actually, the two issues differ in one important aspect: Christians didn't threaten to kill the artists or bomb the museums, nor did they burn down an embassy, or even anyone's flag. The other aspects are of far lesser importance.

Finally, sorry to give you even more of what you've probably already read at Instapundit, but this had to be linked. Jewish Street Explodes:

April 1, 2006. New York -- In response to a series of offensive cartoons published in an Iranian newspaper and subsequently printed in every newspaper around the globe, including many which had refused to publish the now-forgotten "anti-Muslim" cartoons last winter, the "Jewish street" erupted. At Brandeis University, a course on Lesbian motifs in Yiddish literature was briefly interrupted as students asked their professor what he thought about the controversy ...

###

Previous post on this topic: Questions for Mo

Questions for Mo

A blogger by the name of mo visited my link roundup, A Caricature of Islam, and left a message:

I really was upset about the cartoons. Why make such cartoons when they are infactual and false?
If people really read about the prophet peace be upon him they would realise he was a mercy to mankind.
Moreover, as Muslims we aren't allowed to draw pictures of Prophets, furthermore, we aren't meant to disrespect someone elses religion. We respect all prophets, Moses, Abraham, Jesus, so why not respect our dear Prophet

Frankly, I understand if Muslims are offended by some of the cartoons published by Jyllands-Posten. I have been offended by other cartoons published about causes I care deeply about.

However, Muslims threatening to kill the cartoonists and bomb the newspaper, and actually burning the Danish and Norwegian embassies, only make me think the cartoons were accurate. Mo, what do you say about the violent response of Muslims? Are threats and violence an appropriate response? If so, if Muslims do not condemn such acts, or if they make excuses ("but these people were very angry when they did these things ..."), then the cartoons were quite right.

Also, whether or not you respect the prophet Jesus is meaningless, because he is a Muslim figure. A Muslim respecting the prophet Jesus is not tolerance, it is merely following Islam. Real tolerance would be respecting the Christian divine Jesus, the Son of God, the Savior of humanity, one part of the Holy Trinity, when you don't believe he is any of that. Because that's what you are asking; you are asking Westerners to respect your religion, a religion most of us consider utterly false.

So what do you say, Mo? Do you only respect your own Muslim prophet Jesus, or do you respect Christianity and Christian beliefs and symbols? And given that many in the West are atheists, do you respect them? Do they have a right to not believe in any religion and to express their beliefs openly in articles and cartoons? There are several Buddhist temples in my hometown; do you also respect Buddhism and Buddhists?

Basically, what I'm asking, Mo, is are Muslims tolerant, or are they simply demanding we all become Muslims?

A Caricature of Islam

I was just mentioning how the opposition are making clowns out of themselves, and now we have the Cartoon Muhammed Outrage. How's a blogger gonna get a laugh when reality is using up his punch lines?

Update: Mo, a Muslim blogger, posts a comment, and I reply.
Update 2: More coverage and deeper analysis of the situation at Following the Cartoon Wars.
Update 3 (Feb. 19): Moderate Muslims?

Roundup of Roundups Updated Below:

• Face of Muhammed, a good Danish blog, in English, with all 12 cartoons up.


• Mudville Gazette has a fascinating analysis with interviews.


• Eugene Volokh shows the Boston Globe's hypocrisy in the matter.


• David Bernstien at the Volokh Conspiracy compares this with the reaction to anti-Jewish cartoons in Europe.


• Gates of Vienna's "Cartoons? We're Going to War Over Cartoons?" is also worth the read.


• Silent Running adds more cartoons.


• Mark Steyn: "'Sensitivity' can have brutal consequences."


• Mad Minerva, the "Satanic Doodles"? Ahem.


• Michelle Malkin has a good roundup on it, along with other posts.


• Instapundit, who has a roundup and other posts on this.


• And of course, Scrappleface.

Update:

• All Things Beautiful posts "The Cartoon War," which has a lot of great information and a link roundup three times as big as this one, with little overlap.


• Protein Wisdom addresses the philosophy of it all in "Identity Politics".*


• FrontPage has an excellent article covering the reactions to the cartoons.


• Belmont Club has a brief but excellent post.


• The Moderate Voice has an alternative view and interesting series of comments below.

Did I miss any good ones?

(Mug tip to Inaka Yabanjin for the link to Face of Muhammed. All the new links are from The Gates of Vienna, All Things Beautiful, and Protein Wisdom roundups.)

*Does anyone else find the term 'will to power' tremendously grating?

Advice Needed

Thanks!

The deadline passed, the decision was made, & I thought the post a bit too personal to leave up. Anne & Jean, thank you very much for your thoughts.

I'll post something in the comments on the results.

Was I the Only One ...

... who expected Hamas to win the Palestinian elections?

Well? Was I?

After the SOTU Address last night, I heard one commentator talk about how surprised the administration was that Hamas won. If that's true, then the State Department has been shoveling bovine solid waste at them hard and heavy on this.

Really, the Palestinian education system indoctrinates them that the area called Israel is stolen Palestinian territory, that the Israelis are evil, genocidal terrorists, and that they must destroy Israel and retake this land. We've seen the photos of small, Palestinian children dressed up like suicide bombers. The Arab world reinforces this, the UN (along with additional money from the Arabs, Europe, and the US) pays for it, and the only party promising to make good on all this was Hamas. What else could have happened?

Or am I just cynical?

Happy Tet!

The Vietnamese community here in Oklahoma celebrated their new year's eve Saturday night, and we all woke up in the year of the dog yesterday.

Speaking of which, the Sunday Oklahoman had a front-page article on how the state budget is spent. More than half of it goes to education. This comes out after the local branch of the NEA teachers' union filed a lawsuit this month to increase education's share of the state budget. (Original is registration only: Google cache here.) The Oklahoman notes:

The Oklahoma Education Association wants $4 billion more to educate students and upgrade school facilities statewide. The lawsuit supposedly reveals vast funding problems in the state's school finance system but we've yet to hear a plausible solution as to how to pay for what it deems an "adequate" education.

The entire budget of the Great State of Oklahoma is $6.2 billion. $3.1 billion already goes to education, so the OEA is actually suing for a total education budget that exceeds the entire state budget.

One reason it's not so much fun blogging politics anymore is that our honorable opponents have turned themselves into clowns recently. Galloway in a leotard, Kerry rushing home from Davos to lead a filibuster, the teachers' union here ...

Anyway, the Republicans aren't doing so well themselves -- more lobbying corruption? Man, and after McCain-Feingold, I thought they all went honest. (cough)

Yeah, welcome to the year of the dog.

George Galloway Leotarded!?

This is utterly unbelievable. It has to be a joke, but I can't see anything to suggest it is. Anyone else? Please, someone show me this is satire.

Sample:

First he shocked TV viewers and his colleagues by pretending to be a cat and lapping milk from Rula Lenska's hand.

Now George Galloway is set to attract further derision after performing a dance routine on Celebrity Big Brother - in a tight-fitting, red leotard.

The Respect MP, already under fire for taking part in the show instead of representing his constituents, ad-libbed a dance routine for his latest stunt.

(Mug tip to Right Thinking People in the appropriately-titled post, "Gaaah! My Eyes!")

Update: No, apparently it's real. Here's a Times Online report on it:

Mr Galloway, a left-winger who was expelled from the Labour Party over his attacks on Tony Blair and the decision to commit British troops to the invasion of Iraq, inflicted a shock defeat on his former party when he narrowly captured the Bethnal Green seat from Ms King, a Blair loyalist, in May's general election.

Last night, he sauntered along the red carpet into the Big Brother house to a chorus of boos from the crowd, before pausing to make a victory sign and shout "Stop the war!".

Once inside the house he introduced himself to the others, accompanying each handshake with the words: "I’m a Member of Parliament".

Update 2: Pajamas Media is on the case with a better, er, worse, photo, and interesting links.

Pressing On Towards the Chocolate Cookies

Well, I've started a new class, taken the GRE, am preparing to apply for grad school, have been asked to read at a poetry reading & have been preparing for that (crikey! poetry is hard after so long!). I have started some part-time work, and am looking for more. If all goes well, next fall I'll be a happy grad assistant, torturing undergrads and living the freewheeling life on campus.

As a concerned man, I have to say that the typical 57% female, 43% male ratio seems to hold on campus, and I am very concerned that our educational system seems to be failing boys. As a single man, however, I have to say there is an up side ...

While I'm Gone ...

... check out this review of Beach Blanket Burqua, a fun movie with something for everyone.

(Mug tip to Grouchy Old Cripple.)

"More Blogging Soon ..."

Did I actually write that? I don't think so; it must be aliens. (Speaking of which, saw a sign today outside a local restaurant that said "Earth is full, go home.")

Anyway, lots is happening in my non-blog life right now, though whether any of it will be productive or not is still up in the air. So, I'm hiatusing for a bit.

Catch ya later!

Happy New Year!

I had a pretty good break. I hope everyone else did too!

More blogging soon ...

Merry Christmas!

Have a Wonderful Christmas!

Well, Heck

I'm trying to write the wrap-up to my first set of policies to deal with illegal immigration, and I'm beginning to really understand why politicians don't want to mess with this. It goes way beyond the Hispanic vote, too.

The additional problems I see with my own policy suggestions are:

1. The economic fallout in the US would be bad -- suddenly we'd have millions of unemployed illegal aliens with no way out. Deporting them, assuming we could catch all of them, would be extremely expensive. Polipundit suggested that, if they couldn't get work, the illegals would deport themselves, but I don't believe that. Some, maybe many, would be forced into crime, which is made more likely as increased pressure from the US government would allow Mexican organized crime groups in the US to have greater power over the illegals. Also, as our cheap labor pool dried up, prices would go up.

2. I recently read that remittances sent from people in the US constitute Mexico's second largest source of income. (I'll try to find the article and link it.) If even half of the money being sent there is from illegals, then carrying out these policies will actually make Mexico's economy worse, which will exacerbate the problem.

3. The Mexican government has lost control of segments of the nation. It is no longer in firm control over the police or military, both of which have been thoroughly infiltrated by drug lord agents and both of which have, in the past, acted to protect drug lord interests over the interests of Mexico. Any worsening of the situation in Mexico could further weaken the government and strengthen criminal organizations.

Thoughts? Ideas? Solutions?

Finals Week

It's that time of year, folks. I'll reformulate my Illegal Immigration 1 policy and post a new policy proposal in the near future.

In the meantime, here's some philosophy for you:

Definition: Kneehighlism - the belief that fruit-flavored softdrinks are better than Nothing.

And a holiday joke I stole:

Did you know that the three wise men were firemen? Yeah, it says they came from a far.

And finally, folks, remember: A solipsist has only imaginary friends.

Dean Fisked Like a Snake in a Wagon Rut Wearing a Tophat

Howard Dean: "Bring the 80,000 National Guard and Reserve troops home immediately. They don't belong in a conflict like this anyway."

Jason Van Steenwyk replies:

...thanks to the Abrams Doctrine and former SecDef Melvin Laird, the active component cannot function without significant commitment from the reserve forces.

This is because, combat formations aside, much of the required medical, transportation, supply, administrative, communications, civil affairs, legal, and combat support needed to conduct a deployment comes from the reserve components.

If you pull reserve forces out, you will rip the heart out of our combat divisions. You may not even be able to fly them home.

Tell the Brigade commander "you know that truck company you rely on to move a battalion of soldiers to and from the fight? Send them home.You know that -30 level maintenance unit you rely on to get your crew-served weapons firing and to repair your damaged and broken vehicles? You don't get them anymore. You know those MPs already working 12 hour shifts guarding your detainees? Say bye-bye. And you really don't need those Arabic linguists do you? We're sending a whole battalion of linguists home...

In other news, Howard Dean to Bring Christmas Cheer to Troops.

Heh.

###

PS, if you haven't advised me on my future presidential immigration policy yet, please do!

And remember, AGIP 2008!

Wiki-wild

Instapundit sends us to a roundup on the Wikipedia wars.

I like the idea of Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia anyone can add to or edit, a great deal. The execution, however, is sometimes lacking a great deal. Worse, sometimes it is making up a great deal, like adding treason to bios.

Illegal Immigration 1

Here's your chance to affect presidential policy! This is the second in my series of policy discussions. These posts are rough drafts of my future presidential platform planks (AGIP 2008!), and I heartily welcome the comments of my presidential policy formation team (i.e., my blog readers). At the beginning of each week, I'll post a new policy discussion post, and at the end of each week, I will summarize and re-draft that week's policy proposal.

Illegal immigrants and immigration are complex issues, and so this post more than anything else discusses how to change immigration and employment policies to control illegal immigration. What this post does not address are border security, how to deal with the 7 million+ illegal aliens in the US this program will upheave, as well as how to handle the economic fallout of ending a large, cheap labor pool. Those three things will be the focus of next week's policy discussion (though, of course, feel free to comment on them here).

This post represents both domestic and diplomatic proposals to help end the problem of illegal immigration. I am greatly indebted for many of the ideas to various posts by Dr. Demarche on The Daily Demarche, a blog by two foreign service officers which has given the most informed ideas to address this issue I've seen. I have collected, organized and modified some of the ideas I found there and added my own as noted below.

Ten Answers to the Illegal Immigration Problem

In El Otro Lado, Dr. Demarche laid out five steps the US could take to resolve the problem of illegal immigration and explained them. I have quoted from his list (all direct quotes are from The Daily Demarche), added my own ideas, and posted these steps below. You can click the link to read his explanations. I have added three more steps from other posts at The Daily Demarche, including guest poster Criticalreactor. Finally, the last two proposals are my own.

1. "Punish American firms that hire illegal workers- this is the most important step." I would expand this to simply say 'Punish Americans who hire ...' It isn't just firms. Small businesses and individuals are also doing this. On the enforcement side, I would start with the big fish and work down, of course.
2. "Establish a more secure employment document- the Social Security card does not work." Issue new SS cards with photos and all the anti-counterfeiting features. Showing a valid new SS card would also be required to be able to vote in federal elections, and encourage states & cities to pass similar legislation for state elections. From Polipundit, I found out the Social Security Administration is already implementing an online database employers can check SSNs on, which is great -- I don't have to add this to my platform! I would make checking a requirement, however.
3. "Revise and expand the H2 [guest worker] visa category- not just for Mexicans, but for all, and require that issuance only occur in the country of origin of the alien."*
4. "Require legal workers to pay into Medicaid, and deny public benefits to illegal aliens found in America."
5. "Reduce the amount of foreign aid granted to any country by a set or variable amount based on the costs associated with each illegal immigrant detained/treated/deported."
6. Institute a waiting period for applications for visas after a denial. Currently, once denied a visa, an applicant can pretty much immediately re-apply, which is choking the system. This and steps 7 and 8 would greatly enhance our ability to control to whom we issue visas.
7. Professional visa adjudicators would take over the visa lines, currently manned by newby FSOs who do the job for a year or two and move on. They would be "...well versed in law and policy who speak the local language at a high level ..."
8. End all visa category restrictions on the use of section 214(b) to deny visas. 214(b) "... is the catch-all refusal used to turn down applicants (tourist, business, student, etc) that the officer feels are not being truthful, or has other suspicions about." Currently, religious visas (Islamist imams, anyone?) and some others are exempt from denial under this section. (Guest poster Criticalreactor suggested ending the exemption on religious visas, but I don't see any reason to stop there.)
9. Deny a visa to anyone who has publicly incited violence against the US or its interests within the last ten years, and deport any resident aliens who do or have done this.
10. From the date of passage of the legislation, any child born on US soil whose parents are in the US illegally will not be granted US citizenship. This decreases the incentive for pregnant women to cross illegally.

Well, team, what do you think?

###

Update: Dr. Demarche has a new post on this topic up at American Future which is worth the read.

*Dr. D., if you read this, could you please explain why you would require the issuance in the country of origin, instead of simply outside the US? For example, why is it a bad idea to allow a Chinese worker to apply from Japan?

Polipundit link mug tip to Michelle Malkin.

And remember, vote A Guy in Pajamas in 2008!

Bush vs. ET Wrap-up

Well, Jean was the only one who gave a serious response to the discussion, so there's not much to wrap up. Thanks, Jean!

It was an impulse post, however, and most of my readers are folks coming in from Google searches for different kinds of pajamas, so maybe my expectations were a bit too high.

Tomorrow or Monday I'll post another question. Maybe I can make this one a bit more engaging.

Update: Just wanted to say, this was not meant as a 'poor me' post. If I can't generate reader interest, that's my problem, not my readers' problem for not commenting, etc. I hope I didn't sound like I was whining. I really do appreciate my readers, without whom I would have quit blogging long ago.

Congrats!

Grandma Jean graduated!

Riding Sun turns one!

Discussion: Bush vs. ET?

From PRWeb:

On September 25, 2005, in a startling speech at the University of Toronto that caught the attention of mainstream newspapers and magazines, Paul Hellyer, Canada’s Defence Minister from 1963-67 under Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Prime Minister Lester Pearson, publicly stated: "UFOs, are as real as the airplanes that fly over your head."

Mr. Hellyer went on to say, "I'm so concerned about what the consequences might be of starting an intergalactic war, that I just think I had to say something."

Hellyer revealed, "The secrecy involved in all matters pertaining to the Roswell incident was unparalled. The classification was, from the outset, above top secret, so the vast majority of U.S. officials and politicians, let alone a mere allied minister of defence, were never in-the-loop."

Hellyer warned, "The United States military are preparing weapons which could be used against the aliens, and they could get us into an intergalactic war without us ever having any warning. He stated, "The Bush administration has finally agreed to let the military build a forward base on the moon, which will put them in a better position to keep track of the goings and comings of the visitors from space, and to shoot at them, if they so decide."

Hellyer’s speech ended with a standing ovation. He said, "The time has come to lift the veil of secrecy, and let the truth emerge, so there can be a real and informed debate, about one of the most important problems facing our planet today."

Indeed. And what a great issue to launch my new discussion theme. At the beginning of each week, I will endeavor to post an interesting question for discussion, and wrap it up at the end of the week.

First Question: How should the US respond to these extraterrestrials? Is it better to be armed and polite, or mostly harmless and polite? Or something else?

Side Question: If you were Condoleeza Rice, how would you reply to Mr. Hellyer's comments? (Remember, you're secretary of state -- this would be an official statement!)

(The topic has been around the block a bit: WSJ's Best of the Web & InakaYabanjin, among others.)

Good Discussion of Media Coverage of Iraq

There are articles, polls, & discussions of this going on over at AOL. (Yes, I'm trying to influence the polls.)

I'm Not Dead

Really. (In fact, I'm feeling much better now. I'm. Happy! I'm. Happy!)

But, the Good Doctor is now demised. He'll be posting over at American Future, which I'll soon bagel. That old bagel is looking pretty moldy over there, come to think of it.

Well, Diplomad, Chrenkoff, Allahpundit, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern ...

To blog or not to blog, that, Ferns, Romulans, Fellow Bloggers, is the sow's ear I need to consider. Whether it is better to suffer the worms and maggots of outrageous decomposition, or to go gently into that good night, or to awake, and awakening, dream of new themes and posts, aye, posts, there, me lads and lasses, is the rub.

Hit 'em Hard, Hit 'em Fast

Countercolumn Piles On

McCain on Victory

The President Nails Levin

The White House slams the twisted intel lie

Gateway Pundit Rocks

White House 1-2 Series Nails Senators and NYT. A good roundup, and don't miss the GOP commercial of Democrats' statements on Saddam and WMD.

Mug tip to Instapundit, who also rocks with his own comments.

Jeff Goldstein - What else do I have to say?

9 rejected Democratic talking points for why Congressional Dems initially believed Chimpy McHitlerburton's WMD Intelligence LIES

Podhoretz Pulverizes 'Bush Lied' Meme

Click the link and stand back, folks.

BAM! BLAM! KaBLOOIE!

Ooh. That's gotta hurt.

(Mug tip to Michelle Malkin.)

A Broader Pro-Liberation Response

It seems the president wasn't giving a one-off defense of going to war, which was something that worried me. The facts are in our favor. There is only so long you can be a gentleman and ignore slander.

From the AP:

Bush relied on the collective judgment of the intelligence community when he determined that Iraq's Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, national security adviser Stephen Hadley said.

"Turns out, we were wrong," Hadley told "Late Edition" on CNN. "But I think the point that needs to be emphasized ... allegations now that the president somehow manipulated intelligence, somehow misled the American people, are flat wrong."

Republican lawmakers and other officials who appeared on Sunday news shows echoed Bush's Veterans Day speech in which he defended his decision to invade Iraq.

Bush said Democrats in Congress had the same intelligence about Iraq, and he argued that many now claiming that the information had been manipulated had supported going to war. The president also accused his critics of making false charges and playing politics with the war.

Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean rejected the criticism on Sunday and said, "The truth is, the president misled America when he sent us to war."

...

Contending that the president has not been honest about the size of the deficit as well as the war, Dean said, "This is an administration that has a fundamental problem telling the truth."

Hmph. Sounds like the most fundamental problem a sizable number of Democrats still have is just making crap up. Go on 'Face the Nation' with McCain, Mr. Dean. See how far that BS takes you.

Back to the AP article:

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Democrats have a right to criticize the war but that it was disingenuous to claim that Bush lied about intelligence to justify it.

"Every intelligence agency in the world, including the Russians, the French ... all reached the same conclusion," McCain said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Not to mention Clinton.

Let's hope the pro-liberation crowd keeps it up. As for me, for whatever it's worth, I'm writing my representatives to let them know I expect them to keep it up. We have the facts on our side; we need to use them.

Wow, Mr. President

President Bush gives the speech I've been praying for:

And our debate at home must also be fair-minded. One of the hallmarks of a free society and what makes our country strong is that our political leaders can discuss their differences openly, even in times of war. When I made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, Congress approved it with strong bipartisan support. I also recognize that some of our fellow citizens and elected officials didn't support the liberation of Iraq. And that is their right, and I respect it. As President and Commander-in-Chief, I accept the responsibilities, and the criticisms, and the consequences that come with such a solemn decision.

While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. (Applause.) Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs.

They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. And many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: "When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security." That's why more than a hundred Democrats in the House and the Senate -- who had access to the same intelligence -- voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power. (Applause.)

The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. (Applause.) These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will. As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them. (Applause.) Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. (Applause.) And our troops deserve to know that whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our nation is united, and we will settle for nothing less than victory. (Applause.)

This is a truly magnificent speech, well worth reading the whole thing. I wish I had caught it on TV.

Keep it coming!

###

Check out Instapundit's post on the speech, and his replies to hate mail, etc. Excellent.

By the way, the Whitehouse Website always carries the full-text of presidential speeches, and archives them online for us.

One, Opinionated, and Right!

Hey! It's Grandma Jean's blogiversary!

And she's been profiled. No, not by the cops, silly.

What would be your main advice to a novice blogger?
Be brief, post frequently, have something to say, use proper grammar and spelling. [Darn good advice for the rest of us, too. -- Ed.]
...
If you were to relive your life to this point, is there anything that you'd do differently?
Nothing that I want to tell the world about.

That was back in June, and I didn't find out about it until someone followed the link over to me. Thanks for mentioning me, Jean! I'm flattered.

And HAPPY BLOGIVERSARY! Many happy returns!

I'm So Lazy

... I'm stealing Tim Blair's link roundup. In my defense, it's a good one.

And hey, go cheer mj on in the NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month) competition -- she's writing a novel this month!

Finally, with all the media criticism I've done, I'm happy to link to a Countercolumn posting of an apology from an editor for getting it wrong.

Can the Dems Resurge?

Tom Lemasters at Politics in Focus, an interesting-looking new poli-blog, lists what he thinks the Dems need to do to make a comeback.

A brief overview of his full article is:

1. All politics is local; recruit like it.
2. Fresh blood anyone?
3. Stand for something.
4. Nominate a Presidential candidate from outside Washington.
5. Look to the South or the Midwest.

He's got some good ideas, and the comments are interesting (though there is one full-fledged 'Bush-stole-2000-AND-2004!' moonbat).

I think one problem is, Americans want to win in Iraq. We like to win, no matter what, but many of us also understand that winning in Iraq is vitally important for our own future. I'm not thrilled with some things the Republicans have done the last five years (starting with spending and immigration), but the Dems have to overcome their 'America deserves to lose' image, and that would take a tsunami of change.

(I owe someone a mug tip for this, but ... well, darn the aging process! Darn it, I say!)

Betrayal

Greyhawk details NYT distortions and outright lies regarding the words of our soldiers. There are several more, but I found this retraction by the NYT breathtaking:

The Op-Ed page in some copies of Wednesday's newspaper carried an incorrect version of the below article about military recruitment. The article also briefly appeared on NYTimes.com before it was removed. The writer, an Army reserve officer, did not say, "Imagine my surprise the other day when I received orders to report to Fort Campbell, Ky., next Sunday," nor did he characterize his recent call-up to active duty as the precursor to a "surprise tour of Iraq." That language was added by an editor and was to have been removed before the article was published. Because of a production error, it was not. The Times regrets the error.
...
This sort of give-and-take is standard practice on the Op-Ed pages. "We try to clarify and improve copy," said Mr. Shipley. "We do this for the benefit of our contributors, many of whom are not professional writers."

This is a betrayal both of the men and of all journalistic integrity. Again I'll ask, if they'll do this, what else have they been lying about?

Mug tip to Countercolumn.

Barrrrr Humbug!

It's gettin' ter be that time of year, lads and lasses.

Paris is burning. Great novel title. Any takers? Or am I late? Anyway, Dr. D has some thoughts on it, for any o' you scallywags as wot ken reed.

Murray the Barbarian has a book review up -- I think I'll be buying that one. He's on a roll, so I highly recommend reading everything on his main page right now. The crusader pig is especially cute (though as a Kurenai no Buta / Porco Rosso fan, I'm biased).

The good ol' Comrade suggests Mother Nature needs diapers. Not only that, he gives a possible explanation for blogoholism. Oh, all right. It has to be linked too, I suppose. Video games!

Yeah, and I still haven't decided about the whole running for president thing, so don't pull out the pocket books or babies yet.

Arrrrrh! Now move along there, matey, afore I keel 'aul ya!

Happy Halloween, Scooter!

After all, what better time for a witch hunt, eh?

Is it just me, or is it strange that there's been a two year investigation into something that may or may not have been a crime?

Anyway, I watched the 60 Minutes report on this last night and what a joke! They interviewed Joe Wilson and several of Plame's old CIA buddies, all of whom were outraged. None of their statements were challenged, and no one from the other side was given any air time. Journalism? Journalism!? That report wasn't fit to wipe my boots on.

The Little People Are Toast

There's a new project to help fight gnomelessness, which Ferdinand thinks is great because they're tasty when toasted, and an outraged Murray proposes a UN committee to deal with Ferdinand.

Sheesh. Next, Unicef bombs the Smurfs.

Ya know, if they really wanted 'real war' stuff, they would show the Smurf village being ripped apart by car bombs and suicide bombers.

But hey, it's all fantasy, right?

It Would Be Unbelievable Stupidity ...

from the New York Times, except it happens all the time.

Four years of war, and they can't get the basics of the military down. You'd think NYT journalists were sent to the front lines without ANY training ...

First Polygamy In Netherlands

The Brussels Journal carries the story of two women and a man who, although not legally able to have a 3-way marriage, apparently now have a legal 3-way civil union.

Remember how those in favor of homosexual marriage or civil unions laughed at that possibility? Hello? Anybody there?

God Speed, Mrs. Parks

CNN: Rosa Parks dies at 92:

Parks' moment in history began in December 1955 when she refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white man in Montgomery, Alabama.

...

At the time of her arrest, Parks was 42 and on her way home from work as a seamstress.

She took a seat in the front of the black section of a city bus in Montgomery. The bus filled up and the bus driver demanded that she move so a white male passenger could have her seat.

"The driver wanted us to stand up, the four of us. We didn't move at the beginning, but he says, 'Let me have these seats.' And the other three people moved, but I didn't," she once said.

When Parks refused to give up her seat, a police officer arrested her.

As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked, "Why do you push us around?"

The officer's response: "I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."

The US was born of a few principles, principles that it did not live up to for more than a century, principles that it still struggles with. Certainly, we must remember how the US system abused blacks, women, Asians, American Indians and others.

At the same time, we also cannot forget that the very system that abused also corrected itself, that the police officer who arrested Rosa Parks for not giving up her seat to a white man was part of a judicial system that eventually ruled that such treatment was unconstitutional, and that both the police officer and Supreme Court were part of a government that soon passed the Civil Rights Act.

The genius of the founding fathers was not that they were individually perfect -- they were far from it. No, the genius was that they built a system that was self-correcting, as long as men and women of principle run it, and as long as our nation produces principled citizens courageous enough to stand up and challenge the system when it's wrong.

God speed, Mrs. Parks.

Iraqi Constitution to Be Approved

According to CNN, Anbar and Salaheddin provinces, overwhelmingly Sunni, overwhelmingly voted no. The rest approved it. If three provinces had voted it down, it would not have passed.

I have to say, the fact that the vote was mostly along ethnic / religious lines bothers me. With some others, I think it might have been better if it hadn't passed. If the Sunnis saw their vote change this, then maybe they would be more willing to give democracy a chance in the future.

That aside, that's a job well done for the Iraqi government, and kudos to the Coalition and Iraqi forces for the security that allowed it to happen.

Celebratory Gunfire

Happy 60th, UN! (And many highly reformed returns ...)

Here's some UN parties you might have missed ...

Rockin' Round the Clock with the
Oil-For-UN-Officials-Not-Babyfood Scandal
Possible UNScam - Al Qaeda Link
Guilty Plea in UNScam
Indictment in UNScam
Three More Indicted
UN Procurement Scandal
New Conflict of Interest for Kofi?
UN Bribery Scandal: Russian ties, global reach
UN Allowed 'Corrupt Behavior'
Sevan Resigns

But HEY! It's not just the Oil-for-UN-Officials team that's partying!
Sex-for-Aid Charges Haunt UN Peacekeepers
UN Expert Made Child Porn Videos in the Congo

For more of the UN's most recent 15 years in existence, see:
Emergency Sex And Other Desperate Measures, a book that, among other experiences, details UN sex & drug parties and units of criminal peacekeepers, by two current and one former UN staffer.
The blog Friends of Saddam: UNScam and Other UN Scandals.

What'll those crazy guys do next, try to take over the Internet? (Well, they may already have the porn side wrapped up ...)

Just a thought ...

Should I run for president?

I mean, I meet the legal standards, and I'm not otherwise gainfully employed. It was always something I thought I might like to do someday ...

Whaddya think?

I Survived!

The philosophy mid-term is over. No reality questions -- Whew! I woulda had to fake it.

Also visited relatives in Arkansas this past weekend and had a good time (even if they do talk funny), survived some magazine deadlines mostly intact, made it through my fourth funeral this year, and started doing a little teaching.

Well, what's the world up to? Guess I'll surf around a bit. Everybody hold still until I catch up!

Well, Duh

Hollywood fails to show bad side of sex, drugs.

Yes, this was the result of a study.

Suicide Bomber at OU

Yesterday, there was apparently a suicide bombing at the University of Oklahoma. Only the bomber was killed, and it may have just been a suicide by bomb. Or, it may have been a botched terrorist attack. Nobody seems to know.

Anyway, I'm sure everyone else already knows about it, but I just checked the blogs for the first time this weekend and there it was, on Instapundit. Scooped in my own back yard!

###

Update: Reader Adolfo Velasquez sends this link to Michelle Malkin's post on it, which follows the story more.

Democracy as the Standard

I recently asked the question, Should democracies be held to a higher standard? There was a very good discussion the comments, but I thought that Cliff from Promethian Antagonist gave as good an answer as I’ve ever seen to this:

The countries of the world in general should be held to a democratic standard (don't expect help from the U.N. in this regard).

Democracy -- when it is genuinely attempted -- is a higher standard.

But I am left with another question. As I mused in the comments of that original post, “What would it look like if the media and citizens of democracies held the world’s nations to the standard of democracy?”

To begin answering this question, I want to state that I think the purpose of the news media is to inform citizens so that they can make good decisions, especially about their government. And, where their government is entangled with foreign governments, those governments should be explored and explained by the media just as much as our own, something the media on just about every level is failing to do.

I think most Americans, though they may know it intellectually, really don’t understand in any kind of meaningful way that many other nations really have no free speech or assembly rights, and that governments often simply manufacture history to keep their grip on their people. For example, the fact that street demonstrations are not necessarily about any real grievances, but rather often about government-generated (or power-group-generated) issues that may or may not exist, and that in many nations they cannot even take place without government endorsement at some level. I believe this is very important for Americans to know when they are being given like a report on riots or street demonstrations in another country. This is the needed context a journalist can give, rather than just the straight reporting of events. (There’s an interesting post that discusses some of these issues over at Dr. Demarche. Make sure to read the comments.)

As a concrete example, in a news article about anti-Japanese demonstrations in China sparked by Japanese history texts that whitewash Japan’s WWII crimes, it would be important to mention that Chinese history texts also whitewash their history, and that the Chinese don’t have the right to assemble, so the demonstrations must have at least tacit government approval to continue. An astute reporter might also mention that China and Japan currently have a number of political disagreements, over natural gas deposits in the Pacific for instance, and that democratic Japan has to give weight to public opinion, while communist China doesn't. Consequently, our highly dedicated reporter would write, the intentions of any attempt by China to influence Japanese public opinion must at least be questioned.

This would be the type of reporting I would find most useful. It doesn’t actually make democracy the standard, but it does compare and contrast, and I think most citizens of democratic nations would hold foreign nations to democratic standards if they knew these things.

Anti-War Protesters On Warpath Again

According to the Washington Post:

Thousands of protesters against the war in Iraq are rallying today in Washington and other U.S. and European cities to demand the return of U.S. troops in what organizers hope will be the largest gathering since the war began more than two years ago.

...

Protesters were coming from around the country to the Washington rally, arriving on buses, planes and cars, carrying signs that said "Bush Lied, Thousands Died," and "End the Occupation," among other messages.

Organizers hope today's rally and march will draw 100,000 people. The U.S. Park Police canceled all leave to deal with the rally, which occurs the same weekend as the twice-yearly meetings in the U.S. capital of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.

The WaPo also mentions the presence of about 100 counter-protesters, and also about 200 pro-war motorcyclists raising money for care packages to send to troops overseas.

For a first-hand report, check out Gateway Pundit. (With a mug tip to Instapundit.)

Well, what does everyone think about support for the war these days? The American lines are drawn; those who were anti-war seem to have remained untouched by the pro-war arguments, and vice versa. It seems to be a stalemate, except that the pro-war side has its bunch in power, so we move forward and the anti-war side is frustrated. Will this begin to change next year with our congressional elections? What will happen in 2008?

Any thoughts?

###

Update, Sept. 25: The Miami Herald has a good article about the demonstrations yesterday. An official quoted says the anti-war demonstrators probably reached their goal of having 100,000 people, notes the pro-war demonstrations planned for today, and gives Websites for both sides for further information. Good article, I thought.

How's Bayou?

Anne, over at the dynamic just muttering by myself, comes up with a solution to both avian flu and restoring New Orleans to a healthy, clean city, in Two birds with one stone chicken.

I especially like the Voodoo part.

Now This is Right Up My Alley

Check out the Carnival of the Clueless over at Right Wing Nut House.

Mostly pretty funny stuff, though I find the lead entry more appalling than humorous.

Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes

In my year as a blogger, there've been a lot of changes in the 'sphere.

Chrenkoff, Diplomad, Suburbs of the Afterlife, and Shooting Rockets at the Sun have all ended. Riding Sun has moved to his own server, and his blog works and looks much better. MJ's Metrolingua likewise has upgraded to a new look and still keeps up her always-informative posts.

Some of the blogs I used to read all the time, I don't anymore. Some blogs that didn't exist or that I'd never heard of a year ago are now regular fare.

These days, besides the blogs of my own regulars, I most often read Silent Running, a politically incorrect NZ/Anglosphere blog that informs me and makes me laugh, Countercolumn, a great and highly informative blog by an ARNG captain, fiddle player, and writer, Dennis the Peasant, who offers some of the most poignant, and oftentimes funny, commentary around, Blackfive, for military news and views, Dr. Demarche for international affairs and US Foreign Service news, Michael Yon for the best frontline news from Iraq, and finally, Instapundit, which I must be addicted to, because I can't find another reason I'd read it regularly. There are better news aggregators, like RealClearPolitics, and better legal commentary, like the Volokh Conspiracy, and so on, but it's Instapundit I keep coming back to. He's probably figured out how to implant nanobots in his readers to keep them coming back or something.

How about everyone else? What blogs do you consider indispensible, or simply good reads, and why?

If you want to provide links, you can type (or cut and paste a bit):
<a href="http://blogAddressHere.com">Blog Name Here</a>.

Happy Blogiversary To Me, Happy ...

Well, it's been a full year since I suited up in me PJs and started this here blog. It's been fun, and I've really enjoyed the regulars: MJ, Jean, Comrade Toverich, Cliff, Dr. Demarche, and Adolfo Velasquez. There are a number of others who come and go, and I appreciate them as well.

Thank you all for making it a great experience!

I'd also like to thank the blogs that inspired me, which can be found in my blog bagel on the right. And, oh heck, Mom, God, and the Academy.

OK, forget the Academy. They haven't done a darn thing for me.

Here's a glimpse of how it all began:

In the latter half of the 20th century, pajamas were often considered the uniform of choice for dangerous insurgents and subversives.

In the 1960's came the Viet Cong, famous for their black PJs and their attacks on US soldiers and South Vietnamese troops and civilians.

About the same time the VC were training up as the Vietminh, a pajama-sporting subversive named Hugh Hefner launched his movement to take porn mainstream.

With a history embracing both sex and violence, pajama-attired subversives were sure to be a hit in the media. Little did anyone suspect, however, that the third wave of pajama-wearing guerrillas would be of an entirely different weave ...

I wonder where year two will take us ...

Chrenkoff Says Goodbye

Arthur Chrenkoff is signing off.

His blog is one of the very few that I have consistently read from the time I discovered blogs. It was informative, moving, and filled a key place in the media needs of many. His work will be greatly missed in the blogosphere.

Vaya con Dios, amigo.

Melancholy and the Infinite Simpsons

Just watched the Simpsons for the first time since I got back from Japan. Matt Groening has become a bitter antagonistic ass. Or maybe he was just having a bad week. He decided to poke fun at youth organizations, which is absolutely fine. Everything is grist for the mill, right? Anyway, two organizations, the Pre-Teen Braves and the Pre-Teen Cavalry, get into an embittered competition ("war") in which Homer leads the Pre-Teen Braves in some dirty tricks while trying to win. (Get it? This is an organization dedicated to instilling values in children, you see.) So far, so good.

It all ends in a mass melee, as such cartoons often do, and as the two groups of children and all the fighting adults around them decide to make peace, one suggests a song, but, he says, not a song that glorifies war like the American national anthem. No, let's sing the Canadian national anthem. And they do. And then in the midst of all the smiling, happy people, one of the boys (Milhouse) says "I guess we learned that war doesn't solve anything." Bart then pipes up, "Except for all of America's problems."

I just wanted humor, folks. Is it really that hard just to make people laugh? Would it have been that hard to poke fun at both sides? Like JibJab, maybe?

It's really too bad that so much of the entertainment industry hates America. Noisy ghost (before he was exorcised to the nether realms) used to say the recent spate of bad movies is Hollywood's revenge for the re-election of Bush. I believe him.

I guess that's what I get for being a Nazi 'digital brownshirt' fascist warmongering 'little Eichmann' chickenhawk redneck 'American Taliban' idiot. Did I miss fundamentalist? Gulag guard? Anyway, I wouldn't complain, except this re-entry culture shock thing is magnified when you think half the country has lost its freakin' mind sense of humor.

Has anyone else noticed that the liberals are now the side of guilt? "Is this another youth organization that exploits the beliefs of the native peoples you slaughtered?" the Indian immigrant character asks Homer. Used to be the conservatives -- guilt for having sex, for having a beer, for having fun, for dancing to that evil rock 'n roll. Now it's the liberals who bank on guilt. Guilt for being male, guilt for being white, guilt for being Christian, guilt most of all for being American. Hollywood, which was the rebellious James Dean in the '60s, is now the wild-eyed reverend stabbing its puritanical socialist finger at everyone and shrieking "GUILTY! GUILTY! GUILTEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!"

Just like a cliched movie plot, this reverend of fundamentalist socialism is deeply hypocritical, blatantly exploiting its audience, tyranizing teenage filesharers, all the while accumulating obscene piles of wealth. At least, according to their own socialist doctrines. (I mean, really, how can you get rich unless someone else gets poor? Down with the Hollywood bourgouisie! Viewers unite! Seize the means of recording!)

Speaking of which, have you noticed how the rhetoric about terrorist attacks by the Michael Moore / Galloway crowd -- "You deserve it for your evil, capitalist ways!!!" -- is a mirror of the psycho-religious "You deserve it for your evil, homo-lovin' ways!!!" Both ignore reality outside of their own self-formulated worldviews (including the real reasons the terrorist attacks occurred), both are self-destructive, guilt-centered philosophies that preach the only route to salvation is their absurd one, and both point to the terrorist attacks as proof that those who do not follow their way will be destroyed.

Come to think of it, kinda sounds like Al Qaeda.

###

Comrade Toverich has a related post up on the Pervasive Leftist and DNC Sentiment in Hollywood Output.

Can Nature Be Evil?

I'm taking a philosophy class right now and, in its discussion of evil, the author of our textbook assumes that natural disasters are evil. It's under the discussion of 'the problem of evil,' which is basically, if there is an all-good, all-powerful God, why is there evil? He of course discusses free will -- if God took away the choice of evil, humans would be robots. But he says that does not explain why there are "natural evils" like tornadoes and hurricanes.

My question to you: Is that an appropriate use of the word 'evil'?

Koizumi's Assassins

The Star Tribune:

Armed to the teeth with blood-red lipstick and a killer smile, Yuriko Koike stormed the streets in a working-class Tokyo neighborhood with rapid-fire handshakes and a brigade of young campaign aides wearing hot-pink T-shirts and waving rose-colored flags. One of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's hit squad of female "assassins," the ex-TV news anchor vowed to take no prisoners in Japan's nationwide elections today.

"This is a ground battle for reform!" Koike, 53, shouted through a bullhorn to her giddy audience. "Let's change Japan!"

Koike joined a star-studded cast of female candidates sent out on the campaign trail over the past month by Koizumi, who has vowed to resign if his fractured Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) fails to win control of Japan's lower house. The women -- ubiquitously referred to in the national media as Koizumi's assassins -- also include Satsuki Katayama, a model-turned-bureaucrat, and Makiko Fujino, Japanese TV's version of Martha Stewart. Their mission: to take out the prime minister's political enemies in the old boys' network that long held sway over the LDP.

Cool. I've always liked Koizumi, and he is really trying to reform the Japanese system, which, like most governments, needs it. The 'old boys' network' the article refers to is strangling Japan, in my opinion, and has been the chief obstacle in any reforms. I hope his assassins can bring it down.

I do wonder if our reporter wasn't a bit too exuberant: "blood-red lipstick"? "giddy audience"? Hmmm ...

On the other hand, I want to call them 'kunohachi' (related to 'kunoichi').

Homophobes Defeated Kerry?

Really? According to Fox News:

In 2000, California voters approved by 61 percent Proposition 22, which created a state statute that recognizes marriage as only between a man and a woman.

Funny, the Kerry people trying to explain their loss last November never mentioned this.

The Doc is Back in Town

Hear ye, hear ye!

Ferns, Romulans, fellow blogospherans, lend me your ears!

Ye Goode Olde Dr. Demarche is back up and running after a several-week hiatus.

(Not that I would know anything about hiatuses, mind you. In fact, I am taking an introduction to philosophy course right now, and am thoroughly convinced that hiati, like the rest of reality, do not exist. At least until the next class. Question: Is metaphysics related to metadata? I may have missed that one ...)

But anyway, welcome back, Doc!

Bumperfiskin'!

Ran over Wing Nut Echo Chamber in my blogospheric meanderings tonight. Among other right wingnut activities, keggin, the proprietor, fisks hippie bumper stickers.

Found in the blogroll over on MatthewMaynard.net, who, in either a random act of kindness or absurdity, linked to me. So maybe check him out, too.

Or not. These blog thingies, always risky.

Michael Yon

The best front line reporting I've seen. Absolutely riveting.

Should Democracies Be Held To A Higher Standard?

What do you think?

Beautiful, Mournful Post

Tuesday's Gone

Luke Stricklin: American By God's Amazing Grace

There's been a song on the radio lately that I love, and I've been meaning to track it down on the 'net. This morning, as I was wandering around the 'sphere, I ran across this post about the singer, Luke Stricklin, at Gateway Pundit.

Stricklin spent a year in Iraq as an infantryman, and his story is a good read. Here's the song lyrics:

American By God's Amazing Grace

Bottom of my boots sure are gettin' worn
There's a lot of holes in this faded uniform
My hands are black with dirt and so is my face
I ain't never been to hell
But it couldn't be any worse than this place
Tell my wife don't worry 'cause I know what to do
It makes you feel better sometimes,
But don't know if it's true
I know if I die it's just my time to go
But I pray to God every day that I may get back home.

Well when you've seen what I've seen
Things don't seem so bad
Quit worrying 'bout what you ain't got
Thank God for what you have
'Cause I could be raising my family in this place
But I was born an American
By God's Amazing Grace.

For the last twelve months I've had a new address
The neighborhood smells like sewage and the streets are lined with trash.
You never know what's gonna be the next thing to explode
But unlike these people, I have another home.
It breaks my heart to see these kids out on the streets
Walking barefoot through the trash, diggin' for something to eat.
I give them what I got, just to let them know I care
And I thank God it's not my son that's standing there.

Well when you've seen what I've seen
Things don't seem so bad
Quit worrying 'bout what you ain't got
Thank God for what you have
'Cause I could be raising my family in this place
But I was born an American
By God's Amazing Grace.

If you want to talk about it, you better keep it short
'Cause I got a lot of lost time I gotta make up for.
Really don't care why Bush went into Iraq
I know what I done there and I'm damn sure proud of that.
You got somethin' bad to say about the USA
You better save it for different ears 'less you want to crawl away.
And I'll laugh in your face when you say you've got it bad
Until you've spent some time on the streets of Baghdad

Well when you've seen what I've seen
Things don't seem so bad
You quit worrying 'bout what you ain't got,
Thank God for what you have
'Cause you could be raising your family in this place
But you were born an American
By God's Amazing Grace!

Oh, Celebrities ... (Rolls Eyes)

Apropos of the previous post:

Celebrity

Someday I'm gonna be famous
Do I have talent, well, no
These days you don't really need it
Thanks to reality shows

Can't wait to date a supermodel
Can't wait to sue my dad
Can't wait to wreck a Ferrari
On my way to rehab...

Cause when you're a celebrity
It's adios reality
You can act just like a fool
People think you're cool
Just cause you're on TV
I can throw major fits
When my latte isn't just how I like it
They say I've gone insane
I'll blame it on the fame
And the pressures that it goes with
Being a celebrity
Uh huh

I get to cry to Barbara Walters
When things don't go my way
I'll get community service
No matter which law I break

I'll make the supermarket tabloids
They'll write some awful stuff
But the more they run my name down
The more my price goes up

Cause when you're a celebrity
It's adios reality
No matter what you do
People think you're cool
Just cause you're on TV
I can fall in and out of love
Have marriages that barely last a month
When they go down the drain
I'll blame it on fame
And say it's just so tough
Being a celebrity

So let's hitch up the wagons and head out west
To the land of fun in the sun
We'll be real world bachelors
Jackass millionaires
Hey, hey, Hollywood
Here we come

Yeah, when you're a celebrity
It's adios reality
No matter what you do
People think you're cool
Just cause you're on TV
...Being a celebrity
...Yeah, celebrity
...Uh huh
'Where's my coffee?'

###

Written by - Brad Paisley
From - Mud On the Tires
©2003 EMI April Music, Inc. / Sea Gayle Music

Rolling Stoned

From Reuters:

LOS ANGELES (August 10) - The Rolling Stones, not exactly a band at the forefront of rock 'n' roll activism, are taking aim at the American right with a new song on their upcoming album, according to Newsweek magazine.

The track, "Sweet Neo Con," boasts the line, "You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite/You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of s---," according to the weekly newsmagazine.

Mmmm ... Hey, Mick:

You call yourself a liberal
I call you a hypocrite
You call yourself an intellect
Well I think you're just a twit

That was too easy. Can't wait until the full lyrics come out, heh heh.

A number of other bands have come out with anti-Bush lyrics, and they're at the end of the article, should anyone care to read them.

A Great Blog Find

Global Voices Online is a blog that tries to cover pretty much the whole world, with a number of contributors, translations of posts on non-English blogs, and the "World Aggregator." You can click any of the country or region names in the light green area at the top for posts focusing on that location, though some (like Mongolia) don't have any posts up yet.

The particular post that attracted my attention was Inside the Japanese Blogosphere: The Anti-Korea Wave, which is actually about revisionist history in Japan. It gives a brief glimpse inside the Japanese blogosphere and notes some of the top bloggers are frustrated with the anti-Japanese demonstrations and riots in Korea and China this last spring. It also shows an anti-Korean manga which is apparently quite popular right now, then discusses some related topics, and gives a link to the English version (in PDF) of one of Japan's controversial history texts.

A good post, and it looks like a great blog.