Organization is Key

The Gates of Vienna is just one of many blogs focusing on anti-Islamic Fascism work for some time, and they are always a good read. The Baron's recent post on forming an independent group to try and organize seem worth noting. I've asked the focus at the group to keep me up to date. perhaps there are more people interesting in working on that sand castle then I thought. between them and the 101st Fighting Keybees I'm pretty well signed up. Now if only the folks would send me my 101st Fighting Keyboardists' "Chickenhawk" t-shirt.

Of course I can't forget RegimeChange Iran, Because one they have a cool logo, and two because they are a great source of info, although I've been slacking lately and haven't hit them up as much as I should.

Maybe the last thing we need is a Crusade

Especially since Al-Qaeda's definition of a crusade is apparently the West's top religious figure going to a muslim country and profusely apologizing for remarks which were: A. a quotation from the middle ages, and B. basically true.
No, the Prince of the Church calls for an end to violence in the nation where an Islamist shot a nun in the back. Besides attacking children, is there anything that could possibly be more cowardly than shooting a nun?

Meanwhile, everyone's favorite Iranian dictator writes a letter to the "noble american people." I''m tempted to fisk the whole document hear, but others in the blogosphere will do it better than me. I'm content however to point out, that if Americans were as noble as Ahmadinejad suggests, we'd have had enough of his efforts to convert us via the sword, kill armed forces, undermine our efforts at establishing liberty.

I'm also wondering when Jimmy Carter will file suit over Ahmadinejad's plagarism.

"I've got a bad feeling about this"

It's perhaps the most repeated line in the Starwars Trilogy. It's also the refrain we are hearing time and time again from every aspect of society. With this country as partisan and fractured as we've seen in a long time, perhaps we should be grateful that we all agree on something. "We're screwed." (to use the parlance of our time)
There are the environmentalists screaming that we are all going to melt under the rays of an unrelenting sun. There are the anti-Bush moonbats who seem convinced that within a few months Bush will call for martial law and declare a herditary theocratic imperial government. Then, on the other side of the spectrum, there is the conviction, (which I happen to share btw), that the west is being swamped with growing Jihadist sentiment, and are worried that our children are going to grow up wearing burqas and paying the jizya, that Iran and other dangerous regimes will soon acquire nuclear weapons, and, (on the domestic end) we risk being overrun by illegal immigration, and losing our traditional character. A prominent politican (whose name escapes me at the moment) even referenced efforts at free trade agreements as an attempt at a North American Supra-government. I'm certainly not immune to it myself. In a converstation with my brother over the Thanksgiving table, he and I ended up essentially agreeing that a return to tribalism/feudalism was on the horizon where people will have to come to terms with the fact that ultimately the state has no intention, or ability to defend them, and so they, (as people usually do), will end up relying on family and friends as allies against the rest of an increasingly darking world.

Stepping away for a moment from actually attempting to validate or invalidate any of these fears, I'm curious why we are facing them at all. At what point did the west lose such confidence in themselves that despite their differences of opinion, they can all essentially agree that a 3000 year heritage has failed. (500 b.c birth of the Greek city-state democracies) A civilization which has survived one dark age already, seen the rise of liberalism, scientific inquiry, and has been responsbile for almost every significant technological development in the past 400 years. Of course if one's catastrophe of choice is the environmental one than its because of those 400 years of scientific advancement. But whether you agree that it is in spite of, or because of our technological and cultural advancements, where did this recurring feeling that we (or perhaps mankind in general) are about to be squashed in the trash compactor of history come from? Some have attributed it to an abandonment of faith and religion. I don't know if that's accurate. While I agree with those who argue that the march of western civilization since at least the protestant reformation has been towards increasing individualism, independence, and ultimately isolation, I think instead it's in part an abandonment not so much of faith, as of purpose. If one's purpose in life is best fulfilled by gossiping over whether or not some millionare trailer trash singer did or did not get filmed while engaging in marital bliss, or whether or not a man decorated as a zebra did or did not make the right call on whether a overpaid athlete did or did not put his right foot down out of bounds. If that's the extent of our existence than perhaps we have simply come to the realization that it doesn't really matter, in the great scheme of things whether some maniac jihadi saws our head off with a rusty scimitar, or if we drown under a wave of fridge ice-cap water. When one realizes that he is 25 years of age, and that in the endeavors of science, culture, philosophy and political thought all concepts worth concieving have been concieved one is struck with the knowledge that we are a civilization in decline.
Have you ever built a sand castle, and, as high tide rolls in, you frantically dig a deeper moat, or pile sand on top of sand, until you find yourself frantically protecting a structure which is either nothing but one large ditch, or a massive pile of sand without any resemblance to the structure you spent 4 hours building? Your fingernails are bleeding from the scraping of sand, and yet ultimately you've accomplished nothingI find something to be hopefully about in that innate desire to act, to save what we have made. You can't help but do it, even though you know its futility. I'll see you on the beach

Bolton Is really that cool.

The man is all that and a bag of chips. The man's moustache alone is ten times cooler than I will ever be.

Money quote:

Asked whether the U.N. Security Council should continue with the Hariri tribunal because of the "instability" now in Lebanon, U.N. ambassador John Bolton lashed out. "How incredibly wrong that would be. How incredibly wrong that would be. Instability? They're killing people in Lebanon. They're assassinating political leaders. Not the time to seek justice? There may be those on the Security Council who say it. Let them step forward and say it," Bolton said.

Blair Murders Anti-Syrian Christian Leader Pierre Gemayel

The title is a little extreme, but stay with me and I think you'll see it
holds. PM Tony Blair recently made international headlines by suggesting that the West needed to work with Iran and Syria on the issue of Iraq.

He said that he had a message for Tehran and Damascus: “If you are prepared to be part of the solution, there is a partnership available to you. But at the moment, and this is particularly so in respect of what Iran is doing in supporting terrorism throughout the Middle East and acting in breach of its nuclear weapons obligations, you are behaving in such a way that makes such a partnership impossible.”

Than yesterday the Syrians send their first minister level official to Iraq since Saddam was ousted from power.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem arrived in Iraq
on Sunday in the first such visit by a senior Syrian official since the 2003 fall of Saddam Hussein's regime. He was expected to return to Damascus later Tuesday

So far so good right? Blair made them an offer, and the Syrians move to establish relations with Iraq in a move described as " a move that could stem some of Iraq's unrelenting violence." Brilliant diplomacy Mr.Blair.

Then, what comes a short while later? An Anti-Syrian politican in Lebanon is gunned down.

Ah, the nature of compromise. A little quid pro quo. Just as the overthrow of Saddam and the establishment of an Iraqi constitution was a slap in the face to Syria, which led to the people of Lebanon kicking out the Syrian military, which, like the Libyan surrender of its weapons program was a major plus to the whole Iraq operation, now, Blair is being offered a choice. Throw Lebanon under the bus, and maybe we can reach a compromise on Iraq. People who call for diplomacy sometimes forget that it isn't all flowery pretty speeches in French at the UN. Much of the world conducts diplomacy in millimeters, either 5.56 of 7.62.

So what do you think Mr. Blair? Do you have a counter offer, or is Pierre Gemayel simply the price of doing business?

Rangeling up a larger military

Well, Charlie Rangel is at it again. Aren't we so glad that this guy gets to be in the majority now? Trying to reinstall the draft.

It's not that I'm even necessarily against the idea of conscripted service. What I am against is Rangel introducing the draft. Rangel isn't introducing the draft into the discussion because he thinks it will help the war effort. He's doing it because the vast majority of Americans hate the idea of a draft, and he thinks if he can get one, it will kill not only support for this war, but support for any war. If Charlie Rangel gets his way, the only thing we'll have to draft is the one guy responsible for raising the white flag.

You are seriously telling me, that everyone else in Harlem was soo busy, and had better things to do, that they couldn't find someone else to replace this clown?

File Under No SH** Sherlock

If I did it... says OJ Simpson

My first ever fight with my first ever girlfriend (only ever?) was over OJ Simpson, because I mocked her idea that because of the close proximity of houses in the Brentwood area, the murder would have required professional killers instead of the co-star of the "Naked Gun" series. From what I've heard of Simpsons entirely hypothetical description, he did take "someone" with him to the home where he "hypothetically" murdered 2 people. So maybe we were both sort of right.

That's how domestic arguments usually turn out. (with both parties being partially right, not with a double murder... well some times.)

Instapundit: Why Democracy is Like Sex

Glenn Reynolds says

When I clicked on the post, I thought he was going to paraphrase the old quote about Sex; "when it's good its very good, when its bad, its better than nothing."

Instead he talks about about parasites. Typical Instapundit. Still a very scientific way of looking at the the ancient democratic principle of "throw the bastards out."

Leach for UN Ambassador?

"He is the most diplomatic politician I have ever met," Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., said of Leach, a moderate from Iowa known for his professorial sweaters, his low-key, nonpolitical approach to issues and his opposition to the war in Iraq. (FoxNews)

That's all I need to hear. Not just no, but hell no. The last thing we need is some bunny hugger in Turtle Bay. The place is a verifiable cesspool which consists of child-rapist blue helmets, corrupt administrators, and is little more than a Gentlemen's club for tyrants, dictators and the criminally insane.

John Bolton is (was) an ass kicker. He kept America out of the completely absurd human rights commission, got resolutions against North Korea, and has been punishing in his efforts to reform the waste of good NY real estate.

I don't know anything about Leach except what this article says, but its all I need to know. Why the hell would you appoint someone whose against your largest foreign policy effort (that is to say Iraq) to a foreign policy post?

You always know its gonna be a warm softy appointment, when everyone is talking about how diplomatic someone is. When did the definition of diplomacy get changed from, "saying nice doggie until you can get a stick," to, "say nice doggie till you can get another dog biscuit."?

All the Strategery you will ever need.

This Iraq Survey group which meet with Bush yesterday, spent most of the day looking at other potential strategies in Iraq. To save everyone trouble, I've attached a definition.

Strategy (N) a plan, method, or series of maneuvers or stratagems for obtaining a specific goal or result (dictionary.com)

Since we're using talking military matters here we can use the term victory for our specific goal or result.

I thought that going into this we all had the same objective understanding of what constituted a victory in Iraq, which was the overthrow of Saddam and the creation of a relatively free, representative moderate government capable of defending itself and acting as an ally for the United States in the region. Now if you wanted to get scientific about it, we should probably define relatively free and moderate, as well as capable of defending itself in specific terms, but I don't think I need to, because I think most of us have a fairly good idea of what that would look like.

Talk of an exit strategy are nonsense. Perhaps the two worst things Colin Powell ever did was enunciate the idea that you don't go to war without an exit strategy. I respect Colin Powell, but that's totally bogus. Revolutionary War: Exit Strategy=Independence, Civil War: Exit Strategy=defeat of the Confederacy reestablishment of the Union and the end to slavery. World War I: Exit Strategy= victory over the central powers by military force World War II: Exit Strategy= Unconditional Surrender of the Axis Powers. In other words Exit Strategy= Win the War, than go home.

And on and on. We don't get into exit strategies until Korea,Vietnam, Somalia, etc. Korea we still haven't exited, and are still having to deal with, Vietnam was a loss, Somalia was a loss.

A strategy helps you towards your goal. An exit strategy is just a polite way of saying surrender, to a nation which, while pretty sissified at this point is not yet willing to tolerate talk of surrender. We can talk about exit strategies, we can talk about re-deployment, but those are lies your politicians are telling you, or perhaps you are telling yourself. We don't need a strategy to exit, pretty much any piece of white clothe will do the trick.
Now I can appreciate that there is a segment of the population which wasn't that onboard with the invasion of Iraq (well, they were for it, before they were against it,) but the situation is that we are there, and leaving there will be a victory for the Jihadists. We don't need to use high level intelligence to determine this (although the NIE said so) we can do this by listening to the Jihadis themselves. So while Democrats can harp and moan about how Iraq is not the central front on the war on terror, we know it is, BECAUSE THE ENEMY SAYS SO. We know leaving Iraq before they can defend themselves is a loss BECAUSE THE ENEMY TOLD US SO.

My apartment has ants. I know it has ants because I sprayed the counter top with an ant killer, and when I woke up the next morning there were literally dozens of dead ants on the counter top. No ants before I sprayed, ants after I sprayed. Does ant poison cause ants?

No, DK, don't be an ass.

Exactly. Taking steps to kill the ants didn't cause the problem, the fact that I'm a slob and left food hanging out caused the problem. Western civilization has been slovenly for decades, and left crumbs on which the Jihadis have fed. they fed in Somalia, they've fed in Bosnia, and Chechnya, they fed in Afghanistan, In Syria and Iran. (well those are pretty big anthills but even so) all the little crumbs of the earth we couldn't be bothered to pick up and tend to. Iraq isn't the problem, it's the solution if we have the courage to recognize it.

Happy Birthday Marine Corps

My dad and eldest brother don't have blogs, so I will have to do this for them.

Semper Fi.

Why we shouldn't Contract Security to Hollywood

Variety Review of 007 Flick.

Money quote:

As matters advance to the Continent, elements even more unusual in the Bond world of late, comprehensible plotting and palpable male-female frissons, move to the fore. Bond's enemy is not a Mr. Evil type plotting world domination, but a financier of international terrorism, Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen), who needs to make financial amends by winning a big-pot poker game at the casino in fictional Montenegro.

You mean this Fictional Montenegro You ignorant Shmucks?

Jesus.. "Pat I'd like to buy a clue please..."

Impeachment My Sweet Ass.

I'm getting sick and F'ing tired of this "oh we won't impeach him" talk from the Democrats. Screaming Dean did it on the Daily Show. Pelosi has said it numerous times. This shows you the pure cynicism and power-whoring of the democratic party. "How benevolent of us not to throw a two time elected president out on his ear simply because we have the votes." They chortle.

Never mind that there are laws for that sort of thing you douchebags.

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors

Can they ennuciate any actual charges on which Bush could be impeached? Despite what their political Grey Eminence thinks? The illegal war they all voted for? Right...

For those of you who are still irked at the Clinton impeachment, the difference is, perjury is an identifiable federal crime. You can disagree on whether he committed it, but it is a crime. Now Bush has taken a wide-view of Presidential powers, but so have all presidents leading in war-time. There may be a difference of consitutional opinion, but no crime. But we really appreciate the liberals constant assurances that they won't employ what would be a clearly partisan abuse of power to satisfy their lunatic fringe.

Referendum on the War, or a Referendum on is there a war?

I stated in an earlier post my belief that the outcome was not a vote on the war, but as I was trying to get to sleep last night, it occurred to me that it was not so much a referendum on the war, as on "if there is a war." In an earlier interview with Congressman Charlie Norwood a couple months ago, I told him I thought there were no longer two parties, but two mindsets, 9/12 and 9/10. That phraseology seemed to confuse him a little bit, because most of the democrats in power HAVE a 9/10 mindset. There is no war on Islamic Fascism, Jihadism, there is only a misconcieved Neo-Con (read: jewish) adventure in Iraq. In so far as the GOP and President Bush took a hit on this issue, he took it from both sides, there are some, who are angry with them for doing what they've done in the conflict, and other's angry for them not doing enough.

As Mark Steyn asked "Where's the Offence"

Where as Cindy Sheehan would be in the other category. Apparently even a Democratic Congress can't keep her out of jail.

It's going to be a frustrating 2 years for those of us who bought into the idea of "making the world safe BY democracy" (or rather, those of us who were excited when President Bush bought into OUR idea).

With the ouster of Rumsfeld and his replacement by Gates, we are going to see a resurgence in the "realists" around the White House. Realists are the ones who had no trouble dealing with Saddam Hussein, or the Assad's of Syria. Realists who can smile and shake hands with the sheiks, and ignore them as they funnel money to Al Qaeda,Hamas and Hezbollah.

An ugly two years.

Rumor: Burns May Go to Recount

According to rumors I'm getting from a person who should know, it's possible that the highly contested Max Burns John Barrow, Savannah District Race may go to a recount.

http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/politics/15956229.htm On the race and its numbers.

My source says that GOPers were up late into the night watching this race, and problems with voting in EFFINGHAM county could cause a recount. Burns, from Sylvania is trying to take Barrow's seat. Georgia law requires a recount for a difference of 1% or less. And in that Effingham county apparently election workers were going over the ticker tape by hand in an effort to sort out the problems there.

If, and I wouldn't count on it, but if Burns were to win in a recount, it would be the only Incumbent democrat to get knocked out off office in last night's Dem sweep.

There's no word of a recount from the secretary of state yet, but it could be coming.

in the words of Matt Drudge

Developing...

Incumbents Reign in Rabun

Well, I don't know what happened with the rest of the country, but in my little part of Northeast Georgia, the voters went to the polls and said they wanted more of the same. Congressman Charlie Norwood, as predicted, blew Terry Holley out of the water with 67% of the vote. Nancy Schaefer faced off the challenge from Carol Jackson in the 50th District State Senate Seat. Only a minor lead in most counties. As for State representatives, a new rule will soon be enforced where only Stephens County will vote for the 28th state representative, and only Union County will vote for 8th District State Representative. Republican Bill Quarterman had wins in both Banks and Franklin, but Jeanette Jamieson had enough votes in her home town to hang in there. The same, only more so for the 8th district, where Charles Jenkins was defeated by Rabun County Republican Frank Wheeler in every county except Union. Reminds me of how great a thing the Electoral College is on the federal level.

As for the National season, the GOP got trounced, like many expected it to. This is being painted as a rejection of President Bush and the War. I would dispute that. I think it was a rejection of the Republican controlled congress for failing to be conservative enough. The people wanted immigration control, and didn't get it. There were confusion on judicial appointments (Miers!), and no real interesting initiatives from the congress except for outlawing online gambling, which they snuck in to a security bill. Social Security Reform flopped, no movement on Immigration, Port security reform was a joke. With the Republican in majority they still failed to move their platform forward. With a Democratic majority in the House, (and likely in the Senate) We'll see if they can move forward with their platform of surrender in Iraq, repealing tax cuts, terminating interrogations and military tribunals, and giving union pay outs by raising the minimum wage. It's an ambitious program of rolling back the clock, so we'll see what happens.

Update: AJ Wright asked me about what questions I was asking voters coming out of the polls. It wasn't an out and out exit poll. I didn't ask people who they voted for. What I asked was, "What issues were on your mind as you casted your ballot." The answers were a little bit disturbing. Part of it is being put on the spot with a microphone always confuses people, but I definetely did not see any trend at all which indicated that voters leaning heavily to thinking national vs. local, or for or against the war, or any other major trend. And I don't believe voters here are any less or more clueless than the rest of the country. Which is why I reject the national media's constant chirping that the election was a referendum on "president bush" or "the war in Iraq."

Poll watching? or Poll Listening?

So while i'm casting my ballot this morning, I'm treated to some lady talking on her cellphone about picking up dinner from ingles or whatever the heck it was. And when I finished up ticking off my ballot I went up to the poll watcher and told them that I was pretty sure talking on the cell phone in the voting booth was a violation of the law. They agreed it was, and finally got around to telling the woman to can it.

I than preceded to stand in the rain for the better part of an hour, asking people their thoughts on the election as they came out, for my job as radio journalist. I was out in the rain because the law requires 150 feet from the polling place before exit polls or interviews.

In the immortal words of Walter Sobchak:


"Am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules?"

Oh and by the way...

There is an election on, in case you hadn't noticed. You can go else where with national election news, so I'd like to tell you a little bit about the races I'm covering. Here in the Georgia Mountains the election of greatest interest is the 50th State Senate District, Nancy Schaefer (R) vs. Carol Jackson (D). Schaefer is the incumbent, although Jackson is a three time Senator who was gerrymandered out of the 50th in the last redistricting. So the two women have never gone head to head so far as I know. The first move in what would be a bitter battle was from the Schaefer campaign which challenged Jackson's residency. Although Jackson won, it was still probably a good strategic move, Jackson had to spend treasure on lawyers in a race where she was already outraised by Schaefer by almost double. Things in that race calmed down for awhile, but then started to get ugly in a hurry. Schaefer attempted to paint Jackson into the liberal corner, with connections to gay rights lobbies etc. (some gay rights groups did endorse Jackson, although that was primarily a move against Schaefer than anything) Meanwhile Jackson attacked Schaefer on a wide front. It seems to me that Jackson tacked heavily to the right as we moved closer to election day. In the last few days Jackson has hammered Schaefer with ads, ranging from accusations of nepotism to accusing Schaefer of supporting "godless" Scientology. (that charge comes from Schafer's connection to an anti-psychiatry group, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights I think its called, its backed by Scientology.) I suspect that the Scientology bit will backfire, although I have no data to support that, Although it did force Schaefer to use her advertising in the last few days to focus on defending herself instead of GOTV.

Of next importance is the 8th district State Representative seat, in which local Rabun County man Frank Wheeler is attempting to unseat Democrat incumbent Charles Jenkins. Jenkins is the Democrat incumbent, and according to what i've been told he won his last re-election by just taking Union and Towns counties, his stronghold. This race is interesting because of the level of support Wheeler has gotten from State and National GOP figures. US Congressman Charlie Norwood donated $2,000 dollars to Wheeler, and a Norwood connected PAC also contributed $2,000. (Source: Common Cause) This lead to an interesting situation where the challenger was financially stronger than the incumbent. In addition Wheeler has gotten strong backing from the state party. a GOP press person over-nighted me a press packet including a list of bills Jenkins voted on, the day before Jenkins appeared on my weekly talk-show. Interestingly, when I asked him about it, Wheeler seemed geniuely surprised about it. All this indicates to me that the 8th district is one the GOP really wants, or at least thinks they have a strong shot at. Jenkins tried to turn that against Wheeler, saying Norwood's support was based on 3rd Infantry Division Interstate Study, which may come through Northeast Georgia. Wheeler is publicly against I-3. My belief is that Norwood (who is in a relatively secure seat, although we'll get to that in a moment) is looking to help the state GOP since they control the gerrymandering of his own district. (he was recently put into the newly created 10th district, which now includes democratic Athens-Clarke County). Wheeler has told me that he needs a high voter turn out in Rabun County to counter Jenkins strength in Towns county. He must then split Union and win the part of White county. Our radio station has clearly been a part of that GOTV plan in Rabun, Wheeler spent 45 hundred dollars with us, more than any other candidate. So thats definetely a race to watch.

Since I mentioned it, I may as well discuss the 10th congressional district race, Charlie Norwood (R) against Terry Holley (D). Norwood is a 4 term congressman, who started the race with a $1.2 million dollar war-chest. He's facing Holley, the 10th district Democratic Party Chairman. One thing i've noticed is that when a party runs their chairman, at any level, local state or national, they are usually having some trouble finding a candidate but they want to have a bully pulpit in the district. I interviewed Holley, and he seems like a good guy, but the lack of financial support he seems to have gotten indicates the (D) party didn't have a whole lot of confidence in its ability to knock out Norwood. Still, given national discontent with GOP controlled congress we could see a closer election than Norwood has had in the past. Although he must be fairly comfortable, since Norwood pulled his advertising from our station earlier (causing our station manager to have to refund some of their money, which didn't make her happy!) Even so Norwood spent around 35 hundred dollars, mostly on anti-immigration ads (although there were a few Fairtax ads which made me happy.) Holley never advertised with us.

Last, but certainly not least, is Max Watts (D) and Bob Fink (R). Watts knocked out Incumbent Eston Melton in the primary for Rabun County Commission Post 4. The issue of most interest has been the Unified Development Code, a 300+ page total re-zoning of the county. The Builders and Realtors' associations have been opposed to it, at least in its present form and they are possibly the two largest industries in the county. Both candidates have urged additional review of the document, although its likely that it will be passed in December before either one would take office. So neither candidate has distinguished himself on that issue. Fink has pushed heavily for cutting government spending and waste (pretty standard republican fare) and on the Rabun County Wrap up program I do every friday Fink floated a trial ballon for a possible county-city consolidation. I don't see that happening in a place where people identify heavily with their very very local, unincorporated communities, not to mention their municipalities. However with little else to distinguish themselves with, I think Watts will probably pull it out, since in county elections Rabun tends to favor Democrats.

Well either way it'll all be determined tomorrow. My radio station will be live when polls close at 7pm. So I'll be a busy boy tonight and tomorrow.