The Long War-Rev 1

Lefties love personalities. Romantic, mythic, cultic¹.

I’m motivated to find out why the Left cannot support the war. I think it may have to do with their love of romantic, mythic, and cultic personalities. They are casualties of what Steven RiCharde describes as those who would "rather read a map than read a book." Either unable or unwilling to listen to the thread of an argument, the Iconic Thinker prefers pictures--movies, tv, cartoons. "Show me!" All this time I thought they wanted clear argumentation. It turns out they want pictures. Iconography produces ads like "Daisy". It produces mythic candidates like Bobby Kennedy. Or today's field of candidates who lack experience, training, but trade image for trust.

In polite conversation I can ask, “Why do you oppose this war?” And in response I’ll hear, “How can you support War?”

In conversation, watching the news, reading the press releases, this equivocation², the tendency to re-define the starting place of an argument is always there and doesn't assist the conversation. As a Classic Liberal, I want to discuss the roots and origins of the current War in Iraq. As Lefties—they like referring to themselves as “Progressives”—when faced with a losing argument, it’s necessary for the Lefty to change the terms of the argument.

But I'm not embarrassed about my support for the Long War.

Jefferson had to deal with it. As the first President that had to stand up to Muslim beliefs, he was shocked to find that kidnapping and ransom were still practiced in the 19th century. Read news accounts from the day and compare what Jefferson had to deal with to what our current President is going through.

Roosevelt had to deal with it. Muslims ransoming Americans. Times were simpler. "I want Perdicarris alive or Rasuli dead." He then sent a cruiser. Foreign policy for dummies.

The '50's saw the twilight of what had been Western Civ's policing of Islamic extremism. Europe was failing. While American efforts at establishing democratic ideals as the cultural norm took place for Western Europe, dwindling European Imperialism took the lid off the box of Islamic extremism. It wasn’t the end of Europe’s attempt at regional hegemony. Britain and France were more than willing to intercede in the efforts at pan-Arabism by fellas like Nasser. If you recall, it was, in 1956, America that stepped forward in the United Nations to end that invasion. And it was Eisenhower’s reliance on the United Nation’s charter, and the appeal to universal rights of self-determination that rang the first toll of the end of Western influence in the East.

With the decline of European hegemony came the concomitant increase in Soviet hegemony. While Europe—French and English--invaded Egypt, Russia invaded Hungary. In 1956, America was able to stand up to "the Good Guys" but was faced down by "the Bad Guys". Under the United Nation's Charter, the Soviet proclaimed, Hungary had a "right to self-determination³". The Soviet Invasion was support, for the Hungarian Communist Party, for those rights. Prime Minister Nagy was arrested, a non-communist. Ergo standing in the way of “the rights of self-determination” of the Hungarian people and then executed two years later.

The lessons of "the Rights of Self-Determination" weren't wasted on the rest of the world. Move forward to the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan.

As President Carter idly sat by and watched, not only did he ignore one of the most potent anti-Soviet weapons--gained through diplomacy by President Ford and used to great effect by President Reagan--in his arsenal, the Helsinki Accords, he watched dumbfounded as Iran fell to the Mullahs and Afghanistan fell to the Russians.

You’ll still hear former-President Carter talk about “the rights of self-determination”. Remember this phrase: “the rights of self-determination”. It will come back to haunt you.

Up until then, what the world knew of Islamic terror had only been visited upon the Israelis, as it had in 1972 during the Munich Olympics. Terror in those days ranged from Red Brigades, the Baader Meinhof Gang, Black Panthers, and the "Patty Hearst Abduction". Ergo, the common thread to today's political mire.

To a vast majority of the political Left, the Romanticism of being in the Weather Underground, or a freedom fighter for Bobby Seale and Huey Newton, or yelling "Pig" at cops, this was Revolution, man! This kind of romantic thinking was exemplified by mainstream groups, e.g., the Presbyterian Church supporting Angela Davis. These new icons joined established Lefty icons, such as Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.

Take a look at the famous "Class of '74". Those politicians who were elected for the first time to legislative posts either in state, statewide or congressional races.

So, on one hand, we have the UN Charter, proclaiming the rights of self-determination. And in 1974, the first election the Lefties would control, following the two-year debacle of the “First Gate” (Watergate), we had an election. The Left was fully embracing the “right of self-determination” ala post-Invasion Hungary. In Viet Nam, that meant that our efforts to bring democracy to Asia was just, simply, essentially, only, quintessentially, immorally, totally, only, Imperialism. These little brown men and women should seek to find their own form of government. Imposing the values of democracy was—and is—a form of Imperialism. Unknown to the winners of the “Mandate of 1974” was that the principle of individual merit and worth would be won on the world stage the following year.

It is these leaders, who now hold seats of leadership in state houses and in the Congress who are leading the debate against the Long War today. And they are best represented by the man, elected at their political nadir, President of the United States, James Earl "Jimmy" Carter, Jr. The “Human Rights” clause of the Helsinki Accords was a fundamental shift away from the accepted practice of “self-determination” under the UN Charter. In the first paragraph of Section One, VII, you read, “The participating States will respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.”

This was new, international law. And it was important. According to Natan Sharansky, the Helsinki Accords signaled the end of Soviet oppression.

So, we have an historical turning point.

For Lefties? It’s still marching to the “International”. Anti-war, iconic, Bobby Seale, Winter Soldier, and “Nixon is a” whatever.

On the other hand, you have guys like Washington’s “Scoop” Jackson, Warren Magnuson, Barry Goldwater, Abe Ribicoff, Herman Talmadge, Bob Dole, Jacob Javits, Charles Percy, Mark Hatfield, Howard Baker, John Tower, Sam Nunn, James O. Eastland, William Roth, Hubert Humphrey, Stuart Symington, Mike Mansfield…Republicans and Democrats who knew what America stood for and in turn, stood for America.

And now, interposed among these American leaders is the Class of ’74; standing with the anti-war, anti-democracy, “right to self-determination” model of the Soviet, the terrorists of the Baader Meinhof, the Leftists of the Palestinian Liberation Organization.

So what is the thread of Foreign Policy coming from these Lefties? Do they acknowledge Helsinki?

Let’s jump forward.

In the past decade we’ve been attacked by Iran, Iraq, Libya, and their proxies. An argument could be made that we’ve been attacked by the Saudis as well, but the discussion of Saudi policy versus governance would be lengthy, so I’ll just posit that the “official” Saudi position has been to support the United States as an ally. (Go ahead and rant off at this point. But what else are stipulations for, but to side-step the grease and go for the guts?)

During this period, the US has attempted peace-keeping. Negotiation. Bribery. Covert and direct aid. We’ve spilled American blood in Germany, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Israel, Egypt, Crete, Turkey, Indonesia, Yemen…all lost as a result of Islamic Terror. And the list isn’t complete. You’re forgetting the thousands killed on September 11, 2001.

But at that critical moment, a moment where America stood upon the world stage and made one of the greatest political and diplomatic victories of a century…just at that time in 1975 a coup de grace occurred on the world stage.

And a counter-coup occurred in America.

Nature abhors a vacuum. Just as it abhorred the political vacuum during the Carter years, government hates the political vacuum we’re dealing with in Congress right now.

And the counter-coup occurred when the men and women at the ramparts of democracy failed to believe in the dream of democracy. They have replaced the ideal of rationality, freedom of speech, with icons, myths and cultish beliefs. Today, to too many people, democracy is a failed policy. The dream of all the world’s people living with the rights to human dignity described by the Helsinki Accords is just another Imperialist, Rethuglican, War-mongering, neo-Nazi plot to subjugate and conquer.

Far be it for this writer to point out that sixteen years after the signing of the Helsinki Accords the Baltics would be free of the former Soviet Union, and that Communism would fall. In Poland, Hungary, Latvia, Slovenia, Slovakia…freedom and democracy are lived and practiced. Carter ignored the power of democracy. Carter lost.

And we lived through it. And we’ll live through this. More people will die as we fail to face up to the realities of the world we’re living in. Innocent people. People who didn’t choose to fight. That’s the cost of not living up to your responsibilities. People, real women, college kids, farmers, children get killed. And they will when the Lefties in Congress get their way.

Not that Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children want to fight. No one who knows war wants war. But when tasked with the mission, they choose to fight. They go into the battle with full knowledge of the cost of failure. Unlike the men and women of the Twin Towers. Or, the Achille Lauro. Or the men, women and children of Iraq, Kurd, Shia and Sunni. If we don’t choose the mission, the mission will choose us. I just hope few Iraqis will die because America chose not to stand with them.

Oh, and its funny the confluence of events. The “Class of ‘74” and the US Marines? John Murtha—corrupt but not convicted—was first elected to Congress in 1974. See why we study history?

¹Note that the authors of this "Wiki" reference have tried to preclude true definition with 'This article does not discuss "cult" in its original sense of "religious practice"'. It's important for the Left to constantly attempt to shift the meaning of words to "win arguments".
²Links provided in this essay do not constitute an endorsement of their content by this writer. Links are provided to show “starting places” for your own research into why Liberals and Lefties are at such cross-purpose.
³See note 6 on link provided, "Tass Soviet News Agency (24th October, 1956)"

Note to Oregon Congressional Delegation:

The Governor doesn't need you.

For my entire life, I never thought I'd see the day where a Governor was so unpopular that he would have to hire a lobbyist to work for him in Washington, D.C.

Thanks to Oregon Watchdog for the following link to the Oregonian.

The upshot? The Governor needs $479,000.00 to spend on an office and for a former employee of Senator Ron Wyden.

And you don't think the Governor knows how to spread the grease around?

Tobacco Pockets or Your Pockets

Let's Take Jack and Dianne.

Two American kids growing up in Oregon, having been educated by public schools and told to vote Lefty.

The Government has come through for Jack & Diane. Jack makes $15,600 a year working 40-hours per week, fifty weeks per year. That's up $600.00 a year from last year's minimum wage of $7.50 per hour. Now, at $7.80 per hour, Jack and Dianne are sitting pretty!

Man, Six Hundred Bucks!

And it came just in the Nick of Time! Your taxes are going up, sucker!

Well, tobacco sucker. That's right, Jack and Dianne smoke. They know they shouldn't. You know they shouldn't. You shouldn't. But you do.

But Jack and Dianne do smoke, and even though they keep it away from the kids, they still end up spending $8.00 a day on tobacco. And they're not asking for much. Family of four, $15,600 a year. They get food stamps. Dianne and little Jackie are WIC recipients. For most basic medical needs it's the County Health office. A good night for Jack and Dianne are a couple of friends and some X-Box. Not that different from my life. Or, as a middle-school teacher I spoke with last Saturday, the world needs busboys, too.

So, not the "Go West, Young Man" kinda story. But Oregonian enough. And, frankly, Jack and Dianne are doing okay. They don't need help from Mom and Dad. They're getting by.

Not for long. The Lefties in the Oregon Legislature want to help them. How? By increasing the cost of their ciggies by $1.68 a day. More, if there's beer involved. (See, you have a beer, you gotta smoke. Vicious cycle.)

So, let's see. $1.68. Three hundred and sixty-five days a year.

$613.20.

It's like the state took the amount of the Minimum Wage, figured out the increase in earnings going to this poor family, and decided to confiscate it. To help this family.

But not really, because the Governor's "Kids Healthy Stuff" campaign will provide medical care for families earning up to $70-thousand dollars a year.

And to convince you that opposing this is wrong, the Lefties are having a Field Day on Monday.

If you oppose the Governor you're in the Pocket of Big Tobacco!

"This coalition has come together because we believe Oregon children should be at the front of the line when it comes to the state's priorities," says Maribeth Healey, Executive Director of Oregonians for Health Security. "The only opposition to the Healthy Kids Plan comes from Big Tobacco, which means the vote on Healthy Kids is clearly going to show whose side each lawmaker is on."

See? If you say--"ahem, bsht"--you're in the Pocket of Big Tobacco. Doesn't matter what Jack & Dianne had wanted to do with their additional dough. The State wants to help people that make Four-and-a-Half Times what J & D make to help the poor get health care!

And look at the Coalition. (Notice how Lefties love coalitions!)

"Organizations supporting the Healthy Kids Plan include: AAUW of Oregon, AFSCME Council 75, American Cancer Society, American Federation of Teachers-Oregon, American Heart Association, American Lung Association of Oregon, Children First for Oregon, Oregon AFL-CIO, Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems, Oregon Bus Project, Oregon Business Association, Oregon Education Association, Oregonians for Health Security, Oregon Health Action Campaign, Oregon Medical Association, Oregon Nurses Association, Oregon Pediatric Society, Oregon State Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG), Our Oregon, SEIU Local 49, SEIU Local 503, Stand for Children, and the Tobacco – Free Coalition of Oregon."

I missed seeing the Poor People's Council. I don't see any migrant worker groups. What I see is a bunch of wealthy Lefties trying to peddle their trash on the streets of the Capital.

But if you oppose it? Maybe you can do the math. The Governor has bedmates. But, that's too creepy to think about.

Can this stupid tax on stupid behaviour be stopped? The Gov's "Healthy Kids" tax plan has already passed in the House Health Care and Revenue Committee. The only way to stop it is by stopping the Joint Ways and Means Committee. Write these guys and tell them to "kill the bill".

And make sure they know they're in the Pocket of the Little Guys.

Quitting and Not Quitting II

The question was asked in comments to a previous post, "Can someone be against the Iraq War and NOT be a leftist?"

You can be against the war due to religious convictions. And during a period where we have an all-volunteer army it's impossible to find a reason why anyone opposed to war qua war would have to serve. And the argumentation--religious convictions from adherence to the Ten Commandments--is unassailable. You choose to believe that all killing, therefore, all war, is bad. I, personally, am against the death penalty. But do I believe the State has the right, or authority to take a life? Yes. I would prefer it didn't, but the death penalty has a lot of possible argumentation that that includes the religious proscription to kill, as well as economic and justice issues.

Of course, the Seventh Day Adventists and Quakers come to mind. But Quakers and Adventists have served our military with distinction. So, against the war, in Iraq in some other way?

War isn't a death penalty for the enemy. Wars can escalate. Wars can be lost. Wars can be won. War is serious business. And while the business of war is often killing, it isn’t the aim of war.

In my response to the previously mentioned comment I attempted to point out that the groundwork for this war was not the product of "Bush's ego" as the commenter suggested. In fact, if one looks at the historical record, the precedents for our War in Iraq were set during the Clinton presidency. My response follows:

"Shifting the meaning of things is easily spotted as a logical fallacy. Here's an excerpt from an interview with Dr. Martin Indyk, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs dated February 2, 1999. "Well, the Security Council resolutions are comprehensive in their requirements. They would require a different kind of Saddam Hussein. Were he to accept them he would be in a different kind of Iraqi leader. The fact that he has not accepted them for seven years shows that he is not going to accept them, that he is not going to accept Iraq's international obligations. And we see already having accepted one on recognition of Kuwait. Now, his people are raising questions about that again. So, we know that he is not undergone a fundamental change. If he were to give up his weapons of mass destruction, completely disarm, then the oil embargo under the resolutions will be lifted, but he won't do that. That is why the sanctions remain on because he will not accept the requirements of the Security Council. If he were to accept them, if he were to be somebody different then the circumstances will change. But we do not expect that to happen anytime soon because he is Saddam Hussein."

As a young man one can criticize easily what one doesn't remember. When ones leaders are busily erasing history--see Hillary's latest stance regarding the war in Iraq--it can be confusing to the young when it looks at the years previous to the Bush presidency and sees such belligerence. Look at the expression of the will of Congress as voiced by the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. "Expresses the sense of the Congress that once the Saddam Hussein regime is removed from power in Iraq, the United States should support Iraq's transition to democracy by providing humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people and democracy transition assistance to Iraqi parties and movements with democratic goals, including convening Iraq's foreign creditors to develop a multilateral response to the foreign debt incurred by the Hussein regime."Sounds pretty much like the President's "plan", doesn't it? Why Lefties have to bring up Bush, or in your case, Bush's ego, is laughable. But that's the way of fallacious logic. For instant, "further strengthening of our Government into Totalitarianism" because?) "...war is the ultimate show of power by 'The State'". Crazy, man! Like, outasight! It’s sooo progressive!
War--to fulfill the mandates of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, or, as the result of the HJ Res 114--is totalitarianism?

Everyone is allowed to have opinions. But an opinion that purports to show conclusory fact--when in fact it's just a bumper sticker--is not a valid argument. "War is the ultimate show of power by "The State". Well, no, maybe defending one's borders is. Or the ability to levy and collect taxes is. Or, as in Venezuela, the ability to destroy a nation's economy. All these conclusory statements could be supported by argument. But building a fallacious argument, using terms like "Totalitarianism" (with caps), "Bush's ego" (huh? didn't this get sorted out during the Clinton years?), and "nowhere near a threat to the citizens of our country" (read a little history) aren't important enough in themselves to form an argument of any kind.

Glad to have you here. Have a nice day!"

Key cites listed above were from the pre-Bush era. Secretary Indyk was Clinton's secretary for Near Eastern Affairs. The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 was signed into law by President Clinton.

The question again asked, “Can someone be against the Iraq War and NOT be a leftist?" Well, yes, here are two quick states where that could be true. The person who was for the war and now against the war could be an opportunist or of weak character. Hans J. Morganthau wrote about this kind of politician in his “In Defense of the National Interest”, Knopf (1951). It is difficult to “swim against the tide of popular opinion” and face it, the lure of being popular is seductive. It’s generally preferable to being unpopular.

The second case would be if that person were simply wrong. If, in the face of United Nations resolutions, House and Senate mandates, and the words of two presidents that the risks that Saddam Hussein presented are denied, can simply be ascribed to as being wrong. Sometimes people simply make mistakes. If, in the face of overwhelming evidence you can’t draw the correct conclusions we can only fault the system.

In disagreeing with the war, are you opposed to the aims of the war? I suppose that’s possible. Are you one of those people who view the region with the jaundice of Rudyard Kipling? Was the Senate wrong in 1998 when it set out to establish democracy for the Iraqi people? But that wouldn’t free you from the label of being a Lefty. Liberal, rational thought coincides in the words “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal…” To quote the Claremont Institute:

"The Founders are about to state four truths that they describe as self-evident. But they know that nearly every other political power on earth denied these truths. In what sense, then, can they be called "self-evident"?
The phrase "self-evident truth" has a particular meaning in the western philosophical tradition. It means a proposition whose truth is known as soon as the definitions of the terms in question are known. For example, one knows it is a self-evident truth that "a whole is equal to the sum of its parts," as soon as one understands the definitions of "whole," "sum," and "parts."
For those who do not understand the definitions--for instance, using the example above, for someone who doesn't know what "sum" means--a self-evident truth does not appear true. Nonetheless, it is."

So, it’s always been known that denying truth is possible. Denying truth doesn’t make you a lefty. It’s just a good indicator. You can choose to oppose this war on the basis of religion, on the basis of opposing the policy of your country, or by being wrong or an opportunist.

But where does opposing this war make you right? Are you right in your support of Saddam Hussein? Are you right in your support of Islamic Terror? Are you right in your support for beheadings, for the subjugation of women, Christians, Kurds? Death squads of Shia and Sunni? Are you right in wanting to become more like France? Are you right because you appease your enemies? Are you right because the values that you and I share are too good for the Iraqi people? Are you right because you don’t care about the innocents in Iraq? Are you right because you want to consign the Iraqis to civil war and oppression?

Would you stand up, as King Christian X did and wear the Mogen David? Would you support the fight to liberate Iraq from tyranny, or would you consign it to civil hell? Can you see that if Iraq fails, Lebanon fails? Will you turn your back on liberals in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan?
Or will you prove the bombers in Lebanon right? Prove the warlords in Somalia right? Kill an American and they run.

Not this time. War was declared on the US in 1979 when Islamic terrorists took US diplomats hostage. War was declared on the US in 1983 when Hezbollah, an arm of the Iranian terror movement killed 220 Marines, 18 sailors and 3 soldiers. War was declared in April of 1993 when Iraq attempted to assassinate President George H.W. Bush. War was declared on the US when Iraq targeted US fighters in the no-fly areas of Iraq. And Iraq declared war on humanity when it used gas and chemical weapons on its own people, between February and August of 1988, destroying hundreds of villages and 200,000 people.

I am proud of my country. I am proud of what we are doing to help the Iraqis, the Kurds, the Shia, the Sunni, the Lebanese, Jordanians, Egyptians, and Saudis. To retreat, to run is wrong.

Can you oppose the war and not be a Lefty? Perhaps. But one name is as good as any other I can think of.

Progressive Governor Has No Clothes!

Ever since the "Bottle Bill", where Oregon grocers charge pop drinkers a nickel a bottle for the right to buy a bottle of pop, Oregon has been known as a "Progressive State"!

In 1971 Oregon passed the nation's first "recycle" law. Applied only to beer and soft drinks, it mandated that certain cans and bottles levy a use tax that was refundable by retailers to consumers when redeemed. On a per transaction basis, the cost of the law often exceeded the redemption value of the redeemed container. Beer and pop prices were raised by retailers to cover their increased costs.

Since then, passing on increased costs to consumers has been the rule in Oregon. The reason why this form of indirect taxation has been successful has been its incremental nature. It's hard to "divide out" the cost of incremental, indirect taxes. So, Oregon has become the paradigm for indirect cost taxation.

From housing to education, Oregonians are faced with indirect taxes. In addition to property taxes--the supposed "local" tax that pays for schools--parents must pay hundreds of dollars in indirect "fees" in order to enroll their students into public schools. Additionally, millions of dollars are raised through the indirect "lottery", a risk-fixed scam based on irrational beliefs of hitting-it-rich.

But, through it all, Oregonians have maintained the belief that they are "Progressives". In Oregon, pointing out that the Emperor Has No Clothes means, you're not hip. With indirect taxation, the only guy who pays is the guy who wants to make money.

And being against Global Warming is currently the hippest chick of all.

In a state led by a governor who has successively led the departments he's led into financial or moral disrepute it's not surprising that he's found a new version of Three Card Monte. The only problem is, there's this lone, politically disinterested teacher at the state's Ag college who doesn't know that the fact the Emperor’s naked is being ignored. By the cognoscenti. The Hip. The Progressive. So what does he do?

Fool. He tells what he thinks is the truth. The Truth. You know, science and math and stuff. What proportion of a theoretical warming--or cooling--is due to the variation in gas flux or cr flux? Can the governor guess? Do you know the difference?

Decisions are being made on a global scale by global politicians. To believe they aren't motivated by their own, even their own nation's, self-interest is puerile. Blasé. Dumb. But to imagine the governor of the 39th ranked by density state, the 45th by employment state, engaged in Global Warming instead of lifting the state above the reputation and performance of Arkansas is beguiling.

It's simply because once you've gotten onto the progressive escalator, you can't get off.

What Is Your Vision For the World?

In Oregon, the vision thing is big.

Government agencies don't have policies. Here's ODF's "vision" statement. Here's UofO's Educational Technology's "vision" statement. The Oregon Rental Housing Association has a "vision". The City of Ashland has a "vision". You want a true visiony vision, take a look at the Oregon Consensus Program Vision (doc). It's so visiony it's hard to see what the "program"is supposed to do. See, the Oregon Consensus Program, so highly prized, was abolished by the Oregon Legislature in 2003. But too good to let go, the vision was re-birthed within the National Policy Consensus Center at Portland State University. (Vision statement here, in the Preamble of their Mission Statement). Some visions, while unwanted, never seem to go away.

And of course, here's one of the Governor's Visions. I particularly like the Gov's prescription for healthy industries: "Oregon’s existing industries will stay healthy and competitive by improving existing products and developing leading-edge products and services." See? Economy thingies are easy, if people just develop leading-edge products and services.

Lumber/timber? Not leading edge. Fisheries? Not leading-edge. Agriculture? Not leading-edge. In a state with the 39th lowest population density, where most of the state is designated(pdf) either "rural" or "frontier" one would think a rational view of economic activity in Oregon would take in resource utilization as one its primary goals. Not in Oregon. It's micro-breweries and organic beef (see Gov's "Vision" above). It's moving away from ag and forestry.

For the guy raising sheep or cattle, is it any wonder the sheepman or the cattleman feels abandoned by his government? For the logger, faller, millworker, is it any wonder they feel abandoned by his government? What are the concerns of his state government? Is it getting jobs back for Oregonians? Is it facing revenue shortfalls in rural, frontier, areas that will close schools?

What we have is a Government With A Vision: Progressive, Forward-Thinking, Visiony. Why else would be be having debates on Global Warming instead of jobs? Is it any wonder that Oregon ranks 45th in employment in this country?

If you have a vision of the world, that's cool. If your time is spent worrying about Global Warming, or Globalization, or Stopping US Imperialism, whey major cool. I just ask that you re-think your Vision of Stewardship for the state of Oregon.

How long can we continue to worry about World issues when rural communities continue to face declining industries? Declining industries means fewer employees. Increased unemployment.

It's not cool to oppose the Vision Thing. Vision things are leading-edge. (How this is different from "cutting-edge" I'm not sure. You do cut with the leading-edge). Vision. Leading-edge.

When somebody decides to do something about jobs, let me know, m-kay?

Quitting and Not Quitting

Have you listened to the opponents to the war in Iraq? There's a wide swath of opinion being offered. When I talk to ordinary men and women, I believe I'm talking to someone with the same cultural background I'm from. Even people who talk about global warming and American Imperialism...I think I'm talking with someone who shares my cultural background. Yes, I know I live in a small, backwater state. But, all the more for that, I believe that we share a certain cultural similiarity.

I've found that beyond Preliminism, of which I've written, there is a school of western thought that goes well beyond the mysticism of Mary Baker Eddy. If you're a Christian Scientist, hold true to your beliefs. You've heard this before.

There is a school of thought that decries every simple belief that most of us believe in. The most current, and worst, school of thought that I've found has been captured by the Prout movement.

Here is the masthead of the Prout movement...the "World Prout Assembly". "PROUT stands for PROgressive UTilization Theory. It means, the progressive utilization and rational distribution of all the earth's natural resources. PROUT advocates another type of revolution called "nuclear revolution." In nuclear revolution, every aspect of collective life - social, economic, political, cultural, psychic and spiritual - is completely transformed. New moral and spiritual values arise in society which provide the impetus for accelerated social progress. The old era is replaced by a new era - one collective psychology is replaced by another. This type of revolution results in all-round development and social progress."

Get it? It's groovey to be a communist. But it's not really "Communism". It's just collectivism with a new face. There are actually smart people being dumb. On purpose.

Collectivism is good. Communism is bad. The difference? Probably a lack of literacy. Or, more, a willingness to take of leap of faith. Studying issues and asking critical questions is so passe. With the new collectivism you can state what your outcome should be, then take whatever steps you deem as necessary to achieve it. I used to laugh at this kind of solipcism during the Viet Nam war. There were lots of great posters out there with mottos like, "Imagine Peace, Make Peace Happen". As if imagining a thing was the same as proving its existence.

And yet this discredited school of Berkeleyism still exists. These are the proto-spiritualists who will raise us up above theology. But read Berkeley. His arugument was all about supplanting rationalism with a rational theology. But irrational beliefs and rational argument don't exist well together. The very people who offer up hope of a new intellectual utopia end up selling us 18th century dreck.

Influential? Heard of Noah Chomsky? Here's the quote of Chomsky from the front page of Proutworld. ""Alternative visions are crucial at this moment in history. Prout’s cooperative model of economic democracy, based on cardinal human values and sharing the resources of the planet for the welfare of everyone, deserves our serious consideration."Noam Chomsky, Critic of U.S foreign policy, supporter of libertarian socialist objectives."

What are cardinal values? What are ordinal values? Don't the anti-Christers have religious beliefs? Of course they do. They're just not called religious beliefs. That would be religousy.

There is a kind of neo-infantilism that orders the left. Start with the outcome. Work back from there. To where you are. Then...all you have to do is take the first step.

For those who write code you know this is not the way to do it. You end up with all kinds of loops or worse, crashes. Before you institute code, you write top and bottom. What you intend is as important as what you intended.

Why is this important? Today it's important because there are students in a college for whom facing this kind of intellectual conundrum is a day-to-day thing. Meet Dr. Jane Scorza Terpstra. What kind of teacher is she? If you're like me, she's your worst nightmare. Back in my undergraduate days I had a few profs like this. Driven by message. Given the opportunity to "teach". It became a choice of dropping or winning. One particularly bad prof was given the boot after one of my study mates found the book the prof had been stealing her lectures from. A satisfying end of the day.

Imagine being young men returning to the US, finishing their service and finding this. (Or here.) During the early '70's I sat with young men returning from the Viet Nam War. Most of them were officers, sitting at attention, working to get every bit of information. For a young, lazy bloke they were scary. They were actually working. They saw the end game. Getting one in a study group would be a bit scarey. The two I had in my 3rd year russian language class are the ones I remember best. On paper they beat me. Listening and speaking I ruled. But I didn't know then what I know now. These guys were serious about their jobs. They didn't see college as a place to be between high school and someplace else. They were on their way. And we had the honor of being with them. We just didn't know it.

So, today, imagine being faced with this. A bad grade screws you up. But what would a good grade mean? How would you do, sitting in a classroom with an instructor like this? And where would you turn? Do you really think the administration at Northeastern Illinois University will take care of these students?

I don't.

Them Darn Canadierns

Just when you thought you could be proud of your Governor's choices, those darn Canadians go something like this. Here's a guy that takes a look at Global Warming and has the temerity to say that the debate isn't over!

I remember my dad forecasting that radial tires would never be popular because the cost of recapping your old bias ply tires was just too darn low. What did my dad know about it?

And when it comes to Global Warming (GW), just what does your governor know about it? Has he weighed in on what percentage of GW is due to CR flux versus gas flux? Or do we ask, what drives GW as an issue when the state's priorities are so screwed up? Is this the little Perfesser from Wizard of Oz telling you to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain?

Thanks to: Newsbusters

Where You At?

Fair question. Atrocious grammer. Who cares?

How about your state government?

Where I go, how I get there, I don't see that as being anybody's right to know. Unless, of course, that anybody is the Oregon State Legislature. In a Bill before the House, Democrats are asking for the right to get information from you car without your consent.

If you happen to think the state is overstepping, let someone know. The list of sponsors is at the top of the linked page.

Thanks to: NW Republican

Why is it so "mathy"?

It has been drawn to my attention that the Governor's Space Program (GSP) hasn't made it to the Mainstream Media. I've written before about the GSP and pointed out that our current governor is leading us into a new millennium of justice as the world's most Super-Duper Forward Thinker Ever™. That the MSM (mainstream media...why it takes three initials is beyond me, but that's the convention among "right-wing" blogs) hasn't picked up on the story is simple. They never tell the truth. Or, they aren't "truthy".

And so the criticism that there's no independant verification that the governor ever called the Global Warming Conundrum (GWC) "too mathy" also can't be verified independantly. I guess I'm the only guy not wearing tinfoil. I'm getting it.

I've criticized those for whom GWC is proven fact, as I've been criticized to show that the GWC isn't proven fact, to back up their (my) claim(s). Given Gas Flux or CR Flux, what proportion of each to you assign responsibility for the current GWC? Ninety percent gas flux? Ninety percent CR? What if, based on random probability, the percentages were fifty-fifty? Would that mean that Man-made gasses were still responsible? And yes, the definitions of gas v. CR flux are widely known terms. Chew don't know them? (But chew got an opinion?) (Lol)

If so, OJ would like to send you a Thank You card. It's this kind of critical thinking that allows professional cardsharks to exist. Or that your dad farts because you pull his finger.

I've already given a link to a math driven analysis of the GWC. Don't want to find it? Don't worry. Once spoken, once given.

Most of us have heard--maybe in a mathy class--that compound interest is one of the greatest sources of wealth available. You know, take one grain of rice and double it every day? Before too long...you've got a lot of rice. Don't believe it? Try it. Take a box of Uncle Ben's, pull out one grain, then two, then four, not every day, but now...before too long you'll need another box. And a vacuum cleaner. Rice is sneaky. You'll be picking it off your bare feet for the next week.

If you've thought about it and never done it, do it. Just once. Don't have rice? Use dried beans. Your appreciation for being mathy will increase just as your pile of beans increases.

There are lots of significant--yet small--learning moments like this. For most of us we learn these things by working. Dig a ditch with a fella and you'll learn more about common sense than a school will teach you in years. In a ditch there's work and there's outcome. And if you're digging more than your load you'll find out in a day.

In government there is no common sense. How do you measure the value of a politician when most of what they do is create hot air? (GWC?) When you work there's normally a reason for the work. Dig a ditch. Level a building site. Fall a tree. These things make sense. There's a reason for them. But government?

Governments are supposed to be "of the people, by the people, for the people" (Abe Lincoln). But where in the state of Oregon are the people, the individual as a member of society, to be found?

No where. The guy helping you lay-out a foundation doesn't exist. The guy down at the dealership that sold you your last truck doesn't exist. The woman that owns the "mom and pop" grocery store around the corner from you doesn't exist. In Oregon we don't celebrate the individual. We celebrate the group. And not the "thinky" group. Not the "mathy" group. We celebrate the Progressive group. Or, soon to be coming, Oregonians for Space!

It's so "non-spacey" to think about the business of government. Roads, schools, police and firefighters. It's a lot cooler to think about the Galaxy! That's why the GWC is getting such great play in the press here in Oregon. The Governor and his Progressive Band want all of us to forget that there's a certain amount of math to running a government. All we have to do is increase taxes, bump up Lottery Dollars and we can be Kings of the World, ala Tom Wolfe. The difference is, in Bonfire of the Vanities only one man falls prey to his own delusions. In Oregon, we all fall prey to one man's delusions.

So why is science "so mathy"?

Requiescat in Pace

At 1345 today, the Oregon National Guard released information about an Oregon soldier, Sargeant Long N. Nguyen, 27, of Portland, Oregon. Sgt. Nguyen died of a non-combat related wound.

In its press release, the ONG (Oregon National Guard) asked that the media respect the family's request for privacy.

"Sgt. Nguyen deployed with the 41st Infantry Brigade Combat Team. The 41st IBCT is based out of Tigard, Ore. and deployed to Afghanistan last summer to lead Joint Task Force Phoenix. The unit is responsible for assisting the development of the Afghan National Army.

And that was pretty much what we had. A loss. And a request for respect...until 1745 tonight. "The family of Sgt. Long N. Nguyen, an Oregon National Guardsman who died in Afghanistan, has asked for privacy. They have requested media queries go to the ORNG Public Affairs office."

Unspoken in the latest press release is a total disregard for the family of this fallen soldier. Not just one or two opportunists...

"Oregon Army National Guard soldier Sgt. Long N. Nguyen, 27, of Portland, Ore., died Feb. 10 in Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan, of a non-combat related wound. Nguyen was assigned to the 141st Brigade Support Battalion, based in Portland, Ore.

Sgt. Nguyen deployed to Afghanistan in June 2006 with the 41st Infantry Brigade Combat Team, based in Tigard, Ore. The 41st IBCT is leading Combined Joint Task Force Phoenix V and is responsible for assisting the development of the Afghan National Army."

It kinda makes you wonder. In this business of giving your community of interest the news, who disregards the request of a family in bereavement?