Alas, I probably won’t be writing much after August 12. That’s not to say I won’t have things to, well, say! But I have so many things I have to stress about. I will be applying to four to six colleges this year, and I must get that straightened out. I also must keep up with my homework, and maintain good grades. I have to register to vote, and take care of other civic duties, and hopefully get a job to help alleviate some strain on my father. Change is a good thing.
Cheers to the future!
The other night I was watching Glenn Beck’s show on Fox News (don’t ask) and I saw former CIA member Michael Scheuer, whose ridiculously unhealthy obsession with all things Islam and bin Laden has apparently driven him off the deep end.
Scheuer was discussing national security with Glenn Beck, Fox News’ resident crazy bastard. Scheuer was going on about how our government is failing to do its job–like all conservatives do–until he finally arrived to a conclusion I never thought I’d hear from any self-respecting American:
The only chance we have as a country right now is for Osama bin Laden to deploy and detonate a major weapon in the United States… only Osama can execute an attack which will force Americans to demand that their government protect them effectively, consistently and with as much violence as necessary.
So, thus far I actually had a little bit of respect for Michael Scheuer, and I felt that he actually knew a little about what was wrong with American foreign policy. Now, however, I am forced to express my belief that he is in fact a hypocritical terrorist. For him to say that the American government doesn’t give two shits about protecting its people–and then go on to wish upon our country the same fate that took place 8 years ago–is ridiculous. He should be imprisoned for an act of treason. During this rant, I was diligently scanning Glenn’s face for any sort of grimace or disapproval, but I was rebuffed. At the most, Beck apathetically sat there nodding. I thought that this kind of statement was too much for even him, but apparently I was wrong.
Scheuer would know, though, if the American government didn’t care about national security. After all, he was a member of the CIA unit given the task of hunting down bin Laden, but failed. So in one respect, he is correct.
I’m not surprised bin Laden encouraged Americans to read one of Scheuer’s books. Evidently Scheuer and Osama have a sort of man-love that we sane men can only hope to one day understand.
Happy Fourth of July everyone! I’d just like to say we wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for the dedication of many of our leaders and soldiers, and a policy of humility and common sense. With that in mind, I hope we endure many more of these days.
P.S., in keeping with the optimistic spirit of ‘76, I’d also like to share my happiness with my fellow Americans that Sarah Palin is now just a citizen again! Let’s just hope she disappears from the political landscape permanently. God bless America!
The presidential election in Iran took place today. Incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad apparently won reelection by ten-million votes over popular reformist Mir-Hossein Mousavi. I think it is important to note that no matter how much we dislike Iran, they are still a functioning Middle Eastern democracy (more so than our friends in Saudi Arabia). I think Reza Aslan said it best when he said (to the effect of), “They are probably the most democratic nations in the Middle East.” (This was a while ago, on MSNBC.) The media would lead you to believe otherwise, however. We like to define ourselves as the greatest democracy the world has to offer, but I think it would be an accurate assessment to say that Iran is about as democratic as we are. Their ayatollah has about as much say in their government as our corporations have in ours.
Sarah Palin is in the news again (where she has placed herself in the spotlight numerous times before). After David Letterman made a joke about her eighteen-year old daughter Bristol, Palin went on television and made an uproar about it. Now, several days later, we are still talking about a joke a comedian made at 10:30! I, for one, think it’s ridiculous that we have given this opportunistic serpent the podium to pontificate on exploiting children! Isn’t it true that it was Palin’s failure to instill family values in her daughter that led to Bristol having children out of wedlock? Isn’t it true that Sarah Palin has spoken out against exploiting children, yet pushes her children into the public spotlight where the rabid media can do harm to them? Sarah Palin is a hypocrite who will say and do anything to gain public favor. She even went so far as to imply that Letterman is a pedophile (as if that is much better than what he said). Give me a break! This woman is a joke; let her pass into history.
The recent Holocaust museum shootings in Washington, D.C., by 88-year old white supremacist James von Brunn is a tragedy. It says something about the world in which we live. When will people realize that we are all in this together and shooting fellow human beings accomplishes nothing? It saddens me that an idea as basic as love is so rare in this world in which we live.
I saw the film Doubt, based upon the play of the same name by John Patrick Shanley, and needless to say, I was completely blown away. The main cast, which includes Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams, performs masterfully. The character studies, the questions, and the script smack you in the face with a tour-de-force of a story which will keep you guessing long after you switch off your television.
Doubt revolves around a conflict at a Roman Catholic elementary school in the Bronx in 1964. The school’s first black student, Donald Miller, has just arrived and has a “protector” in Father Flynn (Hoffman), the priest. However, the school’s strict disciplinarian principal Sister Aloysius (Streep) suspects Father Flynn may be having inappropriate relations with the boy. The cast is rounded out by the addition of Sister James (Adams), an innocent, young and compassionate nun, who exists as the complete opposite of Sister Aloysius.
The film’s action mainly details the confrontations and accusations between Aloysius and James and Flynn, and through these exchanges one begins to develop their own ideas about the story (and not without doubts!). Did Flynn do it? Is Aloysius just out for herself? What about Donald? And finally, what does it all mean?
A rich philosophical and psychological study on so many levels, Doubt was truly one of the best films from the year of 2008. It’s cinema even Hollywood couldn’t botch.
Never have I been prouder to call myself an American. Here’s to a new America, and a much brighter future for our nation.
So I tuned in to the Republican Convention last night, and saw it again on the news this afternoon. Unfortunately, I saw my hated enemy Rudy Giuliani, former autocrat of New York, making a speech. How painful it was. Ever heard someone say something is a train wreck? Such was Giuliani’s speech, but I kept listening, because I could not believe any man could be so devoid of any intelligence. I sure hope that he doesn’t believe all the codswallop that he spews out his mouth.
One thing he said that made me really irate was, “she [Palin] has more experience than the entire Democratic ticket.” Really, Rudy? Because, Biden has been a senator for 36 years and is the head of the foreign relations committee, and Barack has been in Illinois politics for about a decade. Palin has been governor of Alaska for 2 years and was a mayor before that (can’t leave that out!). I think Giuliani needs to work on his arithmetic.
And what is more sad, is the fact that there are people out there who believe this crap. Why people think McCain’s picking Sarah Palin was a good choice is beyond me. Maybe (assuming McCain wins the general election) if he dies, and she becomes president people will realize just how many marbles the Republicans have lost.
I listened to Palin for a short time, too. Though I don’t remember any of it, because she’s relatively insignificant. I could care less what she has to say. This whole thing is a ploy for votes and she is one cosmic joke.
The death of a political martyr took place today. Benazhir Bhutto, former prime minister of Pakistan and the first female leader of a Muslim country, was assassinated by a lone gunman. He fired rounds from an AK-47, hitting her in the neck, then detonated a bomb which killed himself and 22 other people. Bhutto had many supporters in Pakistan, was the leader of the Pakistan People’s Party, and was set to participate in January 8, 2008, elections.
I read a particularly excellent and insightful National Review Online (a conservative website) article just a few minutes ago that sums up everything, in my view, about Ron Paul. John Derbyshire, the author, doesn’t agree with all of Ron Paul’s ideas, but those core things he does agree with, he says, remind him of the conservatism of the old Republican Party and the libertarianism of years past.
That’s not the point, though. Nits aside, the broad outlook there is conservative in a way we don’t often see from a presidential candidate. It is, in fact, conservatism of exceptional purity. Reading through those policy positions, an American conservative can hear the mystic chords of memory sounding in the distance, and hear the call of ancestral voices wafted on the breeze: Hayek, von Mises, Rothbart, Nock, Kirk, John Chamberlain… Unlike the product in that automobile commercial, this is your father’s conservatism — the Old-Time Religion. What is there among Ron Paul’s policy prescriptions that the young William F. Buckley would have disagreed with?
If Milton Friedman were alive, he would support Ron Paul. These other candidates, Giuliani especially, are making the late Friedman turn in his grave.
In spite of all this, Paul’s rarely polls above the 1.0% mark in the polls. So, Derbyshire asks, why isn’t Paul getting more support; why aren’t “Republicans flocking to Ron Paul?” The answer, Derbyshire says, is this:
If Washington, D.C. were the drowsy southern town that Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge rode into, Ron Paul would have a chance. Washington’s not like that nowadays, though. It is a vast megalopolis, every nook and cranny stuffed with lobbyists, lawyers, and a hundred thousand species of tax-eater. The sleepy old boulevards of the 1920s are now shadowed between great glittering ziggurats of glass and marble, where millions of administrative assistants to the Department of Administrative Assistance toil away at sending memos to each other.
Indeed, it would be hard to push them off the throne they are so accustomed to ruling from. Their Royal Guard is our Congress. Read the article, I found it enjoyable.
The problem with most Americans today is, we feel it is absolutely necessary that we be right in every single matter we engage ourselves in. Whether they throw themselves in a war, or they get in an argument in public, it is always the same: Americans must be right, and they must prove themselves. This is illogical. We, as Americans, must accept the fact that we aren’t supermen. We make mistakes, and like every other man on this planet, we are responsible for those mistakes. We aren’t entitled to anything more and nothing less.
I say this because the Iraq War is a wonderful instance of American arrogance. And to a certain degree, the American response to 9/11 was as well. The “War in Iraq”, as they call it, is a misnomer. It is not a war, in the traditional sense. You cannot make “war” upon terrorists. Terrorists don’t assemble themselves to go to battle, terrorists assemble themselves to run into bazaars and public squares and kill innocent men and children. Therefore, it needs to end as quickly as possible. It cannot be “won,” because these terrorists will never go away. We may kill them, we may kill their leaders, but they will always regenerate.
That is not to say we can’t at least slow their regeneration. As with any organism that regenerates, we must find the source. And what is the source of terrorism? The source of terrorism isn’t one thing, it is many. And we can’t address all of them. But we can do a few things.
We need to leave the insurgency in Iraq and focus our sights, once again, to the demise of our largest enemy: Osama bin Laden. This was our original goal, until Mr. Bush and the other terrible people lied to us, and diverted our attention to Iraq, which was only fractionally as important as the end of Al-Qaeda.
Then, when that goal is finished, we get out of the Middle East altogether. We need to destroy all our bases in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and wherever else we have them in the Middle East. We show the terrorists, by maintaining our own country and becoming one whole nation again, the greatness of liberty and democracy. Terrorism won’t disappear, but it will become less rampant, at least. We are not completely susceptible to so small an enemy, fortunately, and I’m sure we will manage.
If your goal is to completely eliminate terrorism, however, your thinking is flawed. It cannot be done. You’ll probably never realize this, though, because you’re an arrogant American.
Like Ayn Rand, who experienced tyranny herself in communist Russia, wrote in Anthem:
It is a sin to write this. It is a sin to think words no others think and to put them down upon a paper no others are to see. It is base and evil. It is as if we were speaking alone to no ears but our own. And we know well that there is no transgression blacker than to do or think alone. We have broken the laws. The laws say that men may not write unless the Council of Vocations bid them so. May we be forgiven!
It is a sin, but we will be absolved.