May 30, 2008
Makes my ears bleed.
I was just listening to Slate.com's radio show Gabfest on XM Channel 130 (POTUS '08), wherein two metrosexual males and an adenoidal thirty-something valleygirl sound-alike natter on about the week's events, like whether or not Obama should go to Iraq, and whether or not everyone should go see the new "Sex In The City" movie.
There's an old putdown about some long-forgotten screen actress, that "She had a face made for radio."
Let me tell you, when it comes to Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson and David Plotz, all three of them have voices made for print.
Horrible. You can listen for yourself here.
Posted by Mike Lief at 09:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Why does Susan Sarandon hate the American people?
Moonbat actress -- but then I repeat myself -- Susan Sarandon issued a threat yesterday: If John McCain wins the presidential election, she's fleeing for more liberal foreign shores, like Italy or Canada.
Apart from the fact that: (a) I couldn't possibly care less; and (b) It's my dearest wish that Sarandon take her husband and the rest of their Hollywood freakshow with them to the furthest possible reaches of the planet, I suppose this is supposed to concern the rest of you.
The folks at IDontLikeYouInThatWay.com have the perfect response.
Coincidentally, Sarandon's husband, Tim Robbins, and many other celebrities said the same thing before George Bush was elected both times. Guess what? They're still here. I wonder why they haven't left yet?
I don't know her reasons, but I'm guessing they're mostly due to the fact that she lives in the f***ing United States of America.
An illegal immigrant would roll down a barbed wire lined volcano and feed his family to dinosaurs if it meant he could get a job cleaning up cigarette butts in a Denny's parking lot, but poor Miss Sarandon just won't be able to go on in her hilltop mansion if Obama isn't elected.
If I turn out to be the winning bid *crosses fingers* for that nuclear missle auction on eBay, I'm gonna have a hard time deciding between Hollywood or Beverly Hills.
Sarandon probably intends it as a threat, but she'd probably be surprised and a bit hurt to find out how many people wish it was a promise.
Posted by Mike Lief at 09:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Teach your children well
There are countless government-sponsored programs out there, designed to indoctrinate educate your children about the (alleged) dangers of global warming, packaged in a way to make the poison pill go down with nary a murmur of complaint.
So, with that said, let's see what our Australian cousins are doing about their woefully uninformed youth and the need to reduce their "carbon footprint," via the Planet Slayer website.
Gee, this looks like fun -- lots of things to do here -- and she looks cool. She's even got a pierced nose. Mom! Can I get a nose piercing!
Hey, what's that all about? Better take a closer look.
Use the greenhouse calculator to find out when I should die? What the hell?!
Let's click on it and see what they're talking about.
Let me get this straight, they're calling Australian citizens "pigs" and getting ready to let kids begin an interactive game designed to tell them when they should die.
Sure, why not?
Let's begin, shall we?
I'll skip through the what-disgusting-planet-destroying-gas-guzzling-car-do-you-drive questions and get into the meat of the quiz.
Oh, I see, with every answer I give that displeases out Global Warming Overlords, my avatar piggie gets a little porkier.
Cute.
But the effects of incorrect answers are really, really noticeable when they show some affection for materialism, capitalism and consumerism.
Check out what happens when I gave a ballpark figure on how much I spent each year.
Man, I'm a fat, disgusting, Gaia-hating porker. Can it possibly get any worse than this?
Could be, based on how much I spend on "stuff that's good for the environment" or "ethical investments," as opposed to horrible, only-an-evil-conservative-could-want-this-crap stuff, like "eating, drinking, going out, clothes, car, rent, etc."
Guess which way I went.
So, having watched my piggie swell up, grow wicked-looking tusks and generally get more and more disgusting with every answer, it's time for me to hit the final button and see when the experts think I should die to minimize my carbon footprint.
Oh, man, my pig just exploded in a shower of gore and grue, leaving behind only a puddle of blood and a curly tail.
Nice.
Let's wipe off the blood and see what the damage is. How 'bout that? According to the edjimicators at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, I should die at the ripe old age of 2.6 years.
This is what's being pounded into the heads of children all over the world by the fanatics who belong to one of the fastest-growing cults in the world, and they're doing it with taxpayer dollars, too, in the schools and on the web.
Shameful, morbid and deeply, deeply depraved.
Posted by Mike Lief at 07:25 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
May 29, 2008
They never mentioned this in The Lion King!
"But -- but animals are our friends ... aren't they, Daddy?"
"Well, son, it's true that many animals like us humans. Preferably raw."
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa — Police say six caged lions left only fingers and intestines after eating a worker giving them water.
The lions attacked the 49-year-old man Tuesday after he went inside their cage to deliver water, police said Wednesday.
The man had been working at the Uitspan game farm in northwest South Africa for at least two years, police said. No one witnessed the attack.
Environmental affairs was called to the game farm, which cages lions and other animals for tourists' viewing, to discus the fate of the lions.
Seriously, when I was a kid we watched Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom every Sunday night, just before The Wonderful World of Disney, and the beasties that Marlon Perkins tracked over the African Veldt never struck me as cute and cuddly. As a matter of fact, but for the fast-acting assistant armed with a rifle and tranquilizer darts, it was apparent to me -- even as a young feller -- that these beasts were more interested in eating the host than cozying up to him.
People today have a pretty distorted view of nature and wild beasts; do you remember the shock and revulsion when that kid climbed into the polar bear enclosure at the Brooklyn Zoo -- and got his ass devoured back in '87?
When asked what might provoke such an attack, [New York City Parks Commisioner Henry] Stern said, ''The mere presence of people in their cage.'' He said polar bears are territorial and vicious by nature ....
Ya don't say?
While it was perhaps a graphic demonstration of Darwinian evolution in action, perhaps that young man might have avoided his fate had he watched a little less Moonbat Kumbiya Zoology and a little more Marlin Perkins.
It's a dog-eat-dog -- er, lion-eat-zookeeper world out there.
Be careful.
Posted by Mike Lief at 07:14 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 28, 2008
Bad movie remake alert
I first read Michael Crichton's "The Andromeda Strain" back in the '70s, when I found a copy of the novel atop a neighbor's trash can (not an editorial comment, I hope!) during an afternoon outside with the other local kids.
A science fiction thriller, written in the dry style of an after-action memo, "The Andromeda Strain" documented the aftermath of a microscopic extraterrestrial lifeform brought back to Earth on a military satellite. The first notable side effect of contact with the invader is some form of psychosis, after which the blood -- all of it -- coagulates, wiping out Piedmont, a small town in the American southwest.
The book details the efforts of a small team of scientists in a hidden, subterranean facility to figure out what makes Andromeda tick, and how to kill the bug, before it spreads and does to the rest of the world what it did to Piedmont.
It's not exactly a thriller -- there's too much pseudo-hard science for that -- but more of a procedural, earning the reader's suspension of disbelief via the attention to detail and credible recreation of the "sound" of government reports and documentaries of such momentous events, recounted in the cool, dispassionate tones of a long-lost and now-disfavored journalistic style.
The novel, which established the young physician -- and best-selling author -- as a star, was quickly optioned and turned into a smart film preserving the quasi-documentary feel of the source. The scenes in the small town were eery in the extreme, spacesuit-clad scientists moving through silent streets, bodies laying where the residents had been struck down in stride.
I'll never forget the moment when one of the scientists took a scalpel and opened a vein on one of the corpses ... and reddish sand poured out!
The audience recoiled at that, let me tell you (it was a more innocent time), and I had to walk into the lobby for a couple of minutes to calm down.
The movie is not filled with Slam! Bang! KA-POW! action moments; rather, it treats the audience with respect, with (mostly) plausible twists and turns, aided by great performances from the actors, including David Wayne and the invaluable and utterly serious Arthur Hill.
So I was interested when I heard that an updated version of "The Andromeda Strain" was being readied for broadcast on A&E, although wary that it would be jazzed up and dumbed down for the presumably moronic modern viewer.
According to Ed Morrisey, my fears were justified.
Yesterday, I wrote that the first half of the remake of The Andromeda Strain provided a fun ride if one didn’t mind the story getting dumbed down into a Lifetime Channel set of characters and the addition of several hysterically paranoid subplots. It at least beat the pacing of the original, even if it lacked the tautness of the science and the first movie’s realism. I described it as a loss of 30 IQ points. Well, if that was the case, then the finale dropped the IQ level to barely sentient in an implosion not seen since Hollow Man.
[...]
The ending provides the biggest unintentional laughs. The military doctor has been designated the key man, the one who has to stop the self-destruct sequence of the laboratory that will provide unimaginable power to Andromeda for mutations. Unlike in the novel, he dies when he falls in the tunnel into a pool of water used by the nuclear reactor, just as he hands off the key that will stop the sequence to the project leader. Unfortunately, the key sequence requires the military doctor’s thumb for identification, which leads another doctor to do a Mr. Spock (Wrath of Khan) and go into the water to cut off the thumb. He then throws the thumb straight up for two stories to the project leader who’s hanging on the side of the wall, complete with a close-up, slo-mo sequence of the thumb tumbling towards the hero as the self-sacrificing doctor dies in a pool of water that wouldn’t be radioactive anyway.
It provides a perfect analogy to the entire movie. The only way this mess should get a thumbs-up is if a reviewer cut one off in protest and threw it in the air. The rest of the ending is fairly anticlimactic, with a few assorted assassinations as everyone starts covering up the government’s role in the affair. Everyone’s loved ones suddenly finds themselves free of the personal problems that plagued them. The President declares that he’ll continue vent mining despite the strongly-worded memo from the future, which makes sense; I’d try to kill Future Earth too, after a stunt like Andromeda.
What a shame. It could have been interesting; instead, it gives a peek into the mind of the politically-correct paranoids who produced this dreck.
I'm glad I spent the last two nights doing something far more entertaining and enjoyable -- dinner with friends and bowling in a league -- than watching this crap-tastic remake.
If you haven't read the novel or seen the original film, give them a shot. And by all means, take Ed's warning to heart and avoid -- like the plague -- the new "Andromeda Strain."
Posted by Mike Lief at 07:21 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
May 26, 2008
Battle Hymn of the Republic
Posted by Mike Lief at 02:01 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Remembering our fallen heroes
Take a moment to remember the sacrifice a generation of young American men made more than 60 years ago, and consider the families, the communities that bore the pain of the nigh indescribable, incalculable loss.
Take one Massachusetts town, for instance.
NEWTON - When Fred Guzzi, head of Newton Veterans’ Services, faxed me six pages full of names, I immediately called to remind him that I requested the list of soldiers from Newton who died in World War II, not the list of everyone from Newton who served. The list that he sent had too many pages, too many names. Surely one faxed page would suffice. He quickly retorted that all six pages contained the names of all the men from Newton who died in World War II — 269 of them.
By any measure, 269 men killed in war from a city the size of Newton is an enormous, heart-wrenching number. That’s well over 500 mothers and fathers who received the fateful telegram informing them that their sons had been killed in wartime. No corner of Newton was spared the tragedy of the Second World War. Every neighborhood, every block, every school, suffered the loss of someone who was killed overseas. To this day there are those among us who remember all too well.
Alderman Carleton Merrill remembers Lester Bixby, his friend from Newton High, Class of 1943, who was killed in combat in France in December 1944, and Stephan Butts, with whom he attended the Underwood School, who was killed on the India-Burma Front in February 1945. Then there was Milton Elkind, who lived across the street, killed in France that same year. And Bill Spiers, his classmate who died in the retaking of Guam in 1944.
The average age of these Newton soldiers was 24 when they were killed. George Gallagher was only 17 and John Gentile 19 when they were killed (along with the five Sullivan brothers) on board the cruiser Juneau, which was torpedoed in the Battle of Guadalcanal in 1942. The oldest killed was Daniel Hurley, also a veteran of World War I. He enlisted as a medic and died in Germany in 1945, one month shy of his 64th birthday. Annino Coletti was 23 when he was killed in fighting in the Marshall Islands.
Harry Homans of Tremont Street and John Mastopiera of Chestnut Street were both killed on Iwo Jima on the same day, Feb.19, 1945. So were Peter Bontempo and William F. Callahan Jr, both killed in northern Italy on April 14, 1945. Bontempo Road in Oak Hill Park is named for Peter. The Callahan Tunnel is named for William.
Charles Brown and Robert Stein lived in the same two-family house on Edinboro Street. Charles died in a Japanese prison camp in the Dutch East Indies in 1942. Robert was killed shortly after D-Day, on June 8, 1944, in Normandy. Francis Shuster Jr. and William Golding Jr. were next-door neighbors on Fairway Drive in West Newton. They were both killed at age 24.
Governor (and later Senator) Leverett Saltonstall of Chestnut Hill Road lost his son, Peter Saltonstall, at Saipan in the Pacific in August 1944. Endicott Peabody, who later became governor, lost his brother, Arthur Peabody, killed near Vienna, Austria, in February 1945. Gene Cronin, the unofficial “Mayor of West Newton” and a World War II veteran himself, lost his brother, John Cronin, on the Meuse River in Belgium in 1945.
In 1944, 112 Newton soldiers were killed, 20 in December alone.
Fourteen Newton soldiers were killed in the Battle of the Bulge in late 1944 and early 1945, including James Foley and Salvatore Yeradi. Eleven were killed on D-Day, June 6, 1944, or in the subsequent Battle of Normandy, including Julius Amendola and George O’Brien. Ten died — or rather, were murdered — in POW camps, including William Cannon, Fred Timson Jr. and Francis Cronin. A note was found on William Osborne which read “Poisoned by Japs.” Ted Ladd was beheaded by the Japanese while in captivity.
Newton soldiers fought and died all over the globe. Stanton Amesbury was killed in Algeria by Vichy French soldiers in November 1942. Matthew Billings died of his wounds off Kiska, Alaska, in 1943. Edgar Bevis was shot down over Taiwan in 1945. Carl Cole crash-landed and died in Denmark. Harvey Cibel was killed by Rommel’s soldiers in Tunisia in 1943. Albert Desrochers was killed near Australia. Melvin Herson was killed in a bombing raid over Romania in 1944. Charles Spettel was shot down over Yugoslavia in February 1945. Paul Van Wart and Stephan Silverman were both shot down over China in 1944. Dominic Silverstrone and Howard Stiles were killed in New Guinea; their bodies were never found. John Newman Jr. perished on a life raft after his ship was sunk by a German U-Boat off Iceland.
Many of those killed had streets named after them in Oak Hill Park, including Paul Cavanaugh, Francis Fredette, Frank McCarthy, Meinoff Kappius, Joe Antonellis, John Caulfield, H. Russell Keller Jr., George Avery, Nick Tocci, Albert Caldon, Russell Colella, John O’ Rourke, Frank Young, Robert Shumaker, William Kerr, Hugh Van Roosen, George Walsh, Fred O’Connell, Bill Nightingale, Larry Early and Robert Hanson, who was also posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for having shot down 26 enemy aircraft in the South Pacific.
Victor Pellegrini of Lincoln Road was killed on Christmas 1944, when his troop carrier was torpedoed in the English Channel. Ed DeStefano, also of Lincoln Road,was killed the month before, just over the German border. Nam Leong of West Newton was killed in action in Italy in January 1944. So was George Pattison of Newtonville. John Murphy was killed aboard the USS Quincy in the Battle of Savoa Island in 1942. Robert Murphy was also killed in the South Pacific two years later; his father requested that he be buried in the American Cemetery in Manila.
Sixty soldiers from Newton were Missing in Action, and subsequently declared dead, their bodies never having been recovered. Among them were Charles Bjornson, killed when his submarine, the USS Lagarto, was sunk off French Indochina (Vietnam); Charles Burkett Jr., killed when his plane was shot down near the Bonin Islands; George Carson, killed on Okinawa; Paul Coburn, killed when his plane crashed in the Pacific. Also MIA were Fred Elliot Jr., Dominic Giannetti, Robert Hale, John Hennessey, Fred Horgan, Ted Jennings, Ted Johnson, Jim Lally, Carl Lancaster, Bill Lewitt, Lenny Nodell, Clarence Powell and Antonio Palumbo.
Carl Peterson, commander of the US Coast Guard Escanaba, perished with his crew in the North Atlantic after his ship was torpedoed by a German U-Boat. Alfred Pezzella bailed out over Romania in 1944 and was never found. Richard Waite, a medic, was 20 years old when he was killed in Normandy, “his body was burned beyond recognition,” official reports stated, and his burial place is still unknown. Robert Williamson was shot down off the coast of China in 1945, and disappeared forever.
George Guise was killed in Czechoslovakia on May 9, 1945, one day after the final German surrender.
There are more men, many more from Newton who were killed somewhere in the globe during the Second World War. I have barely mentioned a third. Perhaps a book would do them all some justice, much more than a brief column can possibly provide. For they deserve more. Infinitely more. Some of these men were comparatively lucky. They were married before the war. They had children. They lived a portion of their adult lives. But most never married, never had children, never lived a life beyond their post-adolescent years. Their bodies were interred by their parents, if they came home at all.
The United States paid an unbearable price in World War II — 418,500 American soldiers dead. A generation decimated. And with that hundreds of thousands of children we would never know.
But millions of children we would know.
For it was these soldiers who made our future, our nation, our very lives, possible. Without their supreme sacrifice, it is doubtful that many of us would be here today.
We are their heirs.
We are their children.
Via Power Line.
Posted by Mike Lief at 08:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 25, 2008
Boys and their toys
My Dad used to take me to the Sepulveda Dam recreation area to see the radio-controlled planes that flew out of the field, tucked into a corner of the gigantic flood-control basin. I especially thrilled to the sight and sound of the scale warbirds that would engage in brief mock dogfights.
But they were bush league compared to this kind of spectacle.
Wow.
And when it comes to gigantic scale models, nobody can hold a candle to these Belgians, whose pride and joy has a wingspan nearly thirty feet wide, weighing almost 500 pounds.
Did I say, "Wow!"?
Posted by Mike Lief at 09:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 24, 2008
Hollywood moonbat alert
Ah, college graduation, a day when proud parents and their children celebrate their undergraduate education with the presentation of diplomas and, hopefully, a commencement address wherein some notable person will impart a few words of wisdom meant to salute the graduates and perhaps offer some insights into what the future may hold.
Except when said speech is delivered by a Hollywood moonbat, vomiting forth half-baked conspiracy theories and repellent politics in a center-stage, it's-all-about-me moment.
Like Jessica Lange, most famous for being pawed by a big monkey in King Kong, getting pawed by a smaller, hipper monkey in The Postman Always Rings Twice, and getting pawed by nebbishy Method-Actor monkey in Tootsie:
BRONXVILLE, N.Y. — Oscar-winner Jessica Lange bashed the Bush administration and denounced the war in Iraq during a commencement address at Sarah Lawrence College.
The star of "Tootsie" and "Blue Sky" was applauded by students Friday at the small liberal arts college after comparing the conflict with the Vietnam War. She said the graduates have "a heavy burden" to chart a new path for the country.
"We are living in an America that, in the last seven and a half years, has waged an unnecessary war, established prison camps, condoned torture, employed corporate armies, eliminated the right of habeas corpus, practiced extraordinary rendition, and believe me, this is only a partial list," Lange said.
Lange asked the graduates, including her 22-year-old daughter Hannah Shepard, to commit themselves to the "pursuit of peace."
Had I been there -- as graduate or parent -- I'd have been on my feet, shouting, "Shame!"
"... waged an unnecessary war, established prison camps, condoned torture, employed corporate armies, eliminated the right of habeas corpus, practiced extraordinary rendition ...."
Each and every allegation is blatantly political, factually inaccurate, and nothing more than libtard talking points. Just what everyone wants to hear on what ought to be amongst the proudest days in a person's life.
And what's with this "pursuit of peace" crap? Whatever happened to being willing to fight and die for something important, to sacrifice for freedom and justice?
Is there nothing worth fighting for, or is peace at any price the guiding principle for Lange and her pacifist cohorts?
That's the "King of Hollywood," Clark Gable (far right) after returning from a bombing mission with the crew of the "Eight Ball" in 1943. Gable was a far cry from today's brand of big screen "patriots," enlisting during World War II, walking away from the fame and fortune, insisting on living with the troops, facing the same dangers in the air.
To quote another Hollywood celebrity, albeit one of a slightly different ideological bent (he volunteered to fight our enemies instead of propagandizing on their behalf:
Quite frankly, Jessica, my dear, I don't give a damn!
Gawd, I loathe this woman and her comrades.
Posted by Mike Lief at 03:19 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
May 23, 2008
Remembering the fallen
A piper plays as the honor guard --comprised of police officers and deputies representing all the law enforcement agencies in Ventura County -- escorts the colors to the Peace Officers' Memorial in front of the Government Center on Thursday morning.
Razor-sharp ranks of solemn-faced deputy sheriffs and police officers come to attention and render a hand salute as the ceremony begins with a beautifully-sung rendition of the National Anthem.
Maureen Faulkner, whose husband, Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, was murdered by Hollywood's favorite cold-blooded killer Mumia Abu Jamal in 1981, recalls the terrible night she heard that her husband had been shot.
The honor guard salutes their fallen brethren as a bugler plays Taps.
Posted by Mike Lief at 07:34 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 22, 2008
Must-see movie alert
This looks to be gloriously -- hell, almost unbelievably! -- mind-blowingly politically incorrect.
It's also violent, gory, and quite profane.
Don't watch if you're easily offended.
I may be the first in line for tickets.
Posted by Mike Lief at 06:33 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Food for thought
I've been wondering the same thing ....
Just asking:
"Why is it that when the 76-year-old, hard-living dissolute Democrat Ted Kennedy is diagnosed with a brain tumor, it is of course a human and national tragedy... But when the 67-year-old, clean-living Republican Dick Cheney repeatedly goes into the hospital for heart/pacemaker problems, it's a huge media-political laugh, with endless variations of "what's the prob, he doesn't HAVE a heart!, yuk, yuk" going over the airwaves non-stop for a week?" -- Phil Aver
Via the invaluable Gerard Van Der Leun.
Posted by Mike Lief at 06:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
From the archives of cool spy stuff
At first glance, there's nothing particularly noteworthy about this 1950s-era seaplane. However, it looked considerably different when it was ready to be airdropped to a CIA agent trying to make his getaway.
That's right, it was inflatable, thanks to the engineering boffins at Goodyear.
According to the folks at Gizmodo:
One version was apparently inflated by adding water to special pellets which produced gas. Another version says the engine itself, sans prop, pumped the plane up. Either way, it quickly became airworthy and, as a raft as well, could use a body of water as a takeoff strip.
One of the agents involved told the Spycraft authors that it was a viable invention: "We tested it and it worked out pretty good."
I'd feel a bit more secure in an aircraft that didn't deflate when punctured by, hmmm, bullets. Still, pretty nifty.
Posted by Mike Lief at 12:10 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Clean out the officer rot
Robert Averech allows a currently-serving officer in the U.S. Air Force to post on his blog, offering up a blistering indictment of "Officer Rot" in the aviation component of our military.
Peacetime leaders make horrible wartime leaders.
It's a generalization, but a generalization that's generally true.
Enter today's United States Air Force. The plague of peacetime bureaucracy has set in, and it's set in hard. “Officer rot” is what Robert dubbed it, and I can't think of a better term to describe the disease. Officers are advanced in a system that awards those who clog the service's pipes with new and excessive regulations. Simplicity and speed are downplayed in favor of safer methodologies.
And “safe” is really the word of the day. On my base, the Wing Commander emphasizes—above all else—how DUIs and vehicle accidents are a few notches below the historical average. Commanders are reprimanded if one of their Airman suffers from—God forbid—an accident. The mentality has become so perverse that the Air Force actually seems to believe its leaders capable of preventing accidents from even happening.
Smart people realize that accidents are a statistical certainty.
The Air Force does not.
Now that's a very specific example of a larger problem. And the problem is this: Air Force careerists have made risk aversion their number one priority. "Who dares, wins" has gone the way of the Dodo. Airman and their officers are forced to memorize the Six Steps of Operational Risk Management and are expected to apply to every decision they make, so that risk may be avoided at all cost. Not unnecessary risk, mind-you. Risk. Period.
Risk aversion, as many thinking types know, is a horrible trait in an officer and a leader. World War II was marked by an innovation in military thinking never seen before in the US Military—except when Confederates Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson were engineering innovative ways to kill Union soldiers. Today's Air Force, sans a primary purpose and an identifiable peer competitor, is not forced to think outside the box. In fact, they are so far in the box they probably couldn't find a way out if they tried.
[...]
They are so caught up in the wars of old, may God help us if the Chinese make good on their threats to reunify with Taiwan, or if Putin brings back the Russian Empire, or if Kim Jong Il decides he wants a bungalow in Seoul.
I'm an Air Force man and I'm telling it to you as plain as I can. We're screwed. Donezo. Kaput.
Pity, as the USAF would be our front line against any of those scenarios.
The Air Force needs a George C. Marshall. Oh, do they need a Marshall. Someone who gets it. Someone who has the stones to tank a generation of officers who just aren't helping. Someone who understands how to communicate the service's needs, what it can bring to the fight—the Air Force's abilities are unmatched—and someone who will rediscover the service's purpose: to support the infantry.
[...]
Don't get me wrong though, folks. When the sun sets I still love my blue suit and love the sound of thundering jets overhead. Love it. But that's why it pains me so much to see a once-proud service fall into disrepair and irrelevance because of cowardly leaders who value their own stinkin' promotions over the good of the service and the good of the country. Some are well-intentioned. Most are just plain arrogant. I see both types every day. It pains me.
And I want it to stop.
It's hard to find much to argue with in his analysis, which begins with a look at how the U.S. Army avoided the ruinous impact of a piss-poor officer pool during the two years leading up to our entry in World War II. Read the whole thing.
Posted by Mike Lief at 12:05 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 20, 2008
Bad news for the senior senator from Mass.
Senator Edward M. Kennedy was diagnosed today with what appears to be an inoperable brain tumor, and the news is filled with politicians stampeding toward cameras to praise the second-longest serving member of the Senate, junior only to West Virginia's Robert Byrd.
Speaking of the execrable Southern octogenarian, the footage of Byrd weeping on the Senate floor was cringe-worthy, especially the part where he haltingly said, "Teddy, I love you. And I miss you."
For Pete's sake, Kennedy's been in the hospital for about a whole day! It's a bit early to begin acting like he's dead and buried. And it's more than a little disturbing that Byrd suffers separation anxiety when away from his colleague for such a short time.
Byrd, whose pork-barrel legislative record and ego-driven penchant for having projects in his home state named for him, is an embarrassment, and this footage is proof positive that no man should spend that much time in elective office, feeding his insatiable addiction to power and prestige, afraid to let go and allow someone else a turn at the graft-and-corruption-filled trough -- er, Congress.
My sympathies go out to Kennedy's family.
Posted by Mike Lief at 10:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 19, 2008
California, judicial arrogance and gay "marriage"
I wrote last week about the decision by judges to remake society and redefine marriage, venting my spleen thusly:
Thank goodness the California Supreme Court reminded everyone that it doesn't really matter who we elect to represent us; it's the imperial judiciary that runs the show, rewriting the law to say what the legislature was really trying to say, throwing out statutes when they don't satisfy the policy preferences of our black-robed rulers, telling the People to take their voter initiatives, propositions and Constitutional Amendments and cram them where the sun don't shine.
Commenter BullButz disagrees, impressed less by the merits of my rhetoric than by my capacity for bloviating.
Wow! That's a bold statement without any explanation of how this week's gay marriage cases did anything other than interpret the CA Constitution in such a way that found that the voter initiative that amended a statute violates the CA Constitution. This isn't an originalist vs. living constitution debate. This is a case which simply says that the way an initiative amended a statute is unconstitutional. Unless you're saying that Marbury v. Madison was wrongly decided and justices shouldn't decide whether statutes are constitutional or not.
I realize the 120+ pages it takes to get to this analysis is intolerable reading, but this case is not evidence of judical legislation imposed based on the justices policy views.
Mr. BullButz then reminds me that the four-justice majority was comprised of three Republican appointees and one Democratic selection, proving ... what? That GOP governors who try to appease centrists end up putting squishy activist judges on the bench, too?
I'll readily concede that point, proven by this decision and thousands more, from state to federal, East Coast to West, from sea to shining sea.
As to BullButz' contention that the California Supremes merely did their jobs and cleaned up after the incompetent (or racist) People, I'll allow Justice Baxter to speak for me, quoting liberally from his dissent in the gay marriage case (because I don't feel like reinventing the wheel, and Baxter says it well).
I cannot join the majority’s holding that the California Constitution gives same-sex couples a right to marry. In reaching this decision, I believe, the majority violates the separation of powers, and thereby commits profound error.
Only one other American state recognizes the right the majority announces today. So far, Congress, and virtually every court to consider the issue, has rejected it. Nothing in our Constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority’s startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage — an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law — is no longer valid. California statutes already recognize same-sex unions and grant them all the substantive legal rights this state can bestow. If there is to be a further sea change in the social and legal understanding of marriage itself, that evolution should occur by similar democratic means. The majority forecloses this ordinary democratic process, and, in doing so, oversteps its authority.
[...]
The majority’s mode of analysis is particularly troubling. The majority relies heavily on the Legislature’s adoption of progressive civil rights protections for gays and lesbians to find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. In effect, the majority gives the Legislature indirectly power that body does not directly possess to amend the Constitution and repeal an initiative statute. I cannot subscribe to the majority’s reasoning, or to its result.
[...]
The question presented by this case is simple and stark. It comes down to this: Even though California’s progressive laws, recently adopted through the democratic process, have pioneered the rights of same-sex partners to enter legal unions with all the substantive benefits of opposite-sex legal unions, do those laws nonetheless violate the California Constitution because at present, in deference to long and universal tradition, by a convincing popular vote, and in accord with express national policy, they reserve the label “marriage” for opposite-sex legal unions? I must conclude that the answer is no.
... Left to its own devices, the ordinary democratic process might well produce, ere long, a consensus among most Californians that the term “marriage” should, in civil parlance, include the legal unions of same-sex partners.
But a bare majority of this court, not satisfied with the pace of democratic change, now abruptly forestalls that process and substitutes, by judicial fiat, its own social policy views for those expressed by the People themselves. Undeterred by the strong weight of state and federal law and authority, the majority invents a new constitutional right, immune from the ordinary process of legislative consideration. The majority finds that our Constitution suddenly demands no less than a permanent redefinition of marriage, regardless of the popular will.
In doing so, the majority holds, in effect, that the Legislature has done indirectly what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly. Under article II, section 10, subdivision (c), that body cannot unilaterally repeal an initiative statute, such as Family Code section 308.5, unless the initiative measure itself so provides. Section 308.5 contains no such provision. Yet the majority suggests that, by enacting other statutes which do provide substantial rights to gays and lesbians — including domestic partnership rights which, under section 308.5, the Legislature could not call “marriage” — the Legislature has given “explicit official recognition” to a California right of equal treatment which, because it includes the right to marry, thereby invalidates section 308.5.5
I cannot join this exercise in legal jujitsu, by which the Legislature’s own weight is used against it to create a constitutional right from whole cloth, defeat the People’s will, and invalidate a statute otherwise immune from legislative interference. Though the majority insists otherwise, its pronouncement seriously oversteps the judicial power. The majority purports to apply certain fundamental provisions of the state Constitution, but it runs afoul of another just as fundamental — article III, section 3, the separation of powers clause. This clause declares that “[t]he powers of state government are legislative, executive, and judicial,” and that “[p]ersons charged with the exercise of one power may not exercise either of the others” except as the Constitution itself specifically provides. (Italics added.)
History confirms the importance of the judiciary’s constitutional role as a check against majoritarian abuse. Still, courts must use caution when exercising the potentially transformative authority to articulate constitutional rights. Otherwise, judges with limited accountability risk infringing upon our society’s most basic shared premise — the People’s general right, directly or through their chosen legislators, to decide fundamental issues of public policy for themselves. Judicial restraint is particularly appropriate where, as here, the claimed constitutional entitlement is of recent conception and challenges the most fundamental assumption about a basic social institution.
The majority has violated these principles. It simply does not have the right to erase, then recast, the age-old definition of marriage, as virtually all societies have understood it, in order to satisfy its own contemporary notions of equality and justice.
I'm afraid that -- much as it pains me to say that a judge got something right for a change -- Baxter has done exactly that, providing a powerful rejection and rebuttal of the majority's basis for redefining marriage.
I also suspect this will prove a Phyrric victory for those in favor of "gay marriage," serving to galvanize conservative voters otherwise disgusted by the GOP and its candidates, giving them a reason to head to the voting booth, to vote for the California Constitutional Amendment limiting "marriage" to a man and a woman -- as well as giving McCain a nationwide boost on the activist judges issue alone.
Bravo!
And so we come to yet another legal concept: the law of unintended consequences. This could be just what it takes to keep a Republican in the White House.
Heh.
Posted by Mike Lief at 06:09 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
May 17, 2008
The Meaning of Life
Thanks to the folks at Hulu, not only can you watch new TV shows and movies -- as well as old-but-rarely-seen favorites like I Spy, Hill Street Blues and St. Elsewhere -- but you can also pick your favorite scenes and embed them on your own webpage to share with friends.
Take, for instance, the above musical number from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life. How could anything I write do justice to the lavishly choreographed production of "Every Sperm is Sacred"?
Can you tell I'm enjoying Hulu?
What a great site.
Posted by Mike Lief at 10:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Now that's acting
If you know anything about Alec Baldwin, you also know that there's no other actor this side of Sean Penn with whom I disagree more when it comes to politics. Baldwin is a reliable basher of all things conservative, a classic Hollywood liberal, ordinarily someone I'd avoid watching.
But, the thing is, he's simply hilarious as Jack Donaghy, the Head of East Coast Television and Microwave Oven Programming at General Electric on 30 Rock, a sitcom that you really, really need to watch.
The clip above is just one of the reasons why I'll set aside my deep-seated distaste for Baldwin's politics every Thursday night.
And if you've missed out on the series so far, hop on over to Hulu, where you can watch every episode for free.
Posted by Mike Lief at 09:31 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Ah, the joys of middle age
Billy Connolly provides a glimpse into the uncomfortable horror that is every 40-something-and-older man's least favorite medical exam, the prostate check.
This one's chock full of profanity -- as well it should be, given the procedure involved -- and it's a hoot.
Posted by Mike Lief at 08:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 16, 2008
Noonan to GOP: Sucks to be you
Peggy Noonan takes a stab at what's ailing the Republican Party, reeling after losing a series of Congressional special elections, an ill portent of things to come in the Fall.
Noonan titles her piece, "Pity Party." Clever. I'd paraphrase: GOP? Sucks to be you.
These were the standout paragraphs:
"This was a real wakeup call for us," someone named Robert M. Duncan, who is chairman of the Republican National Committee, told the New York Times. This was after Mississippi. "We can't let the Democrats take our issues." And those issues would be? "We can't let them pretend to be conservatives," he continued. Why not? Republicans pretend to be conservative every day.
The Bush White House, faced with the series of losses from 2005 through '08, has long claimed the problem is Republicans on the Hill and running for office. They have scandals, bad personalities, don't stand for anything. That's why Republicans are losing: because they're losers.
All true enough!
But this week a House Republican said publicly what many say privately, that there is another truth. "Members and pundits . . . fail to understand the deep seated antipathy toward the president, the war, gas prices, the economy, foreclosures," said Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia in a 20-page memo to House GOP leaders.
The party, Mr. Davis told me, is "an airplane flying right into a mountain." Analyses of its predicament reflect an "investment in the Bush presidency," but "the public has just moved so far past that." "Our leaders go up to the second floor of the White House and they get a case of White House-itis." Mr. Bush has left the party at a disadvantage in terms of communications: "He can't articulate. The only asset we have now is the big microphone, and he swallowed it." The party, said Mr. Davis, must admit its predicament, act independently of the White House, and force Democrats to define themselves. "They should have some ownership for what's going on. They control the budget. They pay no price. . . . Obama has all happy talk, but it's from 30,000 feet. Energy, immigration, what is he gonna do?"
What a train wreck. The GOP offers voters a magnificent choice: Vote for us, because we're not quite as bad as the other guys.
Which is true, as far as it goes, at least when it comes to the pols on the margins like Kennedy, Schumer, Bloviating Joe Biden. But the great mass of Republicans in Congress have accomplished nothing in the last decade that stands out as hewing to classic small-government principles.
"Compassionate conservatism" -- perhaps Pres. Bush's worst contribution to the political lexicon -- gave us greater governmental control of Americans' lives, especially in health care and education, as the president's congressional compatriots worked just as hard to shovel taxpayer dollars into the eager, gaping maws of whatever special interests squealed the loudest.
Honestly, the GOP seemed to be engaged in a competition with the Dems: Who can squander the mostest the fastest.
"Hooray! We won!"
Then they started losing.
And losing.
And losing.
Movement conservatives have a hard time getting motivated to turn out and support the current crop of candidates, from McCain, at the top of the ticket, to the generic, feckless crapweasel RINO running for his twenty-second term in Congress.
Thank goodness the California Supreme Court reminded everyone that it doesn't really matter who we elect to represent us; it's the imperial judiciary that runs the show, rewriting the law to say what the legislature was really trying to say, throwing out statutes when they don't satisfy the policy preferences of our black-robed rulers, telling the People to take their voter initiatives, propositions and Constitutional Amendments and cram them where the sun don't shine.
Happy days.
Posted by Mike Lief at 06:14 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
May 14, 2008
Gaetano's Ristorante
Every time I'm in Paso Robles I try to have dinner at Ristorante da Gaetano, where I'm assured a fine meal, great wine, and top-notch service -- all provided under the watchful eye of the owner.
Gaetano suggested we start off with the Sicilian Sausage on garlic potatoes; it was stunningly good, provoking a near riot at our table over who got the last few bites. It's not on the menu, so make sure and ask if it's available.
The wine was a new one for me; the Chianti I'd ordered wasn't available, so we also went with another suggestion from the owner and, as with the antipasti, he hadn't steered us wrong.
When it came time for the main course, I went (again) with the Pollo Tutto Mio,
Roasted, organically-raised chicken stuffed with goat cheese, pine nuts, sun-dried tomatoes & spinach.
I've never been unduly impressed by the "organically grown" movement, but this was the biggest, juiciest chicken breast I've ever had the pleasure of devouring. And the pesto sauce! Yowzer.
Did I mention how juicy and moist it was? Dry, rubber chicken is apparently unknown in Gaetano's kitchen.
Andy went with the Rack of Lamb. After the first bite, when he recovered the power of speech, he pronounced it "the best I've ever had!" before resuming his meal.
Anthony went for a pasta dish, which he -- our resident Sicilian -- said was perfect.
There was agreement when it came to dessert: Tiramisu all around.
Not too sweet, with a hint of bitter chocolate, it was the perfect end to a terrific meal.
Ristorante da Gaetano, 1646 Spring Street (at 17th) · Paso Robles, CA 93446 · 805.239.1070
Posted by Mike Lief at 06:33 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
May 12, 2008
Ventura County Star watch: Sucking up to crooks
Stop the presses! The journalistic geniuses at the local fish wrap -- aka, The Ventura County Star -- delivered not one but two thumbsuckers recently, devoting prime space, color photos and purple prose to the plight of criminals.
Just in time for Mother's Day, the Star ran what was intended to be a heart-rending story about moms separated from their kids, trapped behind bars, and the emotional reunions to be had with their children as the tykes came to visit their loving, lonely, nurturing and misunderstood inmate mommies.
You'd have to have a heart of stone not to find the whole thing hilarious -- and infuriating.
Photos by Jason Redmond / Star staff
A toddler plays "Jailbreak!" with his mommy at the local lockup last week, part of a taxpayer-funded party for women being oppressed by the patriarchical criminal so-called "justice" system.
The eager moms pulled their hair into neat pony tails, borrowed their favorite blue eye shadow and ironed the only clothes they own as they primped for a visit from their young children.
Since the last time they saw their sons or daughters a year ago, some of the kids have learned to walk and speak and read.
Many of the waiting moms were little more than kids themselves, barely adults who have experienced a lifetime's worth of court dates, drugs and crime.
But for these few hours, when the wards of the Ventura Youth Correctional Facility get a Mother's Day visit from their children, that all melts away.
"It's the best thing to happen in jail, to see your kids," a 23-year-old woman said as she waited for her 14-month-old baby.
"I can still smell her on my sweatshirt when I go to bed."
Yeah, subjecting your own child to seeing his mother behind bars, now that's an unselfish, caring thing to do.
Only one family showed up for the party, the other inmates returning to their cells, dejected, but at least able to drown their sorrows in heart-shaped peanut butter and jelly sammiches.
Of the seven moms that were expecting to see their children Friday, only one family showed up at the Camarillo facility that took part in Get on the Bus, a statewide program that unites prisoners with their children. Some moms went back to their cells crying, others hoped that maybe their families would come Sunday, the real Mother's Day.[...]
Still, the facility's staff was ready for a party. Streamers were strung, heart-shaped peanut butter and jelly sandwiches were laid out and free toys for the kids lined the visiting room where music was playing.
Jennifer Stinson, a 19-year-old from Fresno who got tangled up with methamphetamine and is now serving a sentence for grand theft auto, was the only ward who got to see her child.
Here's a newsflash for you: Going to jail sucks. Becoming a junkie and stealing cars brings shame and dishonor to your family. Choosing a life of crime carries with it a pretty clear, it's-all-about-me message.
"Tangled up with methamphetamine"? Makes it sound like she was ensnared in its wicked web, like a wayward butterfly.
A twitchy, tweaking, car-stealing butterfly.
Please.
How 'bout a heart-rending story on the ordeal of the mothers of crime victims, mourning the loss of their children, unable to visit with them because the kids are dead.
Nah, too obvious, been done to death -- er -- been done before.
Or a Mother's Day-themed piece about kids making videocalls to their citizen-soldier mom's serving their nation overseas?
Ewwww -- could be construed as patriotic. Can't have that. Although we could spin it as another inhumane result of the Chimpy McBusHitler-Cheney-Halliburton administration.
But wait! There's more!
Digging back just a little further into the Star's treasure trove of lowlife fawning profiles and using children as stage dressing, we have this piece, detailing the continuing police persecution of a loving father, drug addict and head of a local criminal street gang.
Joseph A. Garcia / Star staff
George Christie, Jr., takes time to play with his four-year-old son at his Ventura home, a change of pace from his former hell-raising days as the head of the local chapter of the Hell's Angels.
Ventura County prosecutors did not file drug charges at Friday's scheduled arraignment of former Hells Angels leader George Christie Jr., and his attorney said the delay was evidence of a weak case stemming from years of vindictive, costly intimidation against his client.
"This continues a pattern of harassment," said Los Angeles defense attorney Robert Sheahen.
[...]
Christie was arrested last week — the day before his 61st birthday — after members of a Sheriff's Department gang unit found less than 2 grams of suspected cocaine and methamphetamine in his Ventura home, police said. A gram of cocaine can sell for $50 to $100 on the street.
The substances were discovered after one of three search warrants was served at Christie's home in the 400 block of Ventura Avenue. Deputies also determined Christie was under the influence of cocaine and methamphetamine, officials said.
[...]
Christie declined to comment on the new case. But Sheahen said in interviews this week that Christie has relinquished his role as president and unofficial spokesman for the Hells Angels motorcycle club.
Sheahen said authorities are wasting taxpayers' money going after Christie. The father of a 4-year-old boy, Christie spends most of his time at home, particularly since a motorcycle accident last year put him under a doctor's care, the attorney said.
"All of this stuff is loony. It's nonsense," Sheahen said, speculating any drugs found in Christie's system likely were prescribed. "He's been a perfect probationer" since a massive 2001 drug and racketeering case that made national headlines, Sheahen said.
How often does a newspaper feel the urge to photograph a criminal suspect -- any criminal suspect -- playing with his kid? In his own home? What does such a picture say to the readers?
And why this suspect?
Isn't it interesting that newspapers can't figure out why circulation's tanking, paid subscribers rushing to cancel their home delivery. I'd say the answer's laying in your driveway.
Posted by Mike Lief at 06:14 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 07, 2008
Stephen King: Thin-skinned celebutante
According to an Associated Press report, author Stephen King reacted badly when taken to task for remarks he made at a conference last month.
A blogger jumped on King’s statement at the Library of Congress about the importance of reading in which he suggested poor readers have limited prospects, including service in the Army.
"I don’t want to sound like an ad, a public service ad on TV, but the fact is if you can read, you can walk into a job later on. If you don’t, then you’ve got the Army, Iraq, I don’t know, something like that. It’s not as bright," King said at the April 4 event in which he was accompanied by his wife Tabitha and son Owen.
Blogger Noel Sheppard likened the comment to former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry’s remarks that if you don’t get a good education, "you get stuck in Iraq."
"Nice sentiment when the nation is at war, Stephen," Sheppard wrote.
King posted a heated response on his website.
A message from Stephen
That a right-wing-blog would impugn my patriotism because I said children should learn to read, and could get better jobs by doing so, is beneath contempt.
Noel Sheppard says, “Nice sentiment when the nation is at war, Stephen.”
I guess he feels ignorance and illiteracy are OK when the country needs cannon-fodder. I guess he also feels that the war in Iraq has nationwide approval.
Well, it doesn’t have mine. It is a waste of national resources. . . and that includes the youth and blood of the 4,000 American troops who have lost their lives there and for the tens of thousands who have been wounded.
I live in a national guard town, and I support our troops, but I don’t support either the war or educational policies that limit the options of young men and women to any one career—military or otherwise.
If you agree, find Sheppard on the internet, and send him an email:
“Hi, Noel—Stephen King says to shut up and I agree.”
Steve
Now, I've enjoyed reading King's novels since I was in junior high (Salem's Lot scared the bejabbers out of me!), but this is really disappointing.
To begin with, the "impugning my patriotism" line is weak, very weak. On the other hand, I think it is fair to question King's purported support for the troops, given that he thinks only unedjimicated, illiterate buffoons, lacking any other possible alternatives, would volunteer to serve in the military.
I guess [the conservative blogger] feels ignorance and illiteracy are OK when the country needs cannon-fodder.
[...]
I live in a national guard town, and I support our troops, but I don’t support either the war or educational policies that limit the options of young men and women to any one career—military or otherwise.
Wow.
"Cannon-fodder"?
"[L]imited prospects"?
Who knew that King held the troops that he supposedly supports in such contempt?
I've spent the last few days working with National Guard troops getting ready to deploy -- many for their second or third trip into the combat zone -- and they don't seem to fit the stereotype that King clings to, that of a loser who ends up in the military because he's too stupid to do anything else.
Many of the GIs I've dealt with are college grads; some have their own businesses; none have been illiterate; and to a man (and woman) have been anything but the drooling, slack-jawed yokels waiting to be marched headlong into the blazing muzzles of enemy cannon that King imagines them to be.
I'm reminded of the soldiers I met during a previous mission
Sergeant First Class C. is a boyish-looking soldier with a ready smile and laid-back demeanor. You wouldn't think he'd deployed twice already, once to Iraq and later to Kuwait.
"Which did you prefer?" I ask.
"Kuwait was like a vacation," he answers.
He pauses for a moment, then continues in a mild tone.
"On the other hand, I got shot and blown up in Iraq, so there's really no comparison."
Did I mention he wears the Combat Infantryman Badge on his ACUs?
That probably explains the jagged scar running from beneath the collar of his blouse, up along his neck, running uncomfortably close to his carotid artery.
He's a CHP officer in civilian life, and we trade stories about DUI arrests and prosecutions in our respective counties.
As he initials the pages of the will I've prepared, I notice the aluminum wristband he wears honoring a fellow trooper killed in combat; I'm curious, but don't want to pry.
Fallen comrades; torn flesh. He seems remarkably angst-free, not at all tormented by his experiences.
And yet -- despite what he's seen and suffered -- the sergeant has volunteered, eager to take part in another mission, leaving behind a wife and two young kids as he returns to hunt down and kill our enemies.
Later, I meet his commanding officer, Lt.Col. T., a man who decided to give up a career in the pharmaceutical industry back in the early '80s, enlisting in the army because he was too old to get a commission. He took his chances as an enlisted man, hoping he'd get the waivers necessary to become an officer. At 32, he was years older than his fellow recruits, but he persevered, earning his commission and serving as an active duty officer in the Regular Army for a few years, before joining the National Guard.
In the ensuing years, Lt.Col. T. founded an environmental consulting firm, raised a family, and always thought about resuming his military career, full-time.
In the days after 9-11, that impulse became more urgent, tamped down only by his obligations to his family.
Not too long ago, his wife told him she knew how much he longed to answer the call to arms ... and that it was okay.
Now in his 50s, Lt.Col. T. is getting ready to lead his GIs into battle with a cadre of experienced NCOs, men like Sgt. C., to watch his back and help shepherd his troops safely through the challenging days ahead.
And the environmental consulting firm? He's shutting it down, so he can do something really important.
Yeah, clearly cannon-fodder, Steve-O, men who joined the Guard for lack of anything better to do, given their horrendous public-school, taxpayer-funded educations.
King ended his spittle-flecked response by asking his fans, "If you agree [with King], find Sheppard on the internet, and send him an email:
“Hi, Noel—Stephen King says to shut up and I agree.”
I'd invite you lend your support to Noel Sheppard, and leave a comment on his site.
As for King, well, I wish he'd take his own advice and just shut the hell up.
Posted by Mike Lief at 12:17 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
The morning after
Well, that was interesting. Obama met expectations, winning a decisive 14-point victory in North Carolina, while Hillary Clinton underperformed, barely ekeing out a 51-49 win in Indiana -- although Obama outspent her by as much as 3-1, softening the blow.
Still, Clinton's argument that she's the more electable of the two took a body blow last night; I think it's likely that we'll see more and more Democratic superdelegates committing to Obama.
The most revealing part of the evening was watching Bill Clinton and Chelsea in the background while Hillary spoke; Chelsea looked stricken, a smile that never seemed to reach her eyes plastered on her face, seemingly experiencing one of those moments where you want to be supportive, but don't have the heart to tell a loved one that they're completely deluded.
There were moments where I thought Bill was either going to fall asleep or wander off stage, but I was more concerned by his pallor, red blotches on his cheeks; the man looks unwell.
Emily Yoffe, who blogs at Slate's XX Factor, captured the moment -- and some of what I was thinking.
I also enjoyed watching the backdrop behind Hillary—the shifting facial expressions of Bill Clinton. I'm always intrigued by the semiotics of what she does with Bill.
At the last few election nights she's had him in camera range as she spoke; whenever she has him close it seems to signal she feels she's in trouble.
At first Bill watched her with that lip-biting look of enchantment we know so well, but as the speech wore on the mask seemed to drop and you could almost read his thoughts:
"Hill, you haven't got it. I've got it, and you haven't, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Hill, guess what, all those years you sacrificed for my career—well, it turns out I wasn't holding you back. You're only on this stage because of me, and even so, now that it's your turn and you had everything in your favor—Hill, you just haven't got it. And let's face it, Obama, he's got it."
The Clintons are positively Shakespearean, don't you think? I remain convinced that the only thing worse for Bill Clinton than seeing his wife fail would be seeing her succeed -- and ending up as the First Husband.
Posted by Mike Lief at 11:07 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 05, 2008
Man bites dog
Stop the presses! The media is in the tank for the Obamassiah.
You knew that, didn't you?
The newsworthy part of the story is the person pointing the finger at the journos: one of their own.
Salon's editor-in-chief Joan Walsh -- no neocon she -- dished on her colleagues during an appearance on a Sunday morning gabfest -- and revealed that Hillary is not exactly their favorite, either, which may go a long way toward explaining the way this campaign is being covered.
I was struck when I got to Iowa and New Hampshire in January by how our media colleagues were just swooning over Barack Obama. That is not too strong a word. They were swooning.
I was at a speech, I remember it, I will write about it some day, in Manchester, and every, the biggest names in our business were there, and they were, they could repeat some of his speech lines to one another. It was like a Bruce Springsteen concert where the fans sing along.
And, you know, I respected it to some extent. He's a towering political figure. Of our generation, he's probably the best politician, he's inspiring. And, reporters, white reporters, black reporters, reporters of every race, we want to get beyond racism in America. So, he was, he was inspiring, I understood it, they're humans, they responded.
The downside though is that they hate, hate Hillary Clinton, most of them. Hate is not too strong a word.
But -- but, they're journalists! They're professionals! They're supposed to be impartial!
Yeah.
And I'm Napolean Bonaparte.
Video of Walsh's interview here.
Posted by Mike Lief at 11:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Idiotic energy policy
As Clinton and Obama spar over her support for a "gas tax holiday" -- she thinks it's good for consumers and he thinks it's just political pandering -- the Wall Street Journal points out that all of the candidates are economic retards when it comes to energy policy.
Mr. Obama is right to oppose the gas-tax gimmick, but his idea is even worse. Neither proposal addresses the problem of energy supply, especially the lack of domestic oil and gas thanks to decades of Congressional restrictions on U.S. production. Mr. Obama supports most of those "no drilling" rules, but that hasn't stopped him from denouncing high gas prices on the campaign trail. He is running TV ads in North Carolina that show him walking through a gas station and declaring that he'll slap a tax on the $40 billion in "excess profits" of Exxon Mobil.
[...]
You may also be wondering how a higher tax on energy will lower gas prices. Normally, when you tax something, you get less of it, but Mr. Obama seems to think he can repeal the laws of economics. We tried this windfall profits scheme in 1980. It backfired. The Congressional Research Service found in a 1990 analysis that the tax reduced domestic oil production by 3% to 6% and increased oil imports from OPEC by 8% to 16%. Mr. Obama nonetheless pledges to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, which he says "costs America $800 million a day." Someone should tell him that oil imports would soar if his tax plan becomes law. The biggest beneficiaries would be OPEC oil ministers.
Less is more, up is down, energy independence is more dependence on Middle East oil. The kind of brilliance one can only get from a presidential candidate.
Here's the nut 'graf, where the Journal knocks it out of the park.
This tiff over gas and oil taxes only highlights the intellectual policy confusion – or perhaps we should say cynicism – of our politicians. They want lower prices but don't want more production to increase supply. They want oil "independence" but they've declared off limits most of the big sources of domestic oil that could replace foreign imports. They want Americans to use less oil to reduce greenhouse gases but they protest higher oil prices that reduce demand. They want more oil company investment but they want to confiscate the profits from that investment. And these folks want to be President?
Our politicians are, to put a fine point on it, illiterates -- cretins -- when it comes to understanding something as basic as supply and demand. They're also seemingly interested in crippling our economy, rather than doing anything to increase our domestic energy supplies.
What a hopeless, hapless bunch.
Posted by Mike Lief at 07:09 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Moonbat Watch: European edition
Just when you think you've heard it all, something comes along to prove how wrong you are.
Thanks to our more highly-evolved, incredibly ethical European betters comes the latest in politically correct jackassery: "Human rights" for plants.
At the request of the Swiss government, an ethics panel has weighed in on the “dignity” of plants and opined that the arbitrary killing of flora is morally wrong. This is no hoax. The concept of what could be called “plant rights” is being seriously debated.
A few years ago the Swiss added to their national constitution a provision requiring “account to be taken of the dignity of creation when handling animals, plants and other organisms.” No one knew exactly what it meant, so they asked the Swiss Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology to figure it out. The resulting report, “The Dignity of Living Beings with Regard to Plants,” is enough to short circuit the brain.
It's almost enough to make me want to eat my veggies -- but only after boiling them alive first, then dismembering them with a dull knife and using my jagged, dangerously sharp teeth to rend them into soggy little bits.
Oh, the horror.
Posted by Mike Lief at 06:35 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 04, 2008
Carole King
Carole King is the talented singer-songwriter responsible for a number of monster hits, including "You've Got A Friend":
You just call out my name
And you know wherever I am,
I'll come running
To see you again.Winter, Spring, Summer or Fall,
All you got to do is call,
And I'll be there (yes I will),
You've got a friend.
King has a lovely voice -- her album "Tapestry" is a constant source of aural pleasure -- so I was pleasantly surprised to find an interview with her on XM radio this afternoon.
Not only did I learn that she's a New Age-y space cadet, deeply taken with the inane cliches of some swami type, but she also has a speaking voice that is just like that of the Long Island Jewish-American princess that Mike Meyers used to play in drag on SNL!
Oy vey!
And such a liberal moonbat, too.
That's what I get for listening to Allan Colmes.
Posted by Mike Lief at 09:29 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
May 01, 2008
Thursday Bogie
Bogie enoys a quiet moment with Sheriff Bob, sitting in the morning sun with the purple lawman.
Posted by Mike Lief at 07:50 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack