Racer X

Not sure what put me in the mood, but I've been listening to a little Paul Gilbert and Racer X lately. The man's an incredible guitarist. Here's a sample.

"Blame America First"

An excerpt from Jeane Kirkpatrick's speech at the 1984 Republican convention:

They said that saving Grenada from terror and totalitarianism was the wrong thing to do - they didn't blame Cuba or the communists for threatening American students and murdering Grenadians - they blamed the United States instead.

But then, somehow, they always blame America first.

When our Marines, sent to Lebanon on a multinational peacekeeping mission with the consent of the United States Congress, were murdered in their sleep, the "blame America first crowd" didn't blame the terrorists who murdered the Marines, they blamed the United States.

But then, they always blame America first.

When the Soviet Union walked out of arms control negotiations, and refused even to discuss the issues, the San Francisco Democrats didn't blame Soviet intransigence. They blamed the United States.

But then, they always blame America first.

When Marxist dictators shoot their way to power in Central America, the San Francisco Democrats don't blame the guerrillas and their Soviet allies, they blame United States policies of 100 years ago.

But then, they always blame America first.

The American people know better.

They know that Ronald Reagan and the United States didn't cause Marxist dictatorship in Nicaragua, or the repression in Poland, or the brutal new offensives in Afghanistan, or the destruction of the Korean airliner, or the new attacks on religious and ethnic groups in the Soviet Union, or the jamming of western broadcasts, or the denial of Jewish emigration, or the brutal imprisonment of Anatoly Shcharansky and Ida Nudel, or the obscene treatment of Andrei Sakharov and Yelena Bonner, or the re-Stalinization of the Soviet Union.

The American people know that it's dangerous to blame ourselves for terrible problems that we did not cause.

They understand just as the distinguished French writer, Jean Francois Revel, understands the dangers of endless self-criticism and self-denigration.

He wrote: "Clearly, a civilization that feels guilty for everything it is and does will lack the energy and conviction to defend itself."

With the election of Ronald Reagan, the American people declared to the world that we have the necessary energy and conviction to defend ourselves, and that we have as well a deep commitment to peace.

And now, the American people, proud of our country, proud of our freedom, proud of ourselves, will reject the San Francisco Democrats and send Ronald Reagan back to the White House.

IQ

I don't put much stock in online IQ tests, but a friend asked me to research some, so I have taken several of them. This is the highest I've scored on any of them and is even higher than the my score in a school-administered test as a 15 year-old. I've scored substantially lower on other online tests, so I take all of them with a grain of salt. Think I can get a raise if I show this to my manager? Me neither.

I Couldn't Have Said It Better Myself

The National Post has an opinion column by Lorne Gunter today discussing the Argo buoys and the data they've been producing (hat tip to RealClearPolitics for the link). This paragraph is a good summary of the article's thesis:

So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys' findings? Because in five years, the little blighters have failed to detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters' hypotheses, must be wrong.

And in this excerpt, Gunter cuts through Dr. Willis's evasive babblings:

Just look how tenaciously some scientists are prepared to cling to the climate change dogma. "It may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming," Dr. Willis told NPR.

Yeah, you know, like when you put your car into reverse you are causing it to enter a period of less rapid forward motion. Or when I gain a few pounds I am in a period of less rapid weight loss.

Well said.

Does this make any sense?

Yes, I'm a global warming denier, sometimes denying man-made global warming, and sometimes just denying the whole notion outright. The earth warms, the earth cools, it's a dynamic system that is constantly changing. So what? I saw this article on Drudge today and was mystified by the following paragraph:

"There has been a very slight cooling, but not anything really significant," Willis says. So the buildup of heat on Earth may be on a brief hiatus. "Global warming doesn't mean every year will be warmer than the last. And it may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming."

Now, I understand that the scientist being quoted is examining data from a brief span of time (five years), but it's clear to me that he accepts the premise that the earth has been warming and is continuing to do so, most likely because of man's activities. Why does this research necessarily have to prove or disprove global warming? If Willis's hypothesis was that evidence for global warming would manifest itself in rising ocean temperatures, he needs to admit that the evidence doesn't support his hypothesis. Of course, it's sometimes just easier to blame your measurement devices for bad or misleading data:

One possibility is that the sea has, in fact, warmed and expanded — and scientists are somehow misinterpreting the data from the diving buoys.

These sensors are part of JPL NASA's Argo array. Hardly high school science fair stuff. It does appear that there were some data errors identified, as this article explains.

Update as of 5/30/07: Recent analyses have revealed that results from some of the ocean float and shipboard sensor data used in this study were incorrect. As a result, the study's conclusion that the oceans cooled between 2003 and 2005 can not be substantiated at this time. The study authors are currently working to correct these data errors and recompute ocean temperature changes.

The NPR article is dated 3/19/08, so can we assume the data has been reevaluated and that the initial results have been validated since the 5/30/07 update?

What I find interesting is that few scientists who hold global warming theory as fact haven't found it necessary to question the validity of all of the temperature and weather stations used to collect and compile the data used in support of their theory. Anthony Watts has compiled some great information about weather stations and the effect their placement can have on their data here.

Expelled

I've long said that monolithic Darwinism poses a grave threat to our free society. Its Inquisitors have expunged any semblance of honest debate in most disciplines of science and have created unintended consequences not only throughout the scientific community but society as a whole. I'll be interested to see how Ben Stein tackles this matter in his upcoming movie. Click the post title or here to see the trailer and find out more.

Gamer

I'm an avid gamer and lately have moved back to board games. In addition to pulling out Axis and Allies: Revised for a quick solo play, I'm getting ready to play Air & Armor. I've never played that game against an opponent and can't really say I've played a scenario to completion. I'm going to give it a go during the next few days, though. I also have Europe Engulfed sitting on the shelf, staring at me lovingly. I've barely played it, but think I can get into it fairly quickly. The core system for the game is pretty accessible, but it has lots of chrome and exceptions to steepen the learning curve.

I'm also bidding on a slew of games on eBay with the intention of expanding my collection. I've also been anxiously watching GMT's reprint schedule for a few games just in case I can't get them affordably on eBay. The list of future acquisitions includes Combat Commander: Europe, Twilight Struggle, Asia Engulfed, and Fire Team. Silent War is also a very appealing game, not least of all because it's a solitaire game of enormous scope.

I'm not sure what brought on this sudden resurgence of board gaming interest for me, but it might have something to do with our interminable winter.

Check out my new Board Game Geek widget on the right!

National Security

With the presidential election just months away, there has been increased discussion of national security policy among presidential candidates and commentators. It will be many years before the true benefits and consequences of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are known, but there are some principles that I think are important in analyzing them to this point. The Iraq war has been a divisive and contentious issue since its beginning, and even those on the right have sought to distance themselves from it at various points in its execution. When it has seemed to be going poorly, nobody with the exception of President Bush wanted any part of it. I think that a brief reexamination of the decision to go to war, the role of the President, and the nature of our country are in order as we face the upcoming reality of a new administration.

First of all, I believe that every American President has understood the importance of national security and the gravity of risking American lives to buttress it. I find it interesting that while the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war (in practice, this tenet of the Constitution has been very vague and elusive), thereby properly representing the will of the people, the responsibility to prosecute war rests squarely on the shoulders of the President. He alone is the Commander in Chief, ultimately in charge of the disposition of the entirety of America's military forces. His decisions have the potential to affect millions of lives, but he is accountable for every single one. I have difficulty believing that any President has put America's troops in harm's way without first weighing all possible alternatives. I further believe that every President has determined that the cause for which our troops fought and died was, ultimately, worth the price. This isn't to say that the analysis of historians haven't taken a dim view of some of our wars and declared them a waste of blood and treasure (oh, blessed hindsight), but given the imperatives and realities of the present, I'm willing to give every President the benefit of the doubt.

It is my contention that in the face of the events of September 11, 2001 and the best information available, President Bush believed that sending troops into Afghanistan to remove the Taliban and Al Qaeda was in the best interest of American national security. I personally wonder if anyone in the administration or the intelligence community lamented the fact that the Taliban had been allowed to assume control over Afghanistan in the first place. To me, the actions of Al Qaeda on September 11 serve as a stark reminder that our modern world and its technology demand that we observe and evaluate activities in every corner of the globe. Had I been informed that there was incontrovertible evidence that Al Qaeda, with their allies in the Taliban, had carried out the attacks on 9/11, I certainly would have used military force to eliminate them. However, I would also begin seriously assessing the rest of the world to determine where the next attack might come from. America had been dealt a severe blow that day, and the possibility that additional attacks were imminent was a major concern.

I personally recall the anticipation everyone felt that another attack was just a matter of time. Given the fact that a small, obscure group of religious fanatics in Afghanistan could plan, organize, and execute an attack that cost the lives of 2,974 innocent American civilians, what was the possibility that an openly hostile country like Iraq could be plotting something even worse? An immense amount of analysis on both sides of the intelligence issue have been done, and it's not my intention to determine whether the information we had about Iraq's WMD program was sufficient justification to go to war or not. My point is that had we recognized the danger that Al Qaeda posed, it's possible that we might have taken steps to oust the Taliban from Afghanistan sooner. I think there was sufficient evidence of the Al Qaeda threat prior to 9/11 to justify taking extraordinary measures against them, but the Clinton administration obviously didn't feel military action against Afghanistan was warranted. I assert, however, that had anyone foreseen with certainty the attacks of September 11, no President would have hesitated to act to prevent them.

The Bush Doctrine has been labeled a doctrine of preemptive military action, but who can blame the President for acting to protect America after we had just had our nose bloodied by a tiny band of jihadists in a remote part of the world? How is preemption really any different from prevention? Is having the FBI snatch a terrorist at an airport "preventive," but having a Marine sniper eliminate a Taliban officer in Afghanistan "preemptive?" Is waiting for a terrorist organization to set up shop on American soil and begin actively planning operations before arresting them "preventive" and calling in an airstrike on a terrorist safehouse in Iraq "preemptive?" I don't understand how we justify calling the efforts of domestic law enforcement preventive, but try to distinguish them from military actions by referring to those as preemptive.

If national sovereignty is such a significant issue when discussing the invasion of Iraq, it seems to be less relevant when discussing Afghanistan. Is that because Afghanistan is less industrialized than Iraq, or because its history is so riddled with civil war and strife in comparison to Iraq? Maybe it's because Iraq had stable leadership for so many years that people have chosen to declare that it was a legitimate government. It's frustrating to hear critics of the Iraq war declare us a pariah nation because we preemptively (preventively?) went to war with a country that our leaders deemed an imminent threat to our national security.

To hear the anti-war crowd discuss the issue, it seems that they would have preferred that we use our law enforcement resources to arrest anyone associate with the 9/11 attacks. Most of them were dead already, but hey, it's not really the job of law enforcement to prevent crime but to investigate them, right? The best use of our military at that point, I suppose would have been to have troops secure every point of entry (remember when the National Guard was stationed at airports?), have fighters fly CAP over populated areas, and recall our navy to patrol our coasts. Al Qaeda isn't a government, so we can't really declare war on them, which means it's a law enforcement issue, isn't it? It's a foreign paramilitary terrorist organization that has been harbored and sponsored by nation-states. That makes it fair game for something a little more powerful than an arrest warrant and handcuffs.

Speaking of the anti-war crowd, I believe the issue that gives them the most difficulty is that they don't want to believe that diplomacy, dialog, and appeasement can fail. Perhaps they truly believe that we, as a race, should have moved beyond armed conflict by now. I would submit that most soldiers wish that were true. I believe everyone wishes that were true. It's a noble goal, but one that is not likely to ever be achieved. It's disappointing and disheartening when two parties can't resolve their disputes through peaceful negotiations. Whether the parties concerned are a parent and child, spouses, employer and employee, or two nation-states, it would always be preferable if an agreement could be reached in a spirit of understanding and mutual concern. However, we see those relationships strained and broken on a daily basis, sometimes devolving to the point of violence. When one party resorts to violence, it is usually because they believe, rationally or not, that they have run out of options and that violence is their last resort. Is it ever justified? I think the consensus among civilized people is that it's not unless it is in self-defense or if the other party explicitly expresses a threat of violence. If someone brandishes a weapon in a threatening manner, it is considered a weapons crime in most places, and I believe a person is justified in defending themselves against someone who takes such an action. You shouldn't have to wait to be shot or stabbed before you defend yourself.

I understand that there are limits to comparing national security policy to personal self-defense, and that's really beyond the scope of my discussion. I am simply trying to point out the naivety of those who believe we can solve all of the world's problems without force and at least the threat of violence. It's simply a willful ignorance of human nature to assume human beings will act in a considerate manner if there are no consequences for not doing so. You may personally decide to never, under any circumstances, inflict harm on another human being, but I would advise you not to advertise that fact if you wish to avoid becoming the victim of a criminal who doesn't share your compunction to avoid violence. The world is a dangerous place, and appeasing evil men won't make it any less so.

We elect Presidents to protect the country and have given them the greatest military and law enforcement resources in the world to accomplish that goal. They have access to more intelligence information and analysis than we, as private citizens, could ever dream. It's not always 100% accurate, but we have been generally willing to trust that the decisions our leaders make are right and based in a solid understanding of the facts. When Democrats are in office, we're expected to defer to their judgment on military matters but it seems President Bush has not been extended the same courtesy in regards to Iraq. I think the media has had a large influence on this, but I also believe that the Left has simply been using the Iraq war as a straw man to express their disdain for the results of the 2000 election.

It's discouraging to me to see the hate and venom from that event carried so far that some wish to see us defeated in Iraq simply so they can declare it a defeat for Bush. Every drop in approval that Bush experiences is viewed as some kind of vindication for the election of 2000. The amount of hatred some on the Left have for this man is stunning and dangerous. The declarations they make about Bush being a war criminal or a fascist are just vapid and irrational. Is this the pattern for the future? If you don't win an election by a sufficient enough margin, you're demonized and vilified for the duration of your presidency? So much for civil discourse and loyal opposition.

How fast can you type?

80 words

Speedtest

I found this typing speed test during lunch today. I take my typing speed for granted most times, but have learned that I type faster when I know what I want to type, such as when I'm composing an email or a story. Typing a list of random words is slower unless you read ahead as you're typing. My first couple of tries at the speed test were less than stellar, but after I started reading the upcoming words as my fingers were finishing the current word, my performance improved by 8-10%. I often joke that I can type 80 words per minute but can't read my own handwriting. Sad but true.

January 2008 playlist

Here is the Zune playlist I spent the most time listening to in January. By the way, I would love to find an easy way to export the contents of a Zune playlist. Not the song files themselves, just the listing:

- Danko Jones -
Don't Fall In Love
Time Heals Nothing
Sleep Is The Enemy
Forget My Name
Lovercall
Sound Of Love
We Sweat Blood
Code Of The Road

- Evans Blue -
A Cross And A Girl Named Blessed
Stop And Say You Love Me
Over
Possession
Dark That Follows
The Promise And The Threat
The Tease
In A Red Dress Alone
Shine Your Cadillac

-The Bloodhound Gang
The Bad Touch
I Hope You Die
Foxtrot Uniform Charlie Kilo
Uhn Tiss Uhn Tiss Uhn Tiss

-Bloc Party
Hunting For Witches
Helicopter
Banquet

- Doubledrive -
11:50
I Don't Care
Track Number 7

-Girls Against Boys
BFF
Let It Breathe

-Deep Purple
Girls Like That
Wrong Man
Money Talks

-Three Days Grace
Riot
Over And Over
Crank That - Soulja Boy

Thrash Unreal - Against Me!

Amaranth - Nightwish

Umbrella - Rihanna

Stronger - Kanye West

U + Ur Hand - Pink

Rag And Bone - The White Stripes

Never Been Any Reason - Head East

I've been on quite a Deep Purple kick lately and have concluded that "Highway Star" is one of the greatest rock songs of all time. Not sure why it took me so long to figure that out. I also continue to enjoy Evans Blue for their brooding intensity. Danko Jones is just some of the best pure rock 'n' roll I've heard in a long, long time. No self-respecting guy should be without it. I also went through a bit of a GvsB phase in January, although it's not reflected in this playlist. I think "The Come Down" from You Can't Fight What You Can't See is probably my favorite song of theirs recently. Doubledrive was one of those brilliant, short-lived bands that I like to keep handy. I think Blue In The Face will end up in my top 100 albums of all time.

Back from the dead: The sequel

One week ago, I started experiencing the first symptoms of yet another cold. I've had at least two others already this winter and would have to say this year has been one of the worst. A slight sniffle, a tickle in my throat, and a subsequent cough all pointed to the need for a restful weekend. As it turned out, I felt so bad Friday that I stayed home, and things didn't get much better over the weekend. By Sunday, I had a terrible sore throat and decided it was time to see a doctor. Monday was another sick day, but I did get a prescription for a course of antibiotics to treat what had become a sinus infection. I probably should have stayed home Tuesday, but dragged myself to work. Today is the first day I've felt almost whole, and other than some persistent congestion, I think I'm going to pull through.

Reagan '08

I've been reviewing the commentary following the Republican debate in California last night and was prompted by Michelle Malkin's blog (Link) to listen to Reagan's 1977 speech at Hillsdale College in its entirety. Before I comment on that speech, allow me to explain Reagan's significance in my life.

Having been born in 1971, my formative years took place during an economic dark age in America. I was, of course, too young to have any real awareness of economics or even the concept of money, but I do remember something changing after Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980. Maybe it was the fact that our family was able to afford to drive an Oldsmobile after having endured a tiny Datsun for several years. Perhaps I perceived that we were more prosperous because we purchased a brand new color television with a remote and a VCR, which also had a remote. I was able to purchase my first home computer, my beloved Commodore 64 (one of the best gaming machines ever). As I matured and became aware of more than just my immediate biological concerns, the impression I got was that life in America was good, and that Ronald Reagan had something to do with that.

I remember learning about America's involvement in global affairs and that with Reagan as President, America rarely was on the losing side of any conflict, whether it involved shooting or not. Despite the paranoia and fear that some had that nuclear Armageddon was imminent, Reagan held the Bear at bay and pushed the nightmare of nuclear war seemingly out of sight indefinitely. His voice never failed to comfort, and he seemed utterly nonplussed by the rigors and stress of being the most powerful man in the world.

I remember watching Reagan ride off into the sunset and be succeeded by the generally unpalatable George H.W. Bush, who made it painfully obvious that although he had been Reagan's VP, really didn't comprehend or embrace the principles that Reagan's life was built upon. As Reagan slowly and painfully succumbed to Alzheimer's, his accomplishments and legacy seemed to have gotten lost in the media's wet, sloppy love affair with Bill Clinton. My utter revulsion at the presidency of Bill Clinton lead me to learn more about Reagan and his philosophies, and to learn what made him so great. I am in no way an expert on Ronald Reagan and have never approached his presidency, biography, or character in an academic way. I simply grew up knowing that America was great when Reagan lead her, and that she hasn't been the same since he left office.

When Reagan was elected, I became aware that there are two major political parties in this country, and I knew immediately which one I belonged in. I started paying more attention to future Republican candidates for public office and learned more about the history of the Republican party. It doesn't take a scholar to see that Reagan was a singular, monumental figure not only in the Republican party, but in the very fabric of 20th century America. His vision, which came to dominate Republican politics for a generation, is still revered by the Conservative movement in this country. However, the Republican party seems to have lost a substantial amount of the "Reaganism" that elevated it to prominence in the 1980's and '90's.

So now we come to the 2008 presidential election in which Reagan's name has been repeatedly invoked. This invocation has aroused the ire of the left and given them yet another opportunity to take cheap, gratuitous, and unfounded shots at the legacy of one of America's greatest presidents. It has given liberal Republicans a life raft to tie their presidential hopes to since they know that Reagan Conservatives still form a decisive constituency in the party. They believe that if they can convince voters that Reagan would have supported them that that's good enough to win the nomination. The danger I see is the potential for a revision of what Reagan's Conservatism really is. If a liberal Republican does win the general election after having laid claim to the mantle of Reaganism, it may serve to validate that candidate's policies as an extension of Reagan's philosophy.

It's become painfully obvious to me that Reagan achieved the success he did not because of the Republican party, but in spite of it. His beliefs were so fundamentally American in nature that they transcended the rigid, artificial constraints of party and became a force unto themselves. He exposed post-'68 Democrats as Marxists, and Republicans as elite country clubbers. Reagan's beliefs in the free market, smaller government, federalism, strong national defense, and the God-given right of the American people to be free transcended the scope and ideals of any party, and the Republicans are fortunate that they happened to be closer to Reagan's beliefs than the Democrats. I don't see these as individual issues to be mixed and matched with "progressive" and "moderate" positions, but rather just facets of a monolithic philosophy rooted in the principles of liberty and freedom, the very bedrock of our great nation.

Most distressing to me right now is that as Reagan's presidency grows smaller in the rearview mirror of American history, I see more and more people remembering it not as the beginning of a better future, but as some sort of an aberration or just a hiccup in America's inevitable march toward a Socialist Nirvana. Even those that I assumed were comrades in arms have become very comfortable with the type of policies and ideas that Reagan so ardently fought against, all the while claiming to be Conservative Republicans. Economic policy is the most prominent example, with Keynesian theories being readily embraced while classical free market principles are simply relegated to the same nostalgic scrapbook as Reagan's time in office. Rather than emphasize individual liberty as being supreme in all matters including economic decisions, I hear many people acceding to the notion that it's entirely appropriate for the federal government to manipulate the free market, their justification being that we should assuage the economic pain of a few with the prosperity of the many.

Listen to or read Reagan's Hillsdale address. Read the writings of Adam Smith, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, Bastiat, and Friedman. Rather than mistrust the free market or view it as an anachronism, learn why it's so superior to collectivism and socialism. Learn for yourself why Reagan embraced its principles and viewed profit and property as being so intrinsically tied to liberty. Insist that the government stop trying to manage every detail of your economic existence and demand that you be allowed to live freely, according to your goals, hopes, and dreams rather than some collective median defined by socialist bureaucrats.

My view of America and what makes it the greatest nation on earth has been profoundly shaped by Ronald Reagan, and I think we are facing a time when we would do well to reflect on his attitudes and beliefs about the issues with which a free people must perpetually contend. Perhaps you've forgotten those things or maybe you never really knew them, but in either case, learn them, embrace them, and promote them. Reagan's ideas worked, not because they were new or revolutionary, but because they were as venerable as the human race itself. They appealed to the success and wisdom of ages long past with a reverential understanding that God's most special creation really isn't much different today than it was in the Garden of Eden or the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome.

Back from the dead

Something prompted me to recover and update this blog, but it has been so long since I've posted anything here that my old posts seem like ancient history. It has been nostalgic to catch a glimpse of what was going on in my life five years ago, almost like opening a time capsule. Because it has been so long and the human memory is so tragically short, this is as good a time as any to record a snapshot of my life c. January 2008.

I currently live alone in a suburb of Kansas City in a nice, rented apartment. I'm no longer a landlord and am pursuing a technology career again. I still drive the same car I had in 2003, which is a 2001 Subaru Outback LL Bean Edition with 140,000 miles on it. It has served me well and I hate to think of replacing it. I never thought I would be truly content with a vehicle, but somehow I've achieved that automobile Nirvana.

I have two cats, one of which I had at the time of my last post. The other arrived in my life in a rather indirect fashion, but she is an absolute angel and I wouldn't trade her for anything. The intersection of our daily habits and routines is one of the things that gets me out of bed in the morning. The typical "feline maintenance" chores are, for me, helpful guideposts that get me through the day in a reasonably normal, productive fashion. The things that I do routinely add some much-needed stimulus and excitement to the cats' days. I think the three of us make quite a little family, even if my enthusiastic affection for my feline family members makes me feel like the archetypal "little old lady." At least I just have two of them.

I have worked for my present employer for five months and believe that I have a bright future ahead of me here. The company seems to do an admirable job of retaining good employees, and the compensation and benefits are very generous. For the first time in many years, I actually have confidence that I can achieve my reasonably modest financial goals without sacrificing my lifestyle.

I should mention that the most extravagant area of my lifestyle is, as always, technology. I have a nice pile of computer equipment that I dabble with, although I wish I had a basement or garage to use as a lab. I still love to play computer games (Team Fortress 2 has been a huge time sink for me, but the recently discovered Armageddon Empires is poised to assume that role) and probably spend far too much time with them. I still enjoy reading and fill up most of my non-gaming hours with a variety of books. I just finished the original Foundation trilogy by Asimov, and have started Weber's Honor Harrington series. I'm usually in a sci-fi mood in the winter time. It's easy to read and keeps the imagination sharp.

I am planning to upgrade my television to a 40" Samsung LCD soon, but have a twinge of remorse for even thinking about it. I don't watch a lot of TV, but once you've seen a nice HD television, it's soooo hard to not want one for yourself. I currently still have a monstrous 32" Sony WEGA that has been a great television, even if it is almost impossible to move. I did recently subscribe to Time Warner's "super mega uber" package of cable, internet, and phone, so I've sort of opened Pandora's box with regards to entertainment at home. I'm not forced to upgrade to HD, but it would be nice to be able to watch baseball games in HD this summer. For that matter, because everything looks better in HD, I can see myself upgrading to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray soon so I can experience some of my favorite movies in a whole new way. In any case, my money has a burning desire to leave me in exchange for a nice HD television.

I hope to have some ongoing content for this space that is a more interesting than television viewing habits, but I thought it was important for my sake to sort of relaunch this blog with a personal update. It's also another excuse to mention my cats.

John Rhys Davies interview

The understanding and candor of this actor is amazing. I've come to expect nothing but stupidity and political correctness from the Hollywood crowd, but Mr. Davies obviously has an understanding and appreciation of his culture that is rare.

Interview transcript

Well, this just has to be posted.

Having crawled forth from the spawning grounds of the lower Anduin River, they soon spread a putrid bile and vulgarity that despoiled the land. Men and Elves alike withered at the sight of the Darkling Magpies.

A small band of brave adventurers set themselves to the task of undoing the devastation wrought by the wretched Magpies. Undaunted by reports of the hideousness and stomach-wracking stench of the creatures, they bid farewell to their families and forayed to realms unknown and foreboding.

[Insert lots of detailed narrative describing riding through the forest here.]

As Bongo Baggins slowly pulled himself up the face of the rocks that sheltered the Magpie nesting ground of Limpopo, his mind raced through a hundred horrifying visions of what his eyes might soon witness. Carefully inserting the stubby fingers of his left hand into an almost-too-small crevice, he pulled himself ever so slowly over the last rock. What he saw nearly caused him to lose his grip and fall to what would have been a certain death into the gorge below. Marshalling all of his will and remembering well the admonitions of Grampalf, he steeled himself against the sensory onslaught.

His eyes were immediately drawn to the larger one, his porcine girth nearly a thing of humor. Watching him waddle about, Bongo got the sense that this creature never wearied of eating, and the carcasses of hundreds of Ho-Ho-Elorians were strewn about his nest. Bongo was certain that some dark enchantment had given this Magpie the power of flight for it was certain that his wings did not possess the necessary strength to propel his greasy, oliphant-sized body through the air. What a twisted creature it was, cast in the shape of a graceful bird, but of proportions sickeningly in conflict with nature. Just then, a second small, dark shape leapt from the back of the behemoth.

Upon more careful inspection, it was clear that this smaller shape was indeed the second of the Darkling Magpies. This one stood only to the tailfeathers of the larger creature and, in contrast to his corpulent brother, looked undernourished. His diminutive skull barely contained any plumage, and the feathers that remained there seemed ready to drop at any moment. The pale pink of his scalp shone through, looking as scaly and vermin infested as an orc's back.

Having dismounted his larger companion, the smaller Magpie began squawking and shrieking in a tongue of such vulgarity that Bongo's Hobbit ears nearly folded in upon themselves. Bongo forced himself to listen, trying to make sense of the strange language. After many hours of listening to their horrifying cackling, he realized they were attempting to enunciate a long forgotten lower language with their misshapen beaks. Beginning to understand the dark intentions they were communicating, Bongo was more zealous than ever to slay these villainous creatures and spread their bones through the Valley of Homogorn exactly as Grampalf had instructed.

Bongo retreated to the campsite where his companions were resting from their arduous journey as quickly and quietly as he could. They must not be discovered, but he had to let the others know the disturbing truth he had learned at the crest of the ridge.

"Misthanor, we must prepare to fight the Magpies! They are preparing their final assault on our kingdoms and must be stopped now!" Bongo implored the Human captain.

"Slow down, my little friend. They are but two birds, albeit the spawn of the Dark Lord himself, but mortal nonetheless. The steel of our swords shall dispatch them quickly, then we shall proceed to the Valley of Homogorn. Do not be so fearful, young Bongo."

"But you don't understand.... when their plan is complete, we will not be strong enough to overcome them. We must act now!"

"You don't mean...."

As the rest of the band crowded closely about Misthanor and Bongo, a look of understanding, disgust, and horror spread to their faces.

"Yes, Misthanor! If we don't act now, an army of Darkling Magpies will cover the skies of Middle Earth, blotting out the sun and destroying all life."

"How can they...," Misthanor stammered, his senses reeling.

"I don't know how they will produce an army of offspring, but they have been practicing the mating ritual for some time now, and if they aren't stopped, it is certain they will uncover a dark, evil secret that will allow them to succeed. I think one of them may be carrying a brood even as we speak!"

[End of Book 1]

Author's note: Okay, I’m spent. Feel free to write a sequel.

How the West was lost: An OFP tale

Monday is gaming night for the Landed Gentry Club, and the game of choice for several months now has been OFP. I hated this game until we found the MFCTI mod, then it suddenly became interesting to me. Without getting into the details of the game, I will just say that it is an addicting blend of first-person action, with a full complement of vehicles and weapons, and real-time strategy. The RTS elements are adequate, but certainly not what you would expect from a traditional RTS game.

A typical gaming session starts at around 6:00 and ends as late as 1:00 or 2:00 AM. Keep in mind that we are all 30+ year-old working stiffs, so the idea of taking a pause from blowing each other up to watch the sun rise is a little extreme for us. Our minds and bodies just don't function without sleep anymore. Regardless of the time invested, we always seem to get a good return, and last night was no different.

With Zeb fleeing the cold weather for warmer climes and family festivities, the matchup for the evening was the C&C Music Factory (just came up with this last night... the losing team members' names have been parodied for their own protection) against the almost always dominant Mechanized Nightmare (again, a little play on the initials of the players for the sake of anonymity... mostly to protect a certain individual from his wife). As expected, the Nightmare handed C&C their tank turrets on a platter in the first two games, at which point half of the Nightmare had to leave to head home. The real fun was just beginning, though.

Now I'm not one to judge my fellow combatants' commitment to victory, but last night was just a pathetic, insulting display of ineptitude. The arrogance and hubris that preceded C&C's defeat was nothing short of revolting. The way they found to lose is just not something you can make up. You almost had to experience it to get the full effect of how shockingly, profoundly, and, well, stupidly they gave victory away. Before I go any further, let me explain that these are not just sweet, emotional guys that would have felt badly for pounding me into oblivion. I say that as a compliment to them and their competitive nature. Maybe that's why I was so shocked at the conclusion of last night's final match.

Space won't really permit a full after action report, so let me try to condense the timeline a little. It was a 2v1 matchup, which is very difficult for the "1" typically, but the game seemed to start well for me. Three fairly quick towns, decent income, and I was the first to put a chopper in the air. Playing the East, I knew that helicopters would be my only hope since the M1A1 is still ridiculously "ubered" in this game at least in comparison to T-80B's. After locating the enemy base, I invested all I had in an fully-armed attack helicopter. I made a decent run, but failed to find and destroy the enemy MHQ, which had been moved to a new location. The middle game is a little fuzzy to me, but I do recall quickly losing my MHQ in a helicopter attack and soon thereafter discovering an M1A1 ravaging my base. Destroying this interloper was a frustrating experience because it required at least half a dozen AT4's. After surveying the damage, I realized that I was left with a heavy factory, light factory, and barracks. Not bad for having endured an M1 attack. I also lost a newly built Ka-50 in the attack, which seemed to be the fatal blow.

I knew the enemy was down to no more than one or two light/heavy factories and perhaps a barracks as I had made a very good chopper run shortly before the M1 hit my base. During the run, I managed to take down the MHQ and a number of buildings, but with a large number of "mini" bases (two or three building clusters) scattered around the southern coast, I just didn't have the ordnance to finish them off. Although they were in as bad a condition as I was, I figured the M1 horde would soon descend on me and end my suffering. I built as many puny T-80's as possible and was determined to lead the charge myself when I made a shocking discovery.

When resources allow, I usually build two helicopters at once so that if the first attack fails, I can quickly return in the second bird to complete the devastation before the enemy has time to recover. During the M1 assault, I tried to build a Ka-50 and get it off the ground before it could be destroyed, but I wasn't quick enough. What I didn't realize at the time, though, was that my "extra" bird from earlier was sitting just downhill from the aircraft factory, undamaged. I'll give my opponents the benefit of doubt and assume that they just overlooked it in the chaos, but whatever the reason, it was there and secured my victory.

Of course, my opponents offered up a weak, "We were just toying with you," to attempt to interdict the oncoming wave of boasting and gloating, but it was quickly overrun. I have no doubt that they could have ended the game sooner if they hadn't been so arrogant, but they instead chose to try to do silly things like take all the towns on the map, confine me to my barracks, and build profitable beachfront resorts. I could almost swear that the enemy commander was playing golf when I chased him down and blasted him. At least those looked like golf clubs sticking out of the back of the Humvee...

Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both.
- James Wilson

This weekend, the National Coalition to Restore the Constitution and numerous co-sponsors, including Missouri First, organized a "Faith and Freedom" rally in Jefferson City. This event was held in state capitols across the country to protest recent unconstitutional intrusions upon religious liberty by the judiciary and the rapidly growing power of the judicial branch of government. The focal point of this issue recently has been the case of Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court, but he is not the sole victim of rampant, illegal judicial tyranny in this country.

What has become increasingly apparent in recent months is that the judicial branch of the federal government is the single most powerful government entity that exists today. Far from being the legal advisors to the other two branches that the founding fathers envisioned, they have become black-robed tyrants, dispensing their opinions and personal beliefs as law backed by the police powers of the State. In case after case, judges at the federal and state levels are contravening the will of the people, completing ignoring the fact that governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed."

There are several constitutional solutions to the problem of judicial tyranny, and it is time for Congress to act. According to Article III of the Constitution, Congress is given the authority to establish all courts inferior to the supreme Court [note: in the text of the Constitution, "supreme" is not capitalized]. Legislation introduced this year is intended to limit the federal courts' jurisdiction over matters of religion, but many people are skeptical that such laws will withstand review by the supreme Court, so that seems like a weak approach.

The Constitution also provides for the impeachment of judges that do not exhibit "good behaviour," with the interpretation of that expression left to the Congress. Many believe that a judge must be found guilty of some federal crime to be impeached, but the Constitution requires no such standard. A reading of history provides a strong justification for the impeachment of judges who show disdain for the will of the people and refuse to allow them to enact laws consistent with their values. Impeachment is the Constitutional tool by which the people, through the legislature, can check the power of the judiciary.

Whether a tyrant wears a crown or a black robe, his power over the people is absolute and oppressive. Perhaps today, you may not feel oppressed. Perhaps today, you may feel no need to exercise a liberty that is being stripped away. But rest assured, if history is any teacher, that corrupt, self-serving tyrants will continue to chip away the bedrock of liberty upon which this nation was founded until we are indistinguishable from every other nation that has become enslaved to the absolute will of a few. The people of this country still have an opportunity to stem the tide of tyranny and regain control, but only if they demand that their legislators act boldly and decisively in carrying out their Constitutional duty.

Wow! A blog... Let's see what all the fuss is about.