Saturday, January 17, 2004

Guns are bad. All my life, it's been that simple. At my son's preschool, if a child pointed a banana and said "bang," he was admonished to "use the banana in a happier way." As far as I was concerned, the 2nd Amendment gave us the right to protect ourselves against invading armies, not the right to buy a gun and keep it under our beds.

So what would make someone like me change my mind? I met this gun enthusiast. As research for my new novel, I asked him many questions, all the while voicing my disgust. My character might use a gun, but I never would. "Come to the range," the gun guy said. "I'll teach you to shoot."
Skeptic Gives Guns a Shot

Seen on Instapundit

This weeks winners are Patterico's Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review: 2003 by Patterico's Pontifications, and In My Possible Future World: The Howard Dean Presidency, by Frank J. of IMAO. You can see all the vote garnering entries here.

'Ol Captain Jim has enough heat in this to damn near break my screen.

First, Al. Fuck you. Does the world Loral ring a bell? Been to any Buhuddist Temples lately? People have been convicted of crimes involved with your 1996 reelection campaign. You wouldn't know a moral precept if it woodpeckered up against your sawdust filled, wooden skull.

It only gets better from there.
Hype and Hysteria

I may be dating my self here, but does anyone remember Alar? The big Alar scare? Alar was a compound that was sprayed on apples to help them stay fresh while they were shipped. Some group came up with the conclusion that Alar causes cancer, and they put those findings out. People stopped buying apples, the apple market crashed, and thousands of orchards in Washington state went out of business. And then the rest of the story came out: You would have to eat around 300 bushels of apples a day before you consumed enough Alar to even THINK about getting cancer. Of course, any company that produced Alar was now halting production, and half the orchards that used it were either bankrupt or about to be. Lives were wrecked, because some group only put out half the story.

It seems that someone is finally taking notice about all the food scares.

Food safety is important, but it seems Americans wake up every week to another food scare.

Remember eggs? "EEEEK! EEGS HAVE CHOLESTEROL! EGGS WILL KILL YOU! Oops, wait, nevermind, it's GOOD cholesterol. Uh, move along, nothing to see here"

"Food phobias make news and I think anything that gets people panicked about the food supply is going to get on the news," said Susan Bowerman of the UCLA Center for Human Nutrition. "But the bottom line really is that in most cases the things we're most panicked about are completely overshadowed by the benefits we get from eating the foods in question."

If we listened to every hysterical eco-group or food-backed scientist, we'll be doing nothing but drinking rain water and eating spinach leaves that we grew in our own organic manure.

But for every study that says a food will kill you, another says it's fine. And often these studies are paid for by groups who oppose industrial food production and agribusiness, or by companies who produce organic or free-range products.

Hmmmm, do you think that a group backed by a certain corporation might skew their results in a favorable way for said corporation? Gee, whoda thunk it? I'll bet that if I wanted to, I could grab produce off an organic grocery store's shelves and find crap like arsenic, lead, mercury, and other toxins in it. Would you like to hazard a guess why?

Because all those things occur in nature. The Silver Valley in Idaho doesn't have just silver. It was also a main bullet production facility for the USA in WWII, due to the high levels of lead that were found in the mines. They were literally pulling solid chunks of lead out of the ground. You still have to be careful where you plant your garden if you live there, otherwise you might grow your carrots in soil filled with lead. There are towns in the Southwest that have arsenic in the water supply, and it's there NATURALLY. There's no eeeeeeeevil company dumping arsenic into the wells, it part of the soil makeup.

The bottom line is this: You choose what you want to eat. I don't like beef that's been fattened up with hormones and crap, so I choose beef that's natural. After raising pigs when I was in highschool, I refuse to eat that fat filled crap in the supermarket. So I find a butchershop that has good pork. I'm picky about what I eat, but that doesn't stop me from eating a whole variety of foods. Every food has it's danger, but if you listen to the different so-called watchdog groups, you won't be eating or drinking anything. So piss on 'em. If you can, take a look at how many flip-flops they make on a certain food. First eating salmon was good. Then it was bad. Eggs were good, then bad, then good again. You have the whole-wheat crowd fighting the Atkins crowd. Piss on 'em all. Eat what you want, be aware of what's in it, and let those Chicken Little's run around squawking. You'll be happier for it.

On that note, I've got to get ready for the Meet, Greet, and shoot. Any Puget Sound readers who want to learn how to shoot are welcome. Check out Ari's post below for the details.
You know you want to.

I'll be at breakfast too, provided I can get my ass out of bed in time.

Friday, January 16, 2004


Bush must have reached down and found his balls, because he finally used his executive powers and installed Judge Pickering.

President Bush used his executive authority Friday to bypass Senate Democrats and install District Judge Charles Pickering (search) on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Expect every barking moonbat to be howling up a storm on this one. They've accused Pickering of being everything from a KKK sympathizer to ... well, I don't know what's worse than that. But Pickering's supporters show a different story.

But Pickering's supporters, including the former Democratic governor of the state, Ronnie Musgrove, the head of Mississippi's legislative black caucus and James Charles Evers, brother of slain civil rights leader Medgar Evers (search), say the judge is well known for being scrupulously fair on the bench.

They add that as a state prosecutor in 1968, Pickering testified against a grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan (search), a decision that cost him his re-election, and as chairman of the state GOP, hired the first black political staffer.

In 1968, the highth of civil unrest, this man had the balls to stand up to the Klan, knowing that it might very well threaten his life. That's not just morals, and that's not just knowing what's right. That man has brass balls. He's now in my "Clank Brigade".

Pickering is a good man, and the Donks should have never slandered him like they do. Their insults, lies, and hysteria are a shame to that entire party. And it's good to see that a deserving man finally got treated right by Bush.

Jeepers. Kerry leads in Iowa. I don't know what to think now.

Got some great links for you today. First of all, Kim has a set of links for gun nuts, encompassing just about everything. I swear, if there's any info I need about guns, I can get it from Kim du Toit or from one of his many links. The only thing I would add to his list is an essay by Jeff Snyder called "A Nation of Cowards". According to Geek with a .45, Mr. Snyder has put out a book by that same name. That's one I'll have to add to my library. In any case, Mr. Snyder's essay is well worth reading, and the website states that you can print it out or copy it if you wish, with the usual "Don't use it for commercial uses" caveat.

Cold Fury has a piece on Sean Penn's new trip to Iraq. It's not as harsh as you might think.

The Smallest Minority has found (through a LA times op-ed that he actually agrees with.

A little bad news: The DoD has failed to meet it's deadline to equip soldiers with the bodyarmor they need. There are political appointees and blood-sucking pencil-pushers infesting the Pentagon, and they need to be removed. Of course, now that they've fastened themselves on to the nanny-state like ticks, it's going to be hard to get them out. But mark my words, it's crap like this that will bring the military down. Some pansy-assed REMF who refuses to put in an order until it's been filled out in triplicate, signed, dated, and approved by the next three people in command, and our soldiers are dying in the meantime because they haven't got any body armor. It's fucking bullshit, and whoever is responsible for it needs to be strung up by their scrotum and beaten to death. I guess there are still people in the Pentagon who haven't figured out that we're at war.

Look, my dad was a logistics officer when he was in Viet Nam. He'd spent time in Okinawa before the war, where the main warehouses are. At one point, his Marine Regiment was running low on a lot of things. Not just hard to get items, but basic shit that Marines need to do their job. So my dad takes a stack of requisition forms to the BC and says "Sir, would you sign these, please?" The BC looks at the forms as says "There's no quantity listed." Dad just nods.

The next day dad hops on a C-130 to Okinawa and goes to the warehouses, which he says were damn near bursting with supplies. There were boxes coming out the warehouse seams. So dad gets busy, filling in numbers, and saying "I'll take X of these, and Y of these..." so on and so forth. He makes it back to his Regiment the next day, in a convoy of deuce and a half trucks, full of all the crap he needed. It took a total of three days, and his regiment was re-supplied. If my dad tried to do that today, he'd be court-martialed. As it was, it was thinking in that fashion that earned him his Captain bars.

The pencil-pushers have climbed farther up the ladder, and it shows. The fact that we've been there for months and our soldiers STILL don't have body armor means somebody needs to get fucking FIRED!

Let me finish where I started, with Kim du Toit. He's found an article from the Clairmount Institute titled "Wimps and Barbarians". It's another broadside against the modern feminist establishment who considers the Y chromosome a disease. He also links to someone who tries to refute the piece, but fails miserably. Check out both of them, and read Kim's take on it. He's pretty spot on. Most American males that I know of are opting out of the so-called "Western Feminist" movement. We're tired of it. We don't want to deal with it. And if you look at the country demographics, you can see huge chunks of America just throwing up their hands and saying "The hell with it, and the hell with you".

In the meantime, I'm hungry and need more coffee. See you all later.

The Dems Have Landed

Can someone please tell me why the hell this is front page news on every newspaper in the country today? "Hundreds protest Bush visit to King tomb". Who seriously gives a damn? "Hundreds" of people will protest about anything, especially race-baiting Liberal Loonies carrying signs like "War is not the answer". If George W. revealed on MTV that we wears boxers, then the International Society for the Preservation of Briefs would stage some kind of protest over it. A protest like this is not a newsworthy story.

The sub-headline on the story says "Activists: President's policies contradict reverend's legacy". Can someome please point out to me what precisely contradicts the legacy of Martin Luther King? Has George W. proposed the legalization of lynchings or legislation that requires blacks to sit at the back of the bus? Why don't the reporters for these stories ever challenge these moobats with serious questions?

Who is it that really contradicts the legacy of Martin Luther King? Here is that legacy, summarized in one sentence: "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." The truth is, Liberals hijacked this legacy years ago, with Affirmative Action and their latest loony idea: slavery reparations. It's especially ironic, since the places in America that embrace these racist programs (i.e. Liberal College Campuses) celebrate MLK's birthday with the greatest enthusiasm.
How well do you know your Political Quotes?

This site has a quiz today: "Who said it? Al Gore, or the Unabomber?"

Example question....

"It is not necessary for the sake of nature to set up some chimerical utopia or any new kind of social order. Nature takes care of itself: It was a spontaneous creation that existed long before any human society, and for countless centuries, many different kinds of human societies coexisted with nature without doing it an excessive amount of damage. Only with the Industrial Revolution did the effect of human society on nature become really devastating."

Al Gore or Unabomber?

Click the link and find out!

Thursday, January 15, 2004

Think it was bad when microphones picked up Dubya calling Adam Clymer "a total asshole"? Check this out.

Saddam sings Hey Allah.

Every now and then I look at the inbound links to the blog, and then go check out the site that they came from. I did that tonight, and found two cool blogs.

One is Broken Masterpieces. The only downside is that the writer (trodger) likes a band called Switchfoot, and his wife really likes Mandy Moore. Other than that, he seems to be a good guy!

(Take that in good jest, trodger!)

The other blog is The Procrastinations of Kelly Ann Collins, and Kelly looks like someone my girlfriend and I would enjoy having drinks with. I really enjoyed the link of "Am I Hot In My Panties"., but only until I got to "PANTY MAN!" Then that kinda bothered me. Not that a guy is in panties, but..... You gotta see it to believe it. Well, hopefully you won't run into it. And once I'm done scrubbing my eyeballs with Clorox, I'll be fine. (ow! it burrrrrns!)

Anyways, I wanted to say hi to trodger and Kelly. Hope you guys stop back soon!

UPDATE: Well hell! I didn't know there was a whole list of things in the "Am I"? file! Hey, avoid Panty Man, and go check out the Redheads!

Maybe it's just my Irish blood, but I love redheads.

And lastly for tonight, some guy in Montana has been busted for yelling at some teenagers who were driving around town with their car stereos thumping. The Montana Supreme Court has ruled that telling loud teenagers to shut the hell up is Disturbing the Peace, because by yelling he "established a disturbance of the status quo for those three" kids.

Which makes me laugh, just reading it: "established a disturbance of the status quo". Can you imagine a world where your father (or mother, for that matter) would have gotten cited for disturbing your status quo???

Hey Dave? Got room for two more at your range gala?

WesleyWatch has been dormant for some time, unless Analog Kid has been over there. Clark opened quickly, but then became a non-starter, and now he's gaining on Dean EVERYWHERE. Hmmmm. Maybe it's time to start posting about the mad hatter again. Here's something:

This Dimmy Donk primary is going to be mnore interesting than I thought. Like Ari, I think Gephardt is a neo-Sove, but what's most important to me right now is that we stay on the attack versus Radical Islam, and I think he would do that. Lieberman also. If either of them defeated Bush, I'd lick my wounds but they'd not be too deep. Anyone else would be disaster.

Two good pieces that debunk the "The US built Saddam" myth. By Darren Kaplan.

Part One.

Part Two

Good for printing out and shoving in the face of any moonbat.
Carol Mosely Braun drops out.

What, you mean a Democrat from Illinois who held her Senate seat only one term and got publicly blasted for her affinity with Nigerian dictators by the Clinton State Department, and who ran on a platform consisting entirely of "I'm black. I'm a woman. Vote for me.", wasn't considered electable enough to become the Democratic candidate for President? Shocking.

Now if the Democrats can just remember that Dean is McGovern reincarnated, Kerry and Edwards are polling worse than Dean, no one knows why the hell Wesley Clark is so popular (given that no one who isn't a pundit can actually name anything the man has ever actually done), Lieberman couldn't help Gore's campaign (and therefore how the hell could he expect to run his own, especially without Gore's support), Kucinich is a nut, Sharpton isn't much better, and Gephardt is... well, commie bastard is the first word that comes to mind, we can all get through this election season with a minimum of headache.


Wes Clark, September 26, 2002: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time."
Illegal Aliens Part Two

OK, for those who read my piece on illegal aliens from Tuesday, I told you that I'd have my opinions on what should be done at a later date. This is it. This, in my opinion, is also much more open to debate than the questions of illegals themselves. The aliens broke the law when they came into this country. That settles most of the questions right there. But what we should do or not do is a different kettle of fish.

Here are my two cents, and I'm open to debate on almost all of it.

1) Build a damn fence. I think history has shown pretty damn conclusively that people can and will just walk over the US/Mexican Border. There have been many cases of someone who was deported showing up a week later in the same city he was shipped out of. We can't have that. If Mexicans can just cross the border with impunity, then anyone can. The Border Patrol's job would be much easier if they didn't have miles of open land to guard.

2) Once that fence is built, start deportation. Find an illegal, send him back. Do it as soon as possible. I don't care if he has a job, ship him out on the next plane/boat/van/whatever to his country of origin. Make it clear to the world that if you enter this country illegally, you will be found, captured, and deported. County Sheriffs should also work with the INS to streamline deportation. It's much easier for the INS if the local authorities would be able to ID illegals, detain then, and get them ready for deportation.

3) Work on visa procedures to catch visa violations. Too many people get a student visa, or a work visa, and then just violate the terms of that visa with impunity. If someone is violating the terms of their visa, kick them out. Yesterday.

For those immigrants who have come to this country legally, and are now facing the bureaucracy of the INS, we need to eliminate many of the bullshit red tape hurdles that they face. This can be done rather simply, and at low cost to the USA.

1) Streamline naturalization procedures for legal immigrants who do not use social services. If they can come here, find a job, support themselves, and not need any assistance from the nanny state, they should be frontloaded and given preferred status. If they get here, dump a baby onto the system, and live on welfare for five years, they can bloody well wait to be a citizen.

2) Set a "Service for Citizenship" program in place in the United States military. If a legal immigrant completes five years active duty in the Armed Forces, they become a citizen. This will have a two-fold effect: Force the immigrant to learn English fluently as well as give job skills, discipline, and training to many immigrants, and increase the number of applicants our armed forces receives. Keep in mind that this is not an instant citizen program. Many people flunk out of Basic Training, or get chaptered out of the military. People who fail to complete the five year military duty would not be considered ineligible for citizenship, they would simply need to go about it a different way.

3) Set up an assimilation program for immigrants wanting to become citizens. We can respect other cultures all we want to, but those who want to be a part of our country need to realize that in the culture war, the culture of the country they choose to live in trumps the culture of the country they chose to leave. (The first person to suggest that any form of Shari'a law be put in place in America automatic gets deported, no ifs, ands, or buts.) If you want to wear a veil, dance around in sacred slippers, eat only rabbits that were slaughtered on the second Tuesday of the month, fine. Do that in your house. Outside your front door, you get to deal with American customs and American citizens. America did not get to be a great country by kow-towing to other cultures, we became great by absorbing and transforming other cultures.

I think that all of this would be a great start towards getting illegals out, and allowing those who want to be citizens to get to where they want to be. More importantly, I think that it would impress on those who want to live here that while being a citizen of the USA gives you many rights, it also gives you many responsibilities.

And it's those responsibilities, and those who undertake them, that make this country great.

Wednesday, January 14, 2004

Drudge has this atop his site right now:

FLASH** 1/14/04 20:21:03 ET** Dean's campaign managers threatened to kick ABC-TV off the Dean Campaign plane if ABCNEWS ran the affidavit story on tonight's WORLD NEWS, insiders tell DRUDGE... Dean Manager Joe Trippi said: "Im gonna come after you." News editors made the Dean/affidavit story fifth in the news wheel.... Developing...

This defies reality.

In what political watchers are calling possibly the biggest gaffe in years, former Vice President Al Gore is set to give a speech tomorrow on the perils of global warming -- on what is expected to be the coldest day in New England in nearly half a century!

God, life is rich.

The interesting ones are on page two. SWO Guns
The Watcher's Council

In case you didn't know, Four Right Wing Wackos is part of the Watcher's Council, a group of blogs that were set up by the Watcher of Weasels. Every week the members send in different links that we think deserve attention, and we vote on them. The winning links are then posted on all the blogs of the council.

I bring this up because this week has more good entries than I've ever seen, both from the council and from everywhere else. I've already voted, but I would be doing you a disservice if I only posted the winners. So I want to post all the entries, in order for you to see just all the great people that are on the net. And this is just a small little slice of the blogosphere.

If you can make time for it, go and read. It will be worth your effort.
It's Time

For the Seattle Area Blogger Meet, Greet, and Shoot.

Non-bloggers also strongly encouraged to attend!

Analog Kid has the details up, but I'll copy them for the sake of getting the info out to everyone.

This Saturday, January 17th. Starting at 10AM.
At Wade's Indoor Range in Bellevue
13570 Bellevue-Redmond Road (aka Bel-Red Rd)
Bellevue, Wa 98005

It's going to be a good time, and it looks like a bunch of us will be hitting IHOP before we go to the range, to celebrate St. Rachel of the Pancake getting LGF's IOY award.

Mollbot and Dogtulosba are already in, as well as myself, Ari (the new guy! Yay!), SondraK and her husband. The more the merrier, and if we can take up half of Wade's lanes, that would be cool as hell. So if you're interested in meeting one another, or you just want to learn how to shoot, come on and join us.

Good golly!

"I have reluctantly concluded that the efforts of the United States and NATO in Bosnia are a complete failure," he wrote, citing reports of genocide during the Bosnian civil war. "If we ignore these behaviors ... our moral fiber as a people becomes weakened. ... We must take unilateral action." - Dean urged Clinton to take unilateral action in Bosnia

Tuesday, January 13, 2004

MoveOn had their VenomFest last night.
Illegal aliens

I've been holding off on a post about illegal aliens for a while. Part of the reason was that I wanted to get all the information that I could before I made any judgement on it. Part of the reason was that I didn't want to say anything that I would have to take back. But I've been looking at this Amnesty program from all angles, and mulling it over. And the more I think about it, and the more I learn about it, I can only come to one conclusion:

It's complete and utter bullshit.

1) These people broke a damn law to get into the USA. Many of them continue to break laws once they get here. I don't want a criminal to live next door to me. I don't want criminals living in the next state. I don't want criminals anywhere but in jail. Granting amnesty to a group of people who came into this country illegally doesn't change their moral fiber, and it doesn't change their mindsets! If they come here to sell drugs and piss on the American flag, making them "legal" doesn't change that.

2) Granting them citizenship gives them access to many more government services, which we all pay for through taxes. Hospitals in Southwest states have been dealing with the problem of illegal alien healthcare for years. Do you really want to give them access to federal services? Again, they broke laws getting into this country, do you think they could be responsible citizens? Do you think they could shoulder the burden of the USA's social contract?

3) By just granting these people citizenship, we have done NOTHING to assimilate them. Look, I know that immigrants want to hold on to their culture. Fine and dandy, in their home. But if you're coming to this country, to live here, to be a citizen here, you damn well better learn our language, our customs, and our way of life. That goes for anyone who wants to come to the USA and become a citizen. You left Syria and want to live here? Fine, but get these things through your head: Honor killings are no longer a part of your life. Hating someone based on their religion is not part of your life. Gays are accepted in the USA, not stoned to death. If you can't handle that, GET THE FUCK OUT! YOU came here, WE did not come to YOUR country! Hey Mexicans, guess what? This country was founded by ENGLAND, and our god-damned language is ENGLISH! If you can't bother to learn that language after being here a while, GET THE FUCK OUT! YOU wanted to come here and live, YOU make the steps necessary to live among us. DO NOT come into my country and demand that I respect every god-damned ass backwards custom of yours. In fact, if you demand that I respect your custom of killing your daughter for kissing a jew, you can get bent and GET THE FUCK OUT! If we cannot assimilate new citizens, we might as well name it the United States of Mexico and be done with it. Hand over your civil rights as the last flag passes by.

Being a citizen of this great country is something that many people obviously desire. It's something that I thank god on a daily basis for. But it requres work and responsibility. It requires effort. Just granting citizenship to a huge group of criminals won't make them any better, it will make the average citizen cheaper. That doesn't fly with me.

So what can be done? We could enforce our laws, for one. We could seal the borders and only allow legal immigration into this country. We could begin the long process of deporting illegal aliens back to their country of origin. I've heard many of the arguments against all of that, and to be honest, I see a lot of people who just don't want to shoulder the burden of doing the right thing.

Let's take deportation. I've heard many people (on the Left and the Right) say that we can't deport that many people. The number of illegal aliens is estimated at around 10,000,000. As Mark Styne says, "It's not politically possible for a civilized nation forcibly to deport a population three times as big as Ireland's."


Eighty three percent of Americans want illegal immigration ended. That's not some ideological chunk, that's a huge majority from both sides of the political spectrum. It IS politically feasable, there are just some people who don't want to think about it. It's rare when I disagree with Styne, but he's way off. Over three-fourths of this country wants to put a stop to illegal aliens. That's a political winner if I ever saw one.

Some people whine about the cost of deporting all those people. How much do we spend on services to these aliens? Does that even matter? How many hospitals have to close due to providing un-reimbursed medical care to illegals? How much money will the illegals suck out of our pockets via tax dollars before it becomes cost effective to ship them back? And what about the fact that IT'S THE DAMN LAW?! Ah hell, these two guys can say it better than I can. Misha and Spoons.

And the last problem: Once we grant amnesty to a bunch of criminals who shouldn't even be here, what kind of message does that send to the rest of the world? As Preston of Junkyard Blog puts it:

Until that and the border and visa problems are addressed, I can see no way that Bush's amnesty doesn't end up putting up a big "We're Suckers!" sign that will shine throughout Mexico and the rest of the world.

There is a huge difference between legal immigration and illegal aliens. I am by no means complaining about LEGAL immigration, because LEGAL immigrants are not the problem! I'm not complaining about those who get a work visa and come here to work a job. There was a restaurant in Junction City, Kansas (next to Ft. Riley) that was run entirely by Mexicans on six month work visas. When their visa expired, they would return home and apply for another one. They would invariably get it, return to the USA for another six months, and repeat the cycle. Perfectly legal, and perfectly acceptable. If you want to see examples of legal immigration, take a good look at Misha or Kim du Toit. I can't think of anybody else I'd love to have as fellow Americans. But to simply call a group of illegal aliens "Americans" cheapens citizenship for everybody else who wants it, who understands what it entails, and who deserves it.

So I guess all this boils down to the fact that Bush's Amnesty program is a steaming crock of bullshit, disigned to pander and get votes from a select group of minorities, while avoiding the tough decisions that needed to be made. And judging from what I've seen on the web, the only people who don't understand that fact are the politicians.

Time to wake up, you pols. We put you there, and we can kick your ass out. By force, if necessary.

I'll have my opinion on what needs to be done about this whole mess much later. But I'm tired, the scotch is calling my name, and I have a girlfriend to pamper. I'll see you all tomorrow.

This is great.

There are reasons, and there are reasons. And some reasons are even reasonable.

Before I start, here's the article on Slate.

With the benefit of hindsight, do you still believe that the United States should have invaded Iraq in March 2003?

We call this an "invalid question". We may as well ask "If you knew everything, would you go back and change your mind?" We didn't know everything -- probably still don't, in fact -- therefore the question is useless and moot.

Now, I supported the war in Iraq, but what always baffled me is how many damned reasons people came up with to justify it. This article names a few -- moral, political, WMD, national security, etc. -- but to me there was only one good reason to go: our word.

In 1991, we told Iraq that we would stop shooting at them provided they did X, Y, and Z. In the following 12 years, Iraq did none of those, and our response was continually "Oh yeah? Well keep that up and we'll start shooting again!" For that matter, the UN said basically the same thing, only they phrased it as "Um... ok, that's cool. Just don't do it again, please." What does this accomplish? In the case of Iraq, exactly what was expected -- Saddam did whatever the hell he damn well felt like, feeling secure that we wouldn't do anything. And he was, of course, correct -- we did nothing, though we certainly became obsessed with the president's sex life. As a result, both sides effectively violated the cease-fire -- them by not doing what they were supposed to be doing, us by not shooting at them as a result.

Why does this justify our invasion? Simple -- if we can't show a tiny pissant like Iraq that we mean business, what's to stop everyone else from doing something bad, signing a cease-fire, and then violating it all willy-nilly* because they know we won't do something about it? When that happens, we'll be useless in foreign affairs -- HUGE MOUTHPIECE, tiny little will to back it up.

Personally, I don't buy most of the arguments in favor of war. I don't think Saddam was suicidal enough to use WMDs on us -- people who are suicidal don't build statues to themselves -- and a nation that won't fight back shouldn't expect others to fight for them (remember, we outnumber our leaders millions to one -- the real winner is the one with the bigger will to win. That's the only real way totalitarianism can take hold.). But I do think that the war was necessary, if for no other reason than to ensure that we are taken seriously.

After all, the UN also ignored 12 years of cease-fire, and bitched and complained about having to enforce it, ultimately doing nothing. Where's its credibility now?

* (I've always wanted to use the phrase "willy-nilly" somewhere.)
Two Letters

From Iran. Courtesy of Pejman, and well worth reading. Knowing what the PEOPLE of Iran are saying, vs. what the THUGS who run Iran are saying makes all the difference.

And one other thing that I've seen all over the web, Little Howie Dean blew his top. At a voter.

Democratic presidential front-runner Howard Dean blew his stack at an Iowa voter on Sunday who had asked him to end his "slam, bam and bash" rhetoric attacking President Bush.

"Please tone down the garbage, the mean-mouthing of tearing down your neighbor and being so pompous," said Dale Ungerer during a question-and-answer session initiated by Dean after he had delivered his standard stump speech at the Oelwein Community Centre on Sunday.

Dean's response was calm at first, telling Ungerer, "George Bush is not my neighbor."

But when the Iowa Republican stood and tried to interrupt, Dean shouted: "You sit down. You had your say. Now I'm going to have my say."

Here, I just happen to have my Deano-translator handy, let me run his little screed through it and see what it really means.

"You stupid fucking plebe! How DARE you question me?! You shut the hell up while your bettors do the talking. When we're done I'll TELL you what to think, you simplistic guttersnipe! Now DANCE MONKEY, DANCE!"

These elitists can't stand it when a normal person questions them. People like Dean, Kerry, and the rest have always thought of themselves as being better than anyone else, above anyone else. And it shows in their everyday demeanor.
Seattle? They have a team?

Little David was in his 5th grade class when the teacher asked the children what their fathers did for a living. All the typical answers came up -- fireman, policeman, salesman, etc.

David was being uncharacteristically quiet and so the teacher asked him about his father.

"My father's an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret and takes off all his clothes in front of other men. Sometimes, if the offer's really good, he'll go out to the alley with some guy and make love with him for money."

The teacher, obviously shaken by this statement, hurriedly set the other children to work on some coloring, and took Little David aside to ask him, "Is that really true about your father?"

"No," said David, "He plays for the Seattle Seahawks, but I was too embarrassed to say that in front of the other kids."

As a Seattle fan, I can only say: Yep.
Only in America

Unbelieveable. Somebody actually paid $127 for this!

How stupid, when you can just forge a bunch of stuff on your own for free.

Found some good links while perusing The Smallest Minority.

Rich at Shots Across the Bow explains why he has armed himself after 40 years of going naked.

The Angry Clam finds more anti-gun bias in Detroit press, and exposes it quite nicely.

And Kevin himself lays a smackdown on the Cleveland Morning Journal.

My only question is this: After Jerry Springer was elected mayor of Cincinatti, and Dennis "Grandfather Forest endorses me" Kucinich was elected to Cleveland... WTF were you people in Ohio thinking? At least you seem to have woken up. Or at least voted Kusinich out of office. Springer left after he got caught with a hooker.
How many words start with UN?


Once again, I'm going to state that the UN building should be demolished and turned into something usefull, like a homeless shelter or public toilet for NYC. Hell, turning it into a landfill would be more usefull than it is now.
My First Bleg

Does anyone want a wonderfull companion who would love you lots and never leave your side but hates rodents and reptiles?

If so, Analog Kid would like a word with you.

It seems that his new dog hates rats. That's not condusive to a peacefull household where rats are your pets.
Ah, yes....

My plan is unfolding just as I have forseen it. (rubs hands together) Soon, we Northwest conservatives shall control the blogosphere, and next........ THE WORLD! MUAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAAAAAAA!

Oh.. um... er... Use your inside voice, Dave. Inside voice...

Everybody welcome Ari!
Hi all. I just thought I'd introduce myself, as I'll be posting here more often. (Of course, now that I finish that sentence I have no idea what to add to that.) Ok, the basics: I live in the suburbs of Seattle (motto: "Our priorities, in order: salmon, salmon, trees, salmon, trees, trees, salmon, organic food, people."), I work in computer software, and I consider myself a libertarian. Note the small "l' to that, by the way -- I'm not a part of the Libertarian party, nor do I particularly want to be, but I do subscribe to many of the basic tenets of the philosophy.

Heh. I know where I want to start, but it's 12:20am and I'm exhausted. So tomorrow is when I shall be starting.

In the meantime, just wanted to say hi.

Monday, January 12, 2004

Oh god....

Nothing like a good boot to the gut.

Never Forget.

Paul O'Neill - Lying Asshat.

Strike One

"Suskind claimed he has documents showing that preparations for the Iraq war were well underway before 9-11. He cited--and even showed--what he said was a Pentagon document, entitled, 'Foreign Suitors for Iraq Oilfield Contracts.' He claimed the document was about planning for post-war Iraq oil (CBS's promotional story also contained that claim):

"But that is not a Pentagon document. It's from the Vice-President's Office. It was part of the Energy Project that was the focus of Dick Cheney's attention before the 9/11 strikes.

"And the document has nothing to do with post-war Iraq. It was part of a study of global oil supplies. Judicial Watch obtained it in a law suit and posted it, along with related documents, on its website at: Indeed, when this story first broke yesterday, the Drudge Report had the Judicial Watch document linked (no one at CBS News saw that, so they could correct the error, when the show aired?)"

Strike Two

Suskind's revelations sound sexy, but they're pretty overblown. As Glenn Reynolds has pointed out, a lot of what O'Neill talks about and what Suskind cites had been under discussion in the Clinton administration. In early 2001, "peacekeeping troops, war crimes tribunals, and even divvying up Iraq's oil wealth" were not merely under discussion by neocons that might have wanted to invade Iraq, but by policy wonks across the board. At the time, the Washington consensus about the Iraq policy at the time was that the status quo was an untenable situation. A lot of meetings were being held about ways to rejigger U.S. policy FULL DISCLOSURE -- as a sanctions expert, I participated in one such bipartisan meeting chaired by Richard Haass in the early days of the transition.

Strike Three

The U.S. Treasury has asked the U.S. inspector general's office to investigate how a possibly classified document appeared on Sunday in a televised interview of ex-Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, a department spokesman said on Monday.

"It's based on the (CBS program) '60 Minutes' segment, and I'll be even more clear -- the document as shown on '60 Minutes' that said 'secret,"' Treasury spokesman Rob Nichols told reporters at a weekly briefing.

So, all those people who wanted Karl Rove "frog-marched" out of the White House, are you upset about this?

No, because it's anti-Bush, and that makes it OK, right? BusHitler, right?

Pissants. Your boy just struck out.

Hat tip to the indespensible Instapundit.
Oooooo, OUCH!

See, in order to accept that these weapons are 20 or so years old, you would have to accept that for the last 11-12 years while inspectors wandered around Iraq lifting up rocks and opening car trunks, stashes of chemical weapons were right under their nose; chemical weapons which in all their thorough inspections, they missed.

This, combined with the Mig buried in the desert and the huge stashes of weapons that have been found in schools and mosques, and you have to wonder, why are the anti-war folks so happy that this is "all they've found?" I would be hanging my head because at this point, all these finds are proving is that Saddam had plenty of stuff stashed all over the country, and it happened under the nose of the "experts" at the UN.

The big story here isn't as much what they found, and the more people insist its been there the more they prove one thing: In all those years of inspectors being there, they didn't find these shells that have supposedly been there for 20+ years.

You have to question the effectiveness of the inspectors for missing these, and that is the most interesting part of this discovery.

Every now and then, you find a bitchslapping that you just have to link to. Vinny, here's to you.

UPDATE: Blaster's Blog has a link to this article.

Ali Nimir, a former colonel in a Republican Guard artillery unit, said: "I remember seeing boxes of these kinds of armaments in our base two years ago. We were told that they were chemical weapons.

"They made a splashing sound inside if you moved them around. From what I recall they were removed from our bases and distributed to secret hiding places around the country about a year before the war. I never saw them again."

Ah, the more we learn.......

And this is completely off topic, but still a good bitchslapping to the AP.
Unilateral? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight

First of all, anyone who thinks that the US's action in Iraq was unilateral needs to get slapped with a crumpet, a vegemite sandwich, and a kielbasa. In that order. Anyone who thinks that having three other countries with boots on the ground means "unilateral" is seriously unbalanced. Anyone who looks at the countries of Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, Slovakia, Spain, the Netherlands, The Philippines, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom, and can STILL say "Oh, the USA went to war unilaterally" needs to be committed. Only a partisan hack or a mentally insane person calls a coalition of that many countries unilateral. Everybody got that? Just because we told France, Germany and Belgium to take a long walk off of a short pier doesn't make us unilateral.

There. I've gotten that off my chest. Now then, I'm about to explain why, from a military standpoint, being unilateral isn't all that bad.

Anyone who's been in the Army is familiar with the term "Command and Control". It might be called something different in the other branches of the armed forces, but it all boils down to this: You need to be able to command your forces, and control the battlefield. That's a short and sweet definition, but in reality it's just about as difficult as it gets. You need to be able to sort through pure chaos, figure out what units are where, what's happening with them, where they're going, who's attacking, who's counterattacking, who's flanking, who's supporting, who's calling for fire, what support units are working for who, who's free to assist, what reserves you have, and the list goes on and on and on. It is literally like taking a 5000 piece jigsaw puzzle that someone dumped on your floor, and trying to put it back together in fifteen minutes. And the USA excels at it for a number of reasons.

One of those reasons is also a large part of why we have the best military in the world. Everybody, from the Commanding General to the lowest Private, is made aware of the plan. The CG comes up with the plan, and hands it down to the Division Commanders. The Division Commanders hands the plan down to the Brigades, who hand it down to the Battalions, who hand it down to the Companies, Platoons, Squads, and Teams. Naturally, as it passes downward the amount of information gets smaller and smaller, but by the time each individual team has the plan, everybody is on the same wavelength. They know what they need to do, and who they're with. Radio frequencies are distributed, as well as the times that those frequencies will change. And that lowly private knows what he needs to know. Objective, fallback plans, co-ordinating units, support and fire-support frequencies, all of it. Should his teamleader die in combat, the private would STILL have the information he needed to get the job done, because it was handed down to him before combat.

With all this information being distributed, there are several opportunities for problems to arise. The military knows this, and does it's best to reduce those chances. Distributing the wrong information could lead to units on the same side attacking each other, not knowing that they're firing on friendly troops. It could lead to a support unit not getting to the objective, thus depriving a forward unit of supplies and/or replacements. A whole host of things could go wrong in combat, and it's the military's job to prevent those things from happening. But it's a hard job nonetheless, made even more difficult by the fact that combat always changes. One second you're hard pressed, the next your enemy is retreating and you're following. Command and Control has to react to that, either calling for that unit to stand firm, or ordering pursuit if the situation is right. The USA's military can act independently, but it's much more effective if they have Command and Control to keep the units clued in. CaC can call for support from the Air Force to help a Marine unit, something that the Marine unit would be hard pressed to do on it's own. Hopefully by now you get the point, because I don't want to bore you with more of the same. The point that I wish to impress upon you is the total chaos that combat causes, and the difficulty in making sense of that chaos.

Combat is hard, difficult and disorienting at best. Now then, put yourself into that soldier's shoes. You're an 11C, an infantry mortar team member. You've been pounding away at an enemy position for about five minutes, shooting and moving. All the sudden, over your radio, you hear what sounds like this: "Whopuioawerhj! Ppahwelkrbopds!"

That's about what Dutch would sound like to me. Just how much of a kink would that throw into your plans? Do you think you could effectively fight in a combat situation if half of your force couldn't understand what the other half was saying?

Let's make it worse. One third of your force speaks English. The other two thirds is a conglomeration of Dutch, Italian, French, Korean, and Japanese. Do you think that this force could achieve the objective as efficiently as a force of all one language could? No, of course not. Co-ordinating efforts now requires translators. From English to Korean. From French to Japanese. From Japanese to Dutch to Italian to English. It would take forever just to get the orders out, much less call for fire from a supporting unit. Soldiers couldn't get the information that they need in order to fight effectively if every order had to be translated five times.

Now let's go back to our poor 11C, who just received some garbled message over his radio. It's in Dutch. Now, this guy knows that the Dutch are fighting on his side, but you can't have a translator on every team, it just isn't possible. There aren't enough translators for one, and the translators wouldn't be much help in a firefight anyways. Their job is to translate, not launch mortars. So what is that 11C to do? What if the Dutch need help? What if he's being warned about an enemy unit sneaking up on him?

What if he just dropped a round on them, and has no way of knowing that he just hit a friendly unit?

Do you see the problem? By introducing all these different units and languages into the combat scenario, you have just lost command and control. You've taken chaos and multiplied it exponentially. And ultimately, you have set up your unit to lose this battle, because they can't get the information that they need. America's forces use bullet and bombs, yes, but they also use just as much INFORMATION. Command and Control is about getting the right info to the right units.

Look at what happened in Afghanistan for a real world example. US forces were flying overhead on patrol at the same time Canadian forces were conducting a live fire exercise. The right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing. The pilots didn't know what was going on below them, but a tracking device used by the Canadians lit up their alarms and monitors. Now, the Canadians weren't aiming at our boys, but when a pilot sees a tracker coming from a place that it shouldn't, that tracker goes bye bye. A lack of command and control caused the deaths of our own allies in Afghanistan. And that was between two countries who speak the same language! Imagine the problems that can arise when you have several different languages to go through.

And that brings me back to my point. While the support of all those countries I've listed above is wanted and in many cases necessary, that support does not have to be of a military nature. Too often I've seen and heard people on the left decry our coalition. "But they didn't send any troops!" They seem to think that a lack of armed forces means a lack of support. Not so. They seem to think that without more armies from more countries, we're just one big "unilateral" bully. Once again, not so. Those countries gave us the support we needed in the UN, and in some cases, financially as well. But military support? Not only was it not needed, but it is not wanted. The problems that arise from having that many countries involved completely outweigh the advantage of more troops. In combat, you need to be UNILATERAL. Multilateral = dead allies. Unilateral = Objective Achieved.

Give me the USA, UK, and Australia, and I don't think that the rest of the world combined could wipe us out. Because we would have proper Command and Control. Adding too much of anyone else into the mix results in chaos.

Now, there are exceptions to every rule, and there are exceptions here as well. Many of our forces came out of Iraq impressed with the skills of the Polish troops they served with. But Poland didn't send in a division, they sent in their special forces, small units which could successfully interact with our troops. When the Polish troops were operating on their own, they had their CaC in contact with OUR CaC at all times so that everyone knew what was going on, but there were never any large scale combat operations where the two countries were operating in each other's Area of Operations. The exception proves the rule.

So, I hope that I've removed some of the stigma from the word "unilateral". And please, feel free to copy that list of countries down, so that when other people bring up "unilateral" wars, you can laugh at them.

I do.

The Indymedia types are at it again.

Nice, hunh?
Smoker Update

The smoker rocks. We chowed down on alder-smoked salmon last night. Next week, beef jerkey. Maybe some cheese as well.


Sunday, January 11, 2004

This is getting to be too much! These fellerz are tossing each other under the bus every doggone day and I just can't stands no mo!

Under fire in a campaign debate, Howard Dean (news - web sites) conceded grudgingly Sunday night that he never named a black or Latino to his cabinet during nearly 12 years as governor of Vermont.

"If you want to lecture people on race, you ought to have the background and track record to do that," Al Sharpton snapped at the Democratic presidential front-runner in an emotionally charged exchange in the final debate before next week's kickoff Iowa caucuses.

"I will take a backseat to no one in a commitment to civil rights in America," Dean said moments later, eager to have the last word.
Yahoo! News - Sharpton Blasts Dean on Race in Debate

This, however, does explain why Gore endorsed Dean - - - they both have low Negro tolerance levels.

Both Democrats and Republicans are selfish creatures, to be sure. That’s not where they differ. Where they do differ is this: one group looks at what has worked in the past and wants to keep trying it. The other looks at what hasn’t worked in the past and wants to keep trying that.

Hot Damn! I'm probably the last schmo to find that, but you can read it all here.
Just in case you're wondering

That huge ripping sound that you're hearing? That's the Left, desperately moving the goalposts yet again. As much as I hate to use Roto-Reuters as a source... ugh....

Wait a tic, what are the Danes doing there? The USA is supposed to be Unilateral, dammit! What kind of crap is thi... wha?


No way, the Brits too?


AND the Aussies? Bullshit, next you're going to tell me that POLAND sent troops!


Well hell. Unilateral my ass.


Too many good links in one piece, so here's the whole kit and kabootle.

Free Will - Gunning down the Hopolophobes.

So, want to go on vacation? Check out this lovely list of vacation hotspots in the Democrats favorite beachfront property!

Some people may ask why this post is titled the way it is. Well, because when it comes to Castro and his brutal grip on Cuba, nobody loves a communist dictator like the Donks. Just remember, even as the Donks and Moonbats screech and gibber about "chill winds" and the like, they show unwavering support of Castro as he does things like this.

So asshats like Danny Glover and Harry Belefonte praise Castro, Baba Wawa gives him a prime time interview, and Lefties from all over America cream their jeans whenever his name is mentioned. NION organizes groups to head to Cuba and sing in the name of "peace", ignoring those people in the jails and gulags. All the while, people are trying to get off that island in anything they can float. I've watched news clips of people who's boat has sunk, the Coast Guard is there, and these poor people are throwing the Coast Guard's flotation devices back into the CG's boat. Because you see... if they make it to America's shores on their own, and climb up the beach, they can stay here. If they are picked up by somebody, they get sent back. It's no concern to them that the shore is miles away, THEY WOULD RATHER DIE THAN GO BACK TO CUBA. And yet the Left in this country loves that man. He murders, tortures, and jails anyone who disagrees with him. He locks up anyone who criticizes him. He holds that island under his thumb, grinding the life out of the population. AND THE LEFT LOVES HIM FOR IT!

People try to become what they admire. It's just human nature to try to emulate qualities that you find admirable. So you tell me why I shouldn't be worried when I see the left practically masturbating every time they see Castro's mug.

UPDATE: Oh yeah, real warrior of freedom there, eh? The next time some shit for brains babbles about Cuba's literacy rate, please hit them in the mouth as hard as you can, and then ask them what good being able to read is when you can't get any kind of information. Just remember folks, there are people in Congress who idolize Castro. Jimmah "Peanut" Carter would felch Castro in a red-hot minute if he thought it would get him in closer with the bastard. I can only deduce one thing from all of this: The brutal repression in Cuba is the way of life they want in the USA. With, of course, themselves at the helm.

Hat tip to Suburban Blight.