Saturday, November 12, 2005

The President's Veteran's Day Speech

I just finished watching the speech via You have to watch it chopped up into six segments with commercials. Annoying but, thank God for the Internet or - not having cable - I would not been able to see it at all.

First, let's take as written that he's a horrible public speaker. I'm sure he thinks he's telegraphing strength, determination and resolve. In reality, he looks shifty and smirky. His language is sloppy in a way that projects intellectual laziness - he often says "tuh" instead of "to".

I'm convinced that if he had Clinton's stage presence, Bush's poll numbers would be at least 10% higher. You look at the man when he's at the podium and you can see that he'd rather be anywhere else. He does not like to do this.

Too f-ing bad Mr. President. You've got to get out in front and lead this thing. You're not up for re-election so it's time to throw political caution to the wind and go balls to the wall on this. You should be giving a similar speech and press conferences every week on this topic. You cannot sit back in the White House.

We need more of this:
THE PRESIDENT: "While it is perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs. They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. Many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: 'When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security.' That's why more than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.

"The stakes in the global War on Terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will. As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who send them to war continue to stand behind them. Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. And our troops deserve to know that whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our Nation is united, and we will settle for nothing less than victory."
Good on 'ya sir!

The President has to re-affirm, explain and, when necessary, defend his Administration's policies in the War on Islamo-Fascism. This is the reason that I - and many other libertarian leaning types - voted for the man. It certainly wasn't for his position on gay rights or the war on drugs.

Keep it up. Don't slack off. Take the fight to your "critics". More of this and more often please.

Lead this country in time of war.

Friday, November 11, 2005

American History - Picking and Choosing

Andrew Sullivan's anti-Bush hysteria is making him sloppy:
QUOTE FOR THE DAY I: "I fear you do not fully comprehend the danger of abridging the liberties of the people. Nothing but the sternest necessity can ever justify it. A government had better go to the extreme of toleration, than to do aught that could be construed into an interference with, or to jeopardize in any degree, the common rights of its citizens," - Abraham Lincoln, in the midst of a national insurrection. It's on page 523 of Doris Kearns Goodwin's wonderful new book, "Team of Rivals." The italics are in the original.

QUOTE FOR THE DAY II: "We do not torture," - George W. Bush, earlier this week.
What a silly bint.

Hey Andrew, did you forget when Lincoln - in the midst of a national inssurection - suspended habeas corpus? Take a pill Andy.

Thursday, November 10, 2005

Marine Corps Day

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. - George Orwell

Every year for four years at college, the head our Drama department - who served as a Marine in the Pacific in WWII - would take us out for pizza and beer on this day. He had some intense stories to tell. He always ordered the pizza with anchovies. We always got drunk. And, after much laughing, kidding and singing he always ended the evening with the "10,000 yard stare" look on his face.

Even as a young man I knew that there were some things he just would not, could tell us about his time on Saipan.

God bless him and the rest of the Marines who have served this country for 230 years.
Three Wallace Hettle Updates

First - Check out Hettle's email to Paul Deignan PhD Advisors:
Yesterday and last night Paul Deignan spent in "trolling" a feminist academic web site with disruptive and abusive comments.

This is a highly visible liberal site. He was banned, but used his computer expertise to defeat the ban and taunt the host of the site.

This kind of behavior is not unheard of on the net. But Mr. Deignan chose to do this action from a homepage that claims you as a dissertation adviser.

Mr. Deignan has a right to free speech. He shouldn't disrupt the discussions of others--it is highly unprofessional. And it is linked to your name.

Might you please advise him to exercise a little discretion in the future. As matters stand, Mr. Deignan appears to be doing a bit more politicking than mechanical engineering.

Thank you,

Speaks What an pompous a-hole. I'd love to audit one of Hettle's courses just to take him to task. I'm assuming he would find any challenges to his classroom belief system as "disruptive".

Second - the story has made an article in Inside Higher Ed. Check it out.

And third - there has been an impact to Deignan's academic career. From the Inside Higher Ed article:

What might have ended there as an everyday online spat was only the beginning. A frequent visitor to the Bitch Ph.D. site, the University of Northern Iowa history professor Wallace Hettle, felt obliged to defend Bitch Ph.D.'s liberal end of the blogosphere. Hettle found Deignan's curriculum vita at Info Theory, which lists his academic advisers, the Purdue mechanical engineers Galen King and Peter Meckl, who will play a big part in deciding if he will ultimately receive a Ph.D. Hettle e-mailed them, indicating that Deignan'?s comments were "unprofessionalÂ? and Â?contrary to the spirit of free enquiry." Hettle announced his actions within the comment section of Bitch Ph.D.

"Yes, we received an e-mail,"? King confirmed on Wednesday. "?It said that Paul was exceeding his bounds, if you will, on what is essentially a private site. He's been asked to refrain, at least until he'?s [graduated from Purdue]."?
Libel...? I have no idea. But again, what an pompous a-hole.

Also, I do not understand why Paul is going after Bitch PhD. Sure, she lived up to her Blog moniker, but worth a lawsuit. I don't think so.

Hettle, on the other hand, deserves everything he gets - even if that's only the problem of having to deal with the emails and letters.

Once again H/T Protein Wisdom

"Platoon" in Iraq. Color me not surprised.

It's almost like the media is trying to undermine our morale or something...

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Fight the Power with a Girlcot!

Ah... Rekha's never ending quest for social justice had entered the fashion world.
There's no better way to turn around a situation that strips you of power than by taking action, seeing results and getting empowered in the process.
Right on my Marxist sisterfriend!

Look, I think the tee shirts were in bad taste. I also have no problem with these girls organizing a boycott. I'm not even disappointed that they won.

But tee shirts as a some bellwether of the erosion of women's right? We're nitpicking here people. Women's rights have come leagues in the last 100 years. In fact, as the father of two boys I have some major concerns that women have become culturally dominant - particularly in the academy to the detriment of their male peers. And I don't just mean post secondary education. Elementary and middle schools have no idea to do with boys that, well... behave like boys.

Girls do better in school than boys. More young women go to college than young men and the gap is growing. Women have tons of opportunity in the business world and often receive preference in the name of "diversity". Women have an overwhelming advantage in family court. There is a huge emphasis on "women's health" even though women on average live significantly longer than men.

If any of the conditions in the last paragraph were reversed (imagine if the average female lived 5 or so years less than the average male!!!) it would be a huge societal scandal. Katie Couric would be bleating about it every weekday morning. But when it comes to men and boys, it's their fault and they need to change. Use your inside voice and take your ritalin my son.

I'm sick to death of Rekha and her fellow (hey, can I use the world "fellow" when referring to womyn...?) aging gender feminists trying to impose their concept of what they think women should be. Choice is good and all, but gender feminists want their sisters to make the "right" choice. But the personal is political is all that.

And speaking of family life... what parent in their right mind would let their 13 year old daughter wear a demeaning tee shirt? But then again, what parent would let their pre-pubescent girl wear makeup and revealing clothes to school?

Monday, November 07, 2005

Burn the heretic or... what are they teachin' them youngsters at UNI???

Okay, so a Purdue Engineering PhD candidate drops some acerbic comments on a left-wing academic blog post on why Judge Alito is the Antichrist and must be filibustered. Said engineering candidate actually discusses one of Alito's decisions on the merits of the case and gets labeled a Troll and banned from posting further comments.

So far this ain't news right? But wait... there's more.

One of the commenters, an outraged University of Northern Iowa History professor decides to take the matter into his own hands and contact the engineering PhD candidates advisors to tell them of the candidate's "unprofessional conduct".

First I'm not at all surprised at the initial thread reaction to Paul's comments. It would be like walking into Wednesday evening church service at the local Assembly of God and trying to explain to the congregation that "... there's not even an historical record of Jesus the Christ, so what's all the supernatural, hocus-pocus resurrection fuss about..."

You're not likely to get a positive or measured response. You're even likely to get called some unflattering names.

Paul may not have been crashing a church service. But he was questioning the common wisdom in leftist academia. And that's messing with religious belief baby, make no mistake about it. But man... going straight to "I'm telling teacher!!!"

Whoo... that's pretty harsh.

Okay, so after demanding - and not receiving - a formal apology, Paul is taking said UNI History Professor to court.

Follow the links. Follow the chain of comments, counter comments and events. If you think it's right and proper, Email the History Professor, his Department Head and the President of UNI: Robert Koob. His office can be reached here: Office of the President, 20 Seerley Hall, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0705 - (319) 273-2566 (voice); (319) 273-6494.

I'll publish my letter(s) after I send them.

H/T Protein Wisdom

Update - I forgot to include this link to a .pdf file Paul captured before his later comments were scrubbed. Odd - The more logical and less goading Paul got, the more riled up bitchphd gets. She goes right to the sexism card:
No, Paul Deignan is an arrogant sexist who is determined to show how much smarter he is than the lady professor.

Which pretty much explains why trolls of that sort are always men.
I assume that the last sentence was written without a sense of its inherent irony.

And the punchline - it looks like she's Canadian. Perfect.
"French Youths"

This morning The Today Show finally covered the growing French Intefada. They said the word Muslim precisely once - about 3/4 of the way through the piece.

The roots of the rioting aside... imagine if you will what the worldwide media coverage would be like if these riots were occurring in Washington DC.

Nothing to see here. Move along.