History's End

History will end only when Man does

Location: United States
Blogroll Me!
  • E-Mail me
  • Tuesday, November 30, 2004


    I had earlier posted my belief that a stalemat has been reached in the Ukraine. However, PostModernClog, an excellent blog for explaining the situation in the Ukraine right now, has a new post up that leads me to believe this isn't the case. An excerpt of great importance:
    This is the greatest buddy team since Abbot and Costello Stalin and Beria. The president makes nice sounds about revoting while his surrogates quietly set up an independent republic for him and his own to rule. The same day the president announces his support for new elections, his Prime Minister pulls out of negotiations to go campaign for secession in Donetsk.
    I think that Discoshaman may have figured out the true situation at the moment. Momentum is onYushchenko's side, and Yanukovych knows it. Therefore, he is trying to do one of two things:

    1) Blackmail Yushchenko and the Opposition, by forcing them to back down or face a divided Ukraine, in the hopes this threat will allow Yanukovych to gain the presidency.

    2) Yanukovych realizes the jig is up, and that things will not go his way. Either Yushchenko will be declared President outright, or there will be another election, a cleaner one, one in which Yanukovych is almost certain to lose. In such a situation he might face criminal action, therefor he has decided to make himself king of part of the Ukraine, if he can't be king of all of it. Hence he will try and spur a seccession with the goal in mind of becoming the "President" of East Ukraine. Putin wouldn't mind this too much, as while he doesn't get a tributary out of the whole of the Ukraine, he gets some of it. So he would likely back such a movement. This puts Yushchenko in a very weak spot, much like that of Lincoln in the United States. I don't envy the man, the job ahead of him is enormous.


    Sunday, November 28, 2004

    On the Majority

    The Black Republican has a good post about how majorities fare under the American system. Read it, and follow the links.



    This year I decided to take a short hiatus from blogging during Thanksgiving, which anyone who reads this blog will surely have noticed. Sorry about the lack of warning, I had anticipated internet access later that did not come through. Otherwise, though, things went well, and the family had a good Thanksgiving this year. Hopefully all readers of yours truly did as well.


    Wednesday, November 24, 2004

    Civil War Looming in the Ukraine

    For more information go here. I think that a repeat of Tiananmen is looming. This could be very, very big.


    Tuesday, November 23, 2004

    The Ukraine Situation

    Glenny Reynolds has a good take on the situation in Ukraine, which isn't getting nearly enough attention in the US.

    Update: I missed this earlier, but Clay Calhoun's site also has info from a former Congressman who was in the Ukraine as an election observer. Very disturbing information is revealed:
    Russian special forces dressed in Ukrainian Special forces uniforms are in Kyiv. Ukrainian militia have been instructed by the mayor to protect the people from the Russian troops. Ukrainian militia have established a hotline for Ukrainians to report any incidents with the Russians and pledged to protect Ukrainians.
    It appears that the Russians are messing around in their neighbors politics, much like the US used to in Latin and South America during the 20th century. Not good, not at all.



    While categorizing people is always problematic, I think you could divide Christians into three main groups:

    1) Literal Protestants

    2) Non-Literal Protestants

    3) Catholics

    Of course, this causes problems, as what of the Orthodox Churches? And Eastern Churches? A fourth group is therefore necessary, temporarily, at least.

    4) Eastern Churches

    As I am not an expert on the Eastern Churches, I will need a while before I can decide where to place them permanently.

    Lets examine the three main groups then. First we have the Literalists. They are mostly Evangelicals, and accept what is in the Bible as 100% true. Overwhelmingly creationists.

    The second group, non-Literal Christians, or for want of a better term, Interpretationist Protestants, are those Christians who do not take the Bible literally. Usually Evolutionists.

    Then we have the Roman Catholic Church. The official doctrine of the Church holds that while the Bible is of divine origin, it isn't the sole source of knowledge about G-d. In some ways the Catholic Church has components of the first 2 groups in it. It has evolutionists and creationists both. The issue of evolution is something that hasn't yet been decided in full by the Church, and may not be for a while. So until then you will have both types present. From my experience, the difference between the two is based on two factors. The first is their willingness to trust the veracity of the bible. The more literal minded are more likely to be creationists than evolutionists. Secondly, those of a more scientific bent, are, from my experience, tend to be more sympathetic to evolution than those who aren't. For an example of a Catholic view on Biblical Inerrancy, you can go here. Its a rather long piece, but quite informative.

    Frankly, I am not sure where to go with this. I suppose I can offer a critique on literalism vs interpretationism, but that will take some thought, and time. In the mean time you can read this take on science, Christianity, and evolution. Hat Tip to Donald Sensing.


    Peace in our Time?

    Hardly. Here is a link to a JPost piece (free registration required) about what Abbas plans: The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    This simple bit shows exactly why any peace process that emerges is a sham:
    Yasser Arafat's three top successors vowed on Tuesday to follow in his footsteps by refusing to compromise on the right of return for all refugees and insisting on the establishment of a Palestinian state on the entire West Bank and Gaza Strip, with Jerusalem as its capital.
    The 'right of return' is never going to happen, its a poison pill that ensures there can be no permanent solution to the conflict in the Holy Land. That much I know. What I don't know is if Abbas and the other moderates have long term plans to reform Palestinian society in order to get them to drop that requirement. Of course, this supposes that they actually "win" the upcoming election, and that Hamas doesn't decide to take matters into its own hands. However, I suspect Hamas is going to stay out of the 'political process', whil continuing on the same path as before. Its leaders have much to gain from maintaining the status quo.


    Why Should Dolphins be Protected?

    Becuase they are willing to put themselves in harm's way to protect us.


    Sunday, November 21, 2004


    While I have been somewhat occupied as of late, I attempted to work on the post about Biblical Literalism I mentioned earlier. I have realized that the subject is far deeper than my knowledge of theology is at present, so I may need a day or two to read up on some of the more relevant aspects. However, I have made a few personal discoveries as well.

    I had noticed before that many evangelicals tended to be constitutional literalists as well, but assumed it was a matter of political background than anything else. However, in deeper examination, I realized that in many cases the religious beliefs of Evangelicals influence strongly their political beliefs. Because they are Biblical literalists, Evangelicals tend to look towards not only the Bible, but most documents, literally. Hence they tend towards strict interpretationsim when it comes to the Constitution. The adherence of most Evangelicals to the GOP isn't because of the fact they are ignorant, racists, sexist, or anti-intellectual (although there is a strain of that in some Evangelical thought). Rather, they naturally gravitate towards the party which most represents strict interpretation when it comes to the Constitution. While the Republican Partyisn't 100% on that, it certainly adheres to that far more than the Democratic Party.

    The inverse of the above really isn't the case. Evangelicals, because they are religiously conservative, tend towards political conservatism. But for religious liberals it seems to be the opposite. Their liberal tendencies towards the constitution, as in a loose interpretation, or "living document," philosphy, lead them to join Churches that are loose interpretationist. This has particularly influenced the Episcopelian Church, which I suspect will self-destruct in the next decade or so. Liberals who participate in Christian Churches tend to "imprint" their political beliefs on the church, and make it more liberal.

    More later, and I may do this in several parts.


    Friday, November 19, 2004

    An Open Letter to Europe

    The American Thinker has a brilliant piece by Herbert Meyer, addressed as an open letter to Europe. Go read it right away.

    This letter correctly addresses the growing rift between Europe and America, and explains that the ones who have been changing have been the Europeans more than the Americans. The line "You refuse to see that it is you, not we Americans, who have abandoned Western Civilization" perfectly illustrates the situation. Europe must wake up, and soon, or otherwise the Old World will become the Dead World, with the black flag flying from Lisbon to Moscow.


    Creation Versus Evolution

    La Shawn Barber has a very provacative post about the evolution vs creation debate, one that got me thinking. The comments are just as thought-provoking.

    However, after examining the topic in depth, I realized the issue really isn't about creationism vs evolutionism. Its actually about whether or not a Christian should take the Bible literally or not. Literalism as a Christian philosophy means one must be a creationist, while those who are not literalists can be either a creationist or evolutionist. So if you really want to address the issue, which I intend to do soon, you should address the base issue at work here: Biblical literalism.


    Thursday, November 18, 2004


    Somehow I missed somewhere noting that the second (or 3rd, depending on who you ask) most powerful position in the executive branch will soon be occupied by a black women. That notion would have been a joke fifty years ago, just like man setting foot on the moon. Yet somehow, it is really not much of a story at all. Instead we hear about how US Marines are committing war crimes and about the opening of the Clinton Library. This is a monumental achievement for Americans of African descent, and it gets NO media attention. No specials on the progess of black's in America, or even on race relations. Could this be that it was a Republican President who decided to appoint a black women to the role of Secretary of State? Or because that women wasn't the media' prefered notion of how a black women should be? Who am I kidding, its both. This amazing success story is yet another example of media bias, and the invectives directed against Condaleeza Rice show how racism is ok, as long as it is directed against Republicans. This is the perfect argument against progress: one step forward, another step backward. Shame on them all.


    Wednesday, November 17, 2004

    The World Doesn't Stop for You

    I have been very busy as of late, and alas, the world hasn't waited for me. A lot has been happening:

    Fallujah continues to be cleaned up, while violence builds up elsewhere.
    Suspicion? The insurgents are launching attacks in order to demonstrate that the US conquest of Fallujah didn't defeat them. Prediction: continued violence across Iraq, although with every US move into a city or area taken over by insurgents the attack will start to diminish in occurence and lethality. However, before then things are likely to stay nasty. The insurgents might even try to pick up the pace in a last, desperate move.

    Iran has apparently recieved nuke information and material from Pakistan. This would seem to support the notion that Iran is a growing threat that is going to be dealt with relatively soon.

    Reports that Kim Jong-il's picture being taken down have apparently been confirmed by multiple sources. And there are reports that a North Korean freedom movement has been launched. Roger has more. Read the comments for even more info.


    Tuesday, November 16, 2004

    Potential Shake-up in North Korea

    This is from Debka:
    Pictures of North Korean ruler Kim Jong Il are being removed from public places in Pyongyang and other parts of country. No word so far on who gave the order or its meaning.
    There are only a limited number of reasons why this would occur, and think that the most likely woudl be if Kim is no longer in power. Either he is dead, or somehow "incapacitated." If this is true, and I see no reason for Debka to lie on this, then there very well may have been a coupe in North Korea.


    Mosul Gets Cleaned Up

    I thought it would happen later, but it looks like the US is going to clean it up now. I thought the US would wait in order of the insurgents to have enough time to anger local residents, but it appears that US and Iraqi leaders have decided not to give them time to fortify. We are likely going to see a clean up operation every week or so then, with all of the operations being smaller scale than the one in Fallujah.


    Monday, November 15, 2004

    A War Crime? Hardly

    Story here at Foxnew. Those Marines made the right decision at the time. The key point to this is that the wounded insurgent was faking death. If he had surrendered, or perhaps simply been writhing in pain, then it would likely be a violation. However, in faking his death the insurgent could have easily been carrying a bomb vest, and detonated when US troops came close. The insurgents don't follow the rules of war themselves, so leeway has to be given to US troops. I would likely have made the same choice that marine made had I been there.


    Lacking in Orginality

    That is what I would call this stunt. Watch the media swoon over this.


    Its a step up...

    from Bush=Hitler, at least.

    Hat Tip: many people, including Glenn.


    Sunday, November 14, 2004

    Super-Hero or Super-Ordinary

    Michael Totten has started a discussion on the the new Pixar movie, The Incredibles, about a family of super heroes trying to cope with 'ordinary' life. His reaction to some of the comments originating from the political left:
    Whoa. Superheroes are right-wing? Anytown USA, conformity, and charmless suburbia are left-wing? Really? When did that s--t start? The sixties really are over if that’s how it is.
    Go read the whole time to appreciate where this statement comes from. (Spoiler Warning) Once done with that, I have a few observations to note:

    First off, this film does indeed seem to be a social critique, perhaps even one from an objectivist point of view. That is difficult to determine in full. However, I do notice some striking similarities between it and another work "aimed at children", The Giver. Both works are supposedly aimed, or rather, written, for children, but the fact of the matter is that most children won't fully understand them. They are not childish in their design. Let me explain The Giver a little. It is a dystopian social critique of post-modernist liberalism, disguised as a children's book. It attacks leftist notions of equality and perfectibility, while at the same time upholding the nobility of the human spirit. The idea of "easy way outs" is critiqued, by virtue of the role of the protagonist, Jonah, a young boy who is charged with the job of eventually holding the collective memories of society. These all of the tough memories, the harsh memories, the ones that would haunt you at night. Everyone else is sparred the horror of the past, they don't have to worry about remembering sadness, or misery, or suffering. Jonah is forced to suffer in order for others to be happy. He has no choice in this, because its for the greater good of all. Ultimately the society described is one in which there is no such thing as free will, because everything has long been set out ahead of time. In order to achieve equality, people are brought down to the lowest common denominator. Race problems? Remove the ability to see color. Forced equality is the key to the maintenance of Jonah's community. The society is a picture of what the end result of Leftist social engineering might achieve.

    The Incredibles has its own philosophy, which is not dissimilar to that of The Giver. Mr. Incredible and his wife are forced to live as ordinary people by the government, which doesn't want to have to deal with the cost of maintaining them as super-heroes. This comes about as a result of a lawsuit made against Mr. Incredible by someone who didn't want to have his life saved. This lawsuit results in dozens more against all the manner of super-heroes. However, the true reason for the backlash against super-heroes is a jealousy of their power, ordinary people who hate the fact that they aren't 'special.' And so Mr. and Mrs. Incredible are forced to live as ordinary people, and cover up their true talents. Here you can see the obvious parrallel between the two. Forced equality, and the inability of people to truly express themselves, definitely has a similarity to objectivist thought. There are others. Indeed, Syndrome, the arch-enemy in the film, has the goal in mind of making everyone super, everyone special when he decides to retire. And as he puts it: "... and when everyone's special, then no one is." Once again, through social engineering we see a way to create a form of forced equality. However, what The Giver alludes to, and isn't fully alluded to in the movie, is that doesn't work. You can't bring everyone up. So in order to achieve equality, you bring everyone down.

    Ironically, we see here in the desire to "make everyone special" (something that one would no doubt often here at modern day elementary schools), a desire for conformity. In his desire to get back to the days of his super-hero past Mr. Incredible is actually trying to establish his own identity, to become who he wants to be, and not what society wants him to be. That isn't "right-wing", its individualistic, and as a philosophy should transcend the "left-right" boundaries. What we see in The Incredibles is actually a very simple message: be yourself, not what others expect or want you to be. There are plenty of other messages, of course, but that one is most striking. And woe to us if only one side of the political spectrum says to be yourself.

    Update: Curtis also sounds off on the movie. His favorite line:
    "They're always coming up with new ways of celebrating mediocrity."
    So very true.


    Saturday, November 13, 2004

    A Real Winner

    And its not whom you would expect...


    Replacing Cheney

    I should note that I believed that the GOP would replace Cheney on the Republican ticket for 2004. I was wrong then, but he might still be replaced. His current health problems are a continual liabilty for the administration, and for that reason alone he might step aside. However, there is also the idea of choosing a new VP who can run against Hillary in '08. The act of replacing Cheney would actually create some problems, in that if they do pick a new VP, he or she will have a huge advantage when it comes to the '08 primaries. So the White House would be forced to pick someone who has a good chance of winning on their own. But if they do choose a new VP, they may alienate Republicans who planned on running in '08 themselves. Picking someone as a "caretaker VP" also has problems of its own, as it creates the chance that a VP elevated to President somehow would essentially be a lame duck. Potentially disasterous with the world situation as it is. With these new understandings in mind I can understand why the Administration has been reluctant to replace Cheney.


    Winding Down

    It appears that things in Fallujah are winding down, and "major combat" could be a day or two away from ending. This doesnt' mean the town is safe, of course. I suspect that it will take a few weeks for that to happen. Now I expect the military to start turning its attention to Mosul and Ramadi, where things have been heating up lately.


    Friday, November 12, 2004

    Spain's Anti-American Prime Minister Catching Some Heat

    Michael Totten links to a piece from the Telegraph explaining that Spains PM is catching some heat for his snubbing of the US, because the US snubbed him in turn. I say good for the US, and my response to Zapetero? Tant pis, as the French say. We should stop snubbing him when he apologizes for acting like a petty child.


    60 Million

    That is the number of votes that Bush recieved (thus far) in the 2004 election. That is only about 8 million less that the total number of votes won by both Nixon and Kennedy in 1960. So when you hear people say "Bush isn't my President", then be sure to tell them that he is the President of over 60 million Americans. More Americans than there are people living in Britain, in fact.


    The Battle That Never Was

    I think it is safe to say now that Fallujah was the Battle for Baghdad that never ocurred. Before Baghdad fell, we heard many different people and groups explain how it would become the next Stalingrad, or at least a a costly battle for the US. The fact that Iraq's capital fell easily took many by surprise, including US military and political leaders. The amount of Urban Warfare that occurred was negligible, and thus the Battle of Baghdad was The Battle That Never Was. However, in Fallujah we see what that battle could have looked like. While the US has done fairly well in Fallujah thus far, we see how urban warfare is both costly and time consuming. The first part is preparing the battlefield, the second is to enter the battlefield and engage the foe who actually fights you, and the third is the clean up, where you take care of those who hid in the 2nd phase, as well as repair and rebuild the damage caused by the battle. Wretchard, Chester and Dan have done an excellent job at analyzing the situation in Fallujah, and explaining it for those whose knowledge of military affairs is more limited. In Fallujah we see paths not taken, and paths that yet loom before us.


    Thursday, November 11, 2004

    Israel Prepares for the Worst

    In preparation for Arafat's funeral Israeli forces will go on Alert Level D, last used just prior to the Iraq War. From JPost:

    Police said that their biggest concern is that the tens of thousands of Palestinians who flock to mosques for prayers on the last Friday of Ramadan will begin to riot and may attempt to breach military checkpoints and enter Israel.

    Arafat's funeral is scheduled to take place at around the same time that Palestinian worshippers flock to the Temple Mount and other mosques for

    This bodes ill. The timing of the funeral must be deliberate, and is designed to incite the Palestinian people to violence. The intifada has "calmed down" somewhat in recent weeks, and this must be an attempt to get it going again. Also, it could be an attempt to distract the Palestinian people from the leadership struggle currently going on. We shall soon see how things turn out...


    Sarin in Falujah?

    Or so reports NPR. I missed this earlier, but it could be huge. In a few days time we should know more about the situation.

    Hat tip: Jane


    Veteran's Day

    Today I think that a few words by Lincoln best explain today:
    With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.
    Thanks are owed to all who have fought for the freedom and safety of America and her people. Without your sacrifices none would be free or safe, either here at home, or across the world.

    Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of G-d.


    Prospects for '08

    While some on the Left has decided to either vacate for Canada or hide in their homes waiting for Ashcroft's secret police to drag them a... nevermind... , others have decided to prepare themselves for the mid term elections in '08. However, what exactly can they hope to achieve? Glenn links to a WaPo article that shows how re-districting after the last census has resulted in the creation of many "safe districts."
    Thanks to rigged boundaries and the incumbents' immense fundraising advantage, nearly 96 percent of the "races" were won by a margin of at least 10 percent. Richie noted that 29 of the 33 open seats (with no incumbents running) stayed with the same party. The turnout of voters was about 50 percent higher than in off-year 2002, but party ratios in the House barely budged.
    I thought earlier that the Democrats, angered by the election results in '04, had a decent chance, or at least, a the possibility, of re-taking the house in '06. After thinking about it though, and reading this article, that seems unlikely now. Incumbents are simply too safe. This leaves the Senate as the only branch of the legislature they can hope to take back. However, 17 of the seats open for elections are held by Democrats, 15 by Republicans, and 1 by an Independent. So the Democrats will have to beat a full third of the Republicans open for re-election, while losing none of their own, to take back the Senate. Not impossible, but very hard. I think the most likely outcome in '06 is a a slight reduction in the number of GOP reps and Senators after the '06 election. Although the strong GOP showing in '02 might indicate otherwise.


    I wish I was in Egypt...

    ... so that I could spit on Yassir Arafat's coffin. The man was a monster, and death came too slow for one such as him. Proof that the devil fears competition in hell.


    Wednesday, November 10, 2004

    About Time

    Well, Arafat's death is official now. Took the Palestinians long enough. The coming days and weeks will be pivotal, as the various sides in the West Bank and Gaza compete for leadership. I think that the most likely outcome is that Hamas emerges as top do in Gaza, while the West Bank is fractured, with some cities Fatah controlled and others Hamas controlled. Eventually I suspect that Hamas will come to win out, although Israeli actions might alter the outcome of this. However, its my belief that if Israel doesn't intervene Hamas will eventually come out at the top. Although it, and the territories themselves, will be the worse for it.


    Mopping Up

    According to Wretchard at the Belmont Club, things appear to be close to winding down in Fallujah (scroll down for update). The clear and control phase is approaching, could take a week or more. I suspect we will see some smaller scale incursions into other Sunni Triangle cities in a few weeks, cleaning the scum who managed to escape Fallujah. Hopefully this will result in a weakened insurgency unable to seriously damage Iraqi attempts to hold elections in January.


    The Palestinian Future

    Colt and Dan Darling are having a disagreement about the role that Fatah and some of the more "moderate" Palestinian leaders will play in the coming Palestinian Civil War. It starts here. Frankly, I don't have a clue as to whom is correct, but I don't think it matters. Hamas is probably going to win the civil war, despite its rather ragged command structure. Its more popular, and can rely on foreign backing more than Fatah can. Hizb'allah might also use this opportunity to empower itself, they can't be ruled out either.


    Tuesday, November 09, 2004


    I think that I will be heading back to Haloscan for comments. It provider better control, so expect the return sometime soon.

    Update: Comments via Haloscan are operational. The old comments haven't been deleted, just hidden.


    A Somewhat More Accurate Network

    Much more accurate Posted by Hello

    Note the connections between nodes, and between nodes and major hubs. In this case I am blog-linked to Colt's Eurabian Times, and he to me. Both of us link to Charles' LGF. If I really wanted to get more exact, I would use color coding to indicate the kind of link, and perhaps alternating thickness to indicate the relative strength of the link.


    A Simple Blog Network

    A simple blog network Posted by Hello

    Here we see LGF as the major hub, with Discarded Lies as the minor and secondary hub, and Eurabian Times, Air Force Family, and History's End as the nodes.


    Blog Network

    This is an example of a blog network, very basic. I am still getting used to posting image files, so by tomorrow I should have some better work to show.

    Blog Network Posted by Hello


    So Long, and Thanks for all the Fish!

    Talk of leaving the Union has started to appear. Secession is a word that hasn't been used in a long time, but now at last it rears its ugly head. Mainly it comes from those on the Left, although a few on the right don't seem displeased at the notion either. At this point its just bluster. But should the Democrats lose in '08 things might start to change. As I have argued before, the Left is not used to defeat, and likely will not handle it well. Not that a state leaving the Union is likely, however. Very few blue states would have enough people willing to take off, and I doubt they would be willing to risk it on their own. In fact, I can't think of any at the moment. Its not like the south was before the war, with massive support for leaving the Union clustered in a rather tight but all encompassing geographic region. Also, much of this talk is coming from the chattering classes, and from the majority of Democratic voters. I doubt they would go along with the scheme.


    Just Installed Mozilla Firefox

    It seems to be working fine. Anyone having any problems?


    So Far So Good

    Things appear to be going according to plan, as US forces press to the heart of Fallujah. As usual Chester and Wretchard provide the analysis you need. StrategyPage is also a good place to check out. Much of the information we are receiving appears to be out of date, so I must wonder what the current state of affairs is at the moment.


    Monday, November 08, 2004

    Be Careful What You Wish For

    Why? Sometimes it comes true. In this case, the wish is by the New York Times, and it is for President Bush to be assassinated. Ironically, this would perhaps be the worst thing to happen to happen to the Democrats I can imagine. How ironic it is for Dean Murphy to bring up Lincoln, as Lincoln was the most reviled President in US history while in office. Yet, his assassination in office not long after the end of the Civil War helped make him into a hero, nay, martyr. Were Bush to die at just the right time sometime in the future the same result could happen. The Leftists would cheer of course, but everyone with any sense would denounce them, and the end result would be a metamorphosis of George W. Bush. When forced to actually examine what he has done the Left will implode in not only our nation, but across the world. So in a sense the call for President Bush to be assassinated is a call to commit suicide, because political suicide is exactly what that action would be if a Leftist/Islamist were to kill the man.


    Sunday, November 07, 2004

    It Begins

    The assault on Fallujah has commenced. Chester has good, up to date info on the situation.


    Its Coming

    The assault on Fallujah, that is. Wretchard once again analyzes the subject, and you should head to the Belmont Club right away.


    Friday, November 05, 2004


    Zeyad at Healing Iraq has a fascinating post up discussing a televised session of the Iraqi National Council in session. This kind of transparent government was nowhere to be found in Iraq even 3 years ago, and its effects can't be over-stated. The transparency of liberal democracies is one of the reasons why corruption is so less of a problem, as it is far harder to hide. This helps ensure good government. And good government is key to a nation joining the Core.


    In America

    I saw a good suggestion at the BBC boards where Americans were asked to explain why they voted for George W. Bush. It was this: The next time you come to America, go to places other than Boston, New York and Los Angeles. Its funny, but I never thought before how "Blue America" seemed to draw pretty much all foreign tourists. How many non-Americans visit New York each year, and how many visit Kansas City? Or any other part of "Red America." Although KC is probably blue because its a city. The sub-urbs and rural parts of America are full of history, and have plenty of things to visit, but relatively few see them. Perhaps Europe and the rest of the world would understand us better if they visited "Red America" once and a while.


    Democrats Hit Bottom, Dig

    Apparently losing by 4 million votes or so wasn't enough for the Democrats. They want to lose by more. I can't help but think that Rove and the rest of the RNC is doing the Happy Dance while reading this. Its as if the Democrats want to be the minority party for the next generation or so.

    I should also note a side effect of the Democrat reaction to Bush's re-election. The sheer vitriol directed against Bush supporters has undoubtebly hit a new low. The word most commonly used is "stupid". Well guess what? People don't like to be called stupid. So I fully expect that nearly every Bush voter this year will be that much less likely to vote Democrat when it comes to President. I suspect that the Republican candidate in '08 will get more than 59 million votes, unless of course they pick Alan Keyes. Which is about as likely as Michael Moore realizing the error of his ways, becoming a Neo-Conservative and writing for National Review. But hey, stranger things have happened.


    Thursday, November 04, 2004

    To all Bush Supporters

    Read this.

    Things could have turned out very differently if the Kerry campaign had been better run. Rather than gloat, count your blessings that your opposition was even weaker than you were.


    An Excerpt

    From the Kerry blog:

    But in an American election, there are no losers, because whether or not our candidates are successful, the next morning we all wake up as Americans. And that -- that is the greatest privilege and the most remarkable good fortune that can come to us on earth.

    Where was this Kerry during the election? This Kerry might have won.


    Moral Values

    Many on both the Left and Right have examined with great interest the fact that exit polls show that the biggest issue on people's minds for the election, at least, the most agreed upon, was "moral values." Of course, many on the Left took this to mean that hatred of homosexuals and anti-choice sentiment was the reason behind this. They fail to examine in full what was meant by " moral values." It could mean that, the passage of bans against homosexual marriage in 11 states is some evidence to advance that. However, they fail to take into account what else "moral values" implies. I suspect that many who mentioned that meant far more than just "God, Gays and Guns" as some have said. Rather, I suspect that many people felt:

    A) The right to self defense was a moral issue. They felt that the President was far more likely to take a moral stand to defend the American people.

    B) The President was more likely to do what he felt was right than what was politically expedient. Many in Flyover Country disliked the habit of Bill Clinton to poll on everything. They wanted someone who did something that he felt was right, not that he felt was popular. I suspect more than a few disagreed with the Presiden't decisions on Iraq. However, they felt that what Bush did, he did because he believed it was right. That, I suspect, was on more than a few minds. Changing rationale afterwards isn't like saying you were against the war, when you were in fact ahead of the issue before the administration.

    C) Also, I think that many Americans believed Kerry to be a hypocrite, in that he was a pro-choice Catholic, when such a thing is in many ways a contradiction. They felt he used his religion for personal gain, and that, unlike Bush, he really didn't believe in much. Except himself.

    Its not just the 3 Gs. Yet I see that many on the Left don't see this. So I begin to wonder just what the Democratic party will look like in 2008.

    Note: For those who accuse Bush of being on the leash of the Evangelicals, what, exactly, has he done for them? Faith Based initiatives. Thats it. And that likely won't last past the next serious budget session. Bush did not, repeat, did not bring up the issue of Same Sex Marriage. The Left did, with the Massachussettes court incident and the San Francisco incident. He had, in fact, deliberately avoided dividing issues like that ever since 9/11. However, when the Left decided to make SSM an issue, then he was forced to respond. And he did so weakly, at that. His support of FMA was a joke. Token support, if that. He really wanted the issue to be off the table. However, it didn't go, and ironically enough, it probably gave Bush both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote.

    Update: Roger L Simon has a good post about this. He mentions moral clarity when it comes to spreading liberal values throughout the world. You can count that as reason D. Check out his post.

    Update 2: This post at Powerline and its attending links seems to indicate that the issue of gay marriage actually had a relatively small role in the election. Interesting. It appears there are far more 9/12 Bush supporters than the Left would have you believe.


    Well, so much for the Riots...

    I have no problems with that, of course. But it looks like some of the worries I have expessed here, and over at StrategyPage have proved foundless. The President did well enough that the Left can't even lie to itself about another "stolen election." And thus they slip into a 'blue' mood and blame the "stupid American public." However, as I have noted before, already some self-reflection is going on. Whether it will be enough, or reach the right results, is yet to be determined.


    More Rumors...

    ...about Arafat being dead. After so many "close calls", I don't know what to think. He may be dead, he might yet live. But something tells me that his time will soon come, if it hasn't already. Time for him to reap his bitter harvest.


    Wednesday, November 03, 2004


    Drudge is reporting that Ashcroft intends to submit his resignation in the next few days. I find this likely. I also think I know who will replace him: Rudy Guiliani.


    The Time for Gloating...

    ...is not now. The Black Republican has the correct answer to this situation, found in Lincoln's Second Inaugural, perhaps the greatest political work by a single man in American History, which I shall repeat in its entirety here:
    Fellow countrymen: At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office, there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement, somewhat in detail, of a course to be pursued, seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention and engrosses the energies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends, is as well known to the public as to myself; and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.

    On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago, all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it-all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war-seeking to dissolve the Union, and divide effects, by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came.

    One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it.

    Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes his aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered--that of neither has been answered fully.

    The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses! for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through his appointed time, he now wills to remove, and that he gives to both North and South this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn by the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said, "The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."

    With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.

    Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address
    March 4, 1865


    Round-Up of Reactions on the Left

    Head over to Instapundit where Michael Totten has a good roundup of reactions to Bush's win at Left-of-Center sites. Andrew Sullivan has by far the best attitude, and shows real class. Oliver Willis once against show himself to be the stupid, and not the Kryptonite. And Ezra Klein is self-reflective, but still somewhat close-minded. Interesting to see how it plays out.

    Edit: Oliver has apparently recovered from a short bout of pettiness, and has a good post up discussing how the Democratic Party should turn now that the election is over. This kind of analysis is extremely important, as a strong and viable Democratic Party is essential to a healthy republic. I suspect that the direction the Democratic Party will take will be one of moderate liberalism fiscally, perhaps even moderately fiscally conservative, and libertarian in its social views. That process has only just begun, of course.

    Edit2: Typos fixed, I think...

    Edit 3: Looks like I was wrong about Oliver. Oh well, Winds of Change has some good stuff at least, thanks to AL and Joe.


    About Time

    Looks like Kerry will finally concede soon. I suspect that his desire to keep things going was as much about pleasing the hard core elements of the Democratic Party as it was to see if he would actually win. He couldn't delay for long, not with the President ahead by over 3 million votes. I think I am going to see what some of the European newspapers are saying.


    Tuesday, November 02, 2004

    Nixon was a Better Man than Kerry

    At least, he was in 1960. I think that says everything I feel like saying. A huge win for the President, a definite mandate for the future.


    Victory for Bush

    At least, I think that is the case. THIS post at NRO reports that the Marines and Air Force are attacking Fallujah now. I think that Bush and his advisors believe they will win, and thus they are starting early, before my original projections.

    So I will be among the first to call it for Bush.

    Edit: Note, this is if those reports are true. If they aren't, then I withhold for now.

    Edit 2: Bad Link, but not worth fixing at this point.


    The Porch Light is on...

    ...because The Historian is not here. He is currently switching back and forth between NRO, Powerline, Instapundit and LGF. Currently trying to find some good left-of-center sites, but running into DNC mouthpieces (which arguably NRO is for the GOP).


    The Dead Count More than the Living...

    Blogger Blackfive has apparently been the victim of Chicago style voter fraud. This is hardly a good sign on avoiding a contested election...


    And So we Come to it at Last...

    Soon we shall we see what we shall see. Today Americans will decide whether or not to swap horses mid-river. History now comes to a great fork in the river of time, and we know not which route we will take, nor where it leads. Let us hope for the sake of humanity we make the right choice today...


    Monday, November 01, 2004

    The Copperheads

    Read this excellent post by M. Simon over at Power and Control. And yes, Daschele is most certainly a Copperhead.



    The US is steps away from becoming a Third World Country.

    I can't really think of anything else to say at the moment, my anger is clouding my thoughts.

    Update: The situation appears to be resolved. Daschele is on his way out, of that I am sure of in this election.


    The New Morality

    This Guardian piece about novelist/writer Tom Wolfe is surprisingly full of insight, considering the source. It covers topics as broad as the Leftist-Elite mentality, the sexual revolution and the Bush Presidency. Actually, those topics are hardly so unconnected as I make them out to be. They do all relate to each other, often in unexpected ways. However, the most important part of the article can be found in these paragraphs:

    A new Tom Wolfe novel is always a literary event: where will he go next? The answer this time is an elite, imaginary Ivy League university, Dupont College, for a book about libido off the leash, and about the cult of what Wolfe calls "the bad comedy" of college sports - athletes taken on by centres of academic excellence for their bodies, not their brains.

    The novel - researched, as usual, down to the last expletive - concerns a young world speaking "f--- patois", loaded with creatine and cocaine, numbed by PlayStation 3, and charged by alcohol, the "vile spleen" of rap and, above all, ubiquitous sex between the heirs and heiresses to privilege in America. Most intriguingly, in this week of all weeks in American history, the book affords a gateway towards explaining Wolfe's boldly delivered, tantalising, remark: "I have sympathy with what George Bush is trying to do, although obviously the excursion [into Iraq] is not going well."

    Four years ago, Wolfe wrote an essay to mark the millennium called Hooking Up, about what he called "feverish emphasis on sex and sexiness". In a way, the new novel is a literary fruition of the essay. The excess and decadence at Dupont College are seen through the eyes of his heroine, Charlotte Simmons, who arrives a diligent virgin from the hills of North Carolina, on a full scholarship. She is initially intimidated and appalled, but eventually conquers her fear to partake, indeed to star, in the jock beanfeast.

    "I personally would be shocked out of my pants if I was at college now," confides Wolfe, who spent four years trawling the campuses for raw material. The book, he says, is "about sex as it interacts with social status. And I have tried to make the sex un-erotic. I will have failed if anyone gets the least bit excited. So much of modern sex is un-erotic, if erotic means flight of fancy or romantic build-up. Sex now is so easy to consummate - it is a pressure that affects everybody, girls more than boys, I think."

    As he notes, the America which votes tomorrow is a country riven over morality like never before. On the flip side of the culture of ubiquitous sex is that of puritan Christianity, as harnessed in no small part by Bush. "Yes, there is this puritanism," says Wolfe, "and I suppose we are talking here about what you might call the religious right. But I don't think these people are left or right, they are just religious, and if you are religious, you observe certain strictures on sexual activity - you are against the mainstream, morally speaking. And I do have sympathy with them, yes, though I am not religious. I am simply in awe of it all; the openness of sex. In the 60s they talked about a sexual revolution, but it has become a sexual carnival."

    "In the 60s they talked about a sexual revolution, but it has become a sexual carnival." I think nothing conveys the situation better. The "New Morality," as it were, is essentially the ultimate application of the Existentialist philosophy. This method of thought holds that the individual is the final arbiter of his or her own morality, and that they must choose how to live for themselves. By itself this isn't necessarily bad, but our culture has taken this philosophy and perverted it into a monstrosity known as moral relativism. Ironically, this philosophy is in fact a rejection of Existentialism, but in many ways descends from it. Moral relativism holds that no morality is greater than any other, and because of this, we can't judge the morality of others. Although, it isn't that huge of a leap from "others can't tell you what is moral" to "nothing is moral or immoral." And because of this we have a sexual carnival, a culture which encourages what was once depravity, and tells us that no one, including ourselves, can truly determine right or wrong.

    Those who partake in this carnival forget that when nothing is wrong, then nothing is right, and there is nothing to fight for. Patriotism and personal responsibility, civic duy, all fall to the wayside. They are unsophisticated. I imagine that Rome's last days were not too much different.

    Listed on BlogShares Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com