Tuesday, November 02, 2004
I've read one post of Sarah's over at Trying to Grok, and watched the news for the first time today. Turns out bin Laden isn't pushing up daisies like I thought he was. Several years of opportunity to be the ol' media-attention whore he's always been and he spends it schilling the Democrat party's talking points and mimicing Michael Moore. What's up with that?
Anywho, gonna go back to blissful ignorance until the election is over, and yes I voted (absentee) and drove my wife down to the polls earlier today (wow mom, look... real cowboys voting).
Oh, and for James, I'm not ignoring you, heck you're the reason I even posted today, I noticed several notices (on my much neglected e-mail) about you commenting here, so I took a quick look at my lil' ol' blog, and decided to let all five of you know where I've been.
Oh, and go vote people.
Friday, October 22, 2004
So I'm working on Johnston Atoll and one of the guys tells me that a Republican governor was elected in Hawai'i (I was born and raised there), I called him an, er, ummm, "stand up philosopher."
I don't see why the state couldn't swing the other way. During the heyday of the anti-war protests (aka wonderful NVA propaganda) Hawai'i wasn't nearly as virulent as the larger states. Hawai'i has a large active duty and veteran population. Hawaiians themselves join the military at rate higher than their demographic proportion. People in Hawai'i don't like the way the left treats the military. Spitting on veterans is not something you do in Hawai'i, though I'm not sure if it's that way at UH anymore.
The Democrats have a huge following in Hawai'i, but nobody likes to be taken for granted, and nobody enjoys backing a party that gives them nothing in return, and many (I hope most) Americans don't like the way the Left disdains, insults, and denigrates the military.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
It's a great game. The flaws are not fatal. It's a multi-platform game so the graphics aren't great, lowest common denominator (PS2) , and the conquest mode seems odd in that picking a side to play is either non-existant, or simply not instinctive enough for me to figure out, which is too bad.
Sunday, October 10, 2004
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
Saturday, October 02, 2004
Let's go back to Kerry's global test.
quote:We'll ignore the first part since it has nothing to do with a "global" test and is, rather, a domestic premise. Kerry's test is that the world believe you pre-emptively struck for legitimate reasons.
No president, though all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.
But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.
The problem with this statement is that it is utterly subjective. Legitimacy in whose eyes is he talking about? Certainly not Poland, Australia, Great Britain, The Czech Republic, or the rest of the Vilnius Eight. Perhaps he means France and Russia? We'll look at those two countries.
France believed that Saddam had stockpiles of chemical weapons and that those would be found after the invasion. France believed that Saddam killed hundreds of thousands of his own people using those weapons. France believed that Saddam had violated every UNSC resolution that was passed. Despite this France threatened to veto proposed UNSC Resolution 1442 (or so). So despite what we all thought at the time France saw the war as not being legitimate; or rather as not being legitimate enough to override their own interests which involved billions of dollars in oil contracts, weapons contracts and nuclear contracts.
Russia not only thought the same thing, they had added evidence that Saddam intended to use terrorist strikes in the US. Despite this they were unwilling to support the US because of their own interests which included oil and weapons. I think they did see legitimacy in US actions which would explain why they didn't support us, but also didn't actively work against us.
Germany was tied intimately to France's position because the administration was elected on a platform of anti-Americanism, and had solid EU ties and interests with France.
Perhaps the countries that Kerry meant are Iran, North Korea or Saddam's Iraq. These countries would never see any American action as legitimate. The UN is made up of countries. The majority of these countries are not western democracies, and a number of them (in Europe also) see the US as an entity that needs to be taken down. So much so that EU representatives have characterized the EU's position as a counter to American economic and military might. These are not the kinds of countries that would see any action in the best interest of the US as legitimate, since their goal is to "counter" America.
John Kerry claims that he holds America's sovereignty important, but then goes ahead and states that America's actions must be approved by the world, by a "global test," that relies on countries hostile to US interests approving our actions before we do them. I agree with Bush that America's interests are the most important thing here, not whether we win a popularity contest among France, the Sudan and Vanuatu.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Monday, September 13, 2004
How this will all play out should John Kerry be elected is anyone's guess. Looking back on the Clinton years I think (though times have changed) that attacks on the CiC and demeaning his position in the face of our enemies is a win/win situation for the Democrats because they may not have to worry about the same kind of hate from the right as comes from the left. Even at the height of Kosovo and Mogadishu few would have compared Clinton to Hitler, but such is pretty mainstream among "peace activists" today.
Saturday, September 11, 2004
They destroyed a rocket at UMCADS on Wednesday. An M55 sarin gas filled rocket. It was just one rocket among 100,000 stored in the
It was only one rocket, and a few more the next day. But each and every one makes a difference. Each and every rocket destroyed is one less piece of chemical weaponry on the face of this planet.
One rocket among thousands. Not a big deal, but it’s a start. This got me to thinking about
What is known is that it existed and there is no sign that it was ever destroyed. These several dozen are the first steps. So far in
It may be decades before Saddam’s stockpiles of chemical weapons are ever accounted for, it took half a century to find the weapon and fighter stockpile under the Berlin airport, and there are likely hundreds of chemical weapons off the coast of the US that haven’t been found. It doesn’t mean none of it existed while we knew nothing about it. A young airman found that out the hard way.
We know it has been over a decade under UN authority and none of it was accounted for. Under Coalition authority we have found more than the UN ever did, and as a pleasant side-effect the Coalition has prevented the future murder of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis whereas under UN authority hundreds of thousands were murdered.
The Coalition is doing something useful in the world, just like the chem. Demil workers at UMCADS, one piece at a time.
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
The Democrats have an image problem where defense and war are concerned. They’re seen as week on defense, weak on the War on Terror, and weak on attacking
Problem is that a majority of military folk, my opinion, based on nine years AD, and bunches of vet friends and family (even the Democrats among them), believe the Democrats are weak on matters pertaining to defense, war, the military and terrorism. The most damning, however, is that Democrat strategists, Kerry’s advisors, and the mainstream media seem to agree with that view. Look at their actions not their words. They are constantly urging Kerry to run on the economy and to get away from
It seems to me that the Democrats are not only weak on the most important topics this country faces today, but readily admit it in their actions.
I want to match my contribution but I can't. The truth is I really couldn't afford the small amount I did contribute. Right now things are very hard for me and my family, we're struggling to make ends meet. I'm working away from home, and though I have the opportunity to go home once a month we don't have the money for me to visit my family except every other or every third month.
Be that as it is, as a veteran and the son of a Vietnam veteran who was spat upon by people who supported his cause, and who was villified by John Kerry, his compatriots, and supporters I cannot sit idly by while someone like that tries to become commander in chief of the very kind of people he has shown such a disparaging attitude towards.
I don't know whether the Democrats or the Republicans could foster an environment that would make me more financially secure. I do know which party has managed to bring the pride back to veterans and active duty GIs. I do know which party has never villified and demonized american servicemen and women. I do know which party has shown a greater propensity to keeping this nation able to defend itself, and to project power overseas to fight our enemies on their turf.
By the time our finances allow much besides bills and food the election will be done. Until then I will wish you well.
Most sincerest regards,
Kalroy (real name on e-mail, nickname on post)
On April 8 came the downing of Air Force Maj. Jim Ewald’s A-10 Thunderbolt fighter over Baghdad and the discovery that it was a French-made Roland missile that brought down the American pilot and destroyed a $13 million aircraft.
Not damning, until you read the next line:
Army intelligence concluded that the French had sold the missile to the Iraqis within the past year, despite French denials.
So you've got to wonder why this article doesn't seem to have any traction in the MSM (Mainstream Media). Okay, you don't actually have to wonder, we know why. This makes America's "traditional allies" not just look bad, but points out collusion with America's enemies, and puts lie to the French claim that they're our friends and shows that they're friends with America's enemies. Obviously their actions show their words to be a lie, but not according to those whose politics, agenda, or progressive beliefs require that they not acknowledge the falacy of aligning with France.
France has been shown to have great interest in stopping the war in Iraq from happening, and in Saddam Hussein winning. There are the $70 billion plus oil contracts with government owned TotalfinaElf (french oil company) and now the multi-million, if not multi-billion, dollar armaments trade that the French had with Saddam Hussein.
Now France has been opposing any action in Darfur. Turns out they again have money and oil interests that require the genocidal regime remain in power. Of course they've been acting against saving lives, yet again.
Turns out it's all about oil and money for France, more so than it could ever be with the US.
Whoops. Rantburg doesn't seem to reference the article, my bad.
Nope didn't work. Oddly what ended up working was shutting down my IMs. Could be coincidental. Either way, pretty much peeved me off.
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
If not for the Iraqi blogs and the Milblogs, we'd never know what the hell was happening in Iraq beyond the death toll. Mind you, that's more than we get to find out about the happenings in Afghanistan, and try finding about the death toll in Kosovo (I found one article from Jan 2004). The death toll in all three are horrible in that any death is horrible, and American deaths more so (for me). But the successes show hope, they scream that so long as we keep our resolve we can win this dang thing. But God forbid the US should win, at least that seems to be the attitude I get from some.
Update: I chopped and re-wrote the start of the article. One day I'll go ahead and actually write drafts, re-write, proof-read, blah, blah, blah...
Saturday, September 04, 2004
I am curious as to why former policy aid and Democratic speechwriter Jesse Moss was chosen. After doing a google search I don't find any other political work by him than Right Wing Hollywood and I don't know what that movie is like.
Should I expect the show to be biased and predjudicial in a leftward direction? Would a Republican be biased and predjudicial in the other direction? Maybe they should've had a libertarian do it, they can't stand either party.
I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt.
I find it irritating that someone like Kerry would commandeer an insult that he probably learned from one of his cronies, and had never heard himself, and probably doesn't really understand.
Friday, September 03, 2004
I watched the GOP convention fairly closely, and I don't recall hearing Kerry's patriotism attacked. In fact, I heard several speakers explicitly praise Kerry for his service to his country. On the other hand, blasting those who received student deferments as "refusing to serve when they could have" does strike me as an attack on their patriotism.
I agree. I also watched Kerry's speech right after the convention and I got kinda pissed that he would attack President Bush's service when all Bush has done is praise Kerry's service. It's Kerry's peers from Vietnam who question Kerry's record. I don't remember anyone questioning Kerry's patriotism. Granted perhaps the Bush Girls (still not tired of that phrase) attacked his patriotism, I wouldn't know, I couldn't stand to watch them anymore than a I could a tv commercial; BORING. So if they did I would have missed it.
Perhaps Kerry used a Lapham machine and reviewed the text of the speeches that way, rather than studying them himself. Perhaps Michael Moore wrote the speech for him. I'm thinking that what is likeliest is the kind of projection I've been seeing from the left for a while now. It's the kind of thing Kerry and the Democrat Coalition would say, so they assume that's what Bush would say. Perhaps that explains Boston Democrat strategist Mary Anne Marsh's attack. I have friends who, unlike Bush, Kerry, Edwards or Cheney, volunteered for the active duty army, and during Vietnam, who ended up serving his whole stint in Germany. She thinks he betrayed his country.
The purple heart band-aid thing at the Republican National Convention was in poor taste, it was stopped very quickly by the RNC chairman. I noticed most news outlets utterly failed (or chose not) to mention that part. Myself, I'm not as classy as Bush, or the RNC Chairman. I thought the band aid was pretty funny. Especially since I removed a metal splinter, a jagged bit of steel, from my hand just the other day, whose dimensions matched the one Kerry got a purple heart for. Certainly it's nothing compared to the shrapnel that ripped my father's kidney out in Vietnam.
Kerry attacking Bush's military service brings up another point. You'd never know without the blogosphere, that Kerry wanted to have more in common with Bush and Cheney regarding military service, but his luck in those days didn't seem very good. He wanted to get yet another education deferment, like Cheney did, after getting a couple others so he could leave the US to study. When that didn't come through he joined the Reserves, kinda like Bush. When he got stationed in Vietnam he volunteered for the least dangerous service he could find there, but once again his bad luck kicked him in the butt, and after he volunteered the swiftboat mission changed and became a dangerous line. I guess that was the point he decided to stop trusting on his luck and trusting more in his subterfuge and lack of honor.
Thursday, September 02, 2004
ZELL MILLER: It's funny that the purest voice of Jacksonian America at this Republican convention -- in fact, at either convention -- comes from a Democrat. There was a time when it wouldn't have been surprising at all.
meshes nicely with what I thought of Zell Miller. Steve den Beste writes about Mead's Jacksonianism in America. A must read.
Update: Some idiot came to my site looking for Zell Miller Hate Monger. Idgit.
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
From the Democrats I get a party platform which, like the Republicans, is not talked about much during the convention. Unlike the Republicans, however, the Democrat platform is the antithesis to what the movers and shakers believe, support and endorse. The Democrats don't have room for a pro-life key speaker at their convention. They don't have room for Democrats who argainst racial quotas.
What I see from the Republicans is their "big tent" in action. What I see from the Democrats is their "big tent" in words only. Actions speak louder than words, and watching the Democrats claim tolerance but practice bigotry does not go unnoticed by me. It has been this attitude by them that pushed me out of the party.
Tuesday, August 31, 2004
Months ago it was suggested that people should pretend to be Republicans and volunteer to work at the convention, then do whatever they can to mess things up. I'm glad to find out that at least one person has followed through - a Yale student managed to get within 10' of Dick Cheney before loudly denouncing the war. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that there are dozens more there and that they are creating confusion wherever and whenever possible.
He's a leftist whose posts seem sympathetic to Code Pink, and noted leftist umbrella group, United for Peace and Freedom, whose organization list is a who's who of leftist and anti-American groups, including the Communist Party of the US and some real hate America nutjobs.
I missed most of the Democrat National Convention. They consistently failed to keep my attention, and/or pissed me off, and/or bugged me. I had expected the Republican National Convention to be the same way. Frankly my expectations of either party has never been really high. I watched all of Barack Obama's speech and was impressed by it, but every other speaker turned me off. It built on that. The worse it got, the less inclined I was to change the channel back from Sci-Fi channel, or Comedy Central, and ended up missing a lot of it.
Expecting the same thing to happen with the RNC I watched it anyway (almost didn't bother on the first night). Ed Koch held me. Rudy Guilliani held me. Even John McCain held me. The 9/11 widows held me. Former Police Chief of New York held me. The RNC program pretty much kept me on C-Span for the night. Watched almost the entire thing.
The second night consisted of me ignoring the television while I chatted with my wife. Nothing exciting to begin with, then suddenly...... coolness, good re-run of Stargate SG-1. Ooooh, tennis with some hot blonde, a couple of seconds of oogling and the television was back on C-Span, then quickly on to some program on USN Seals. Back to C-Span and damned if I didn't miss the very very beginning of Arnold Schwarzenegger's speech, but the rest kept me in rapt attention. Then the Bush Girls came on, and in the words of The English Beat, "click, click...click, click, click." Back to Sci-Fi channel, Tech TV (ruined since its merger with G4 and vice versa), then the end of Barbara Bush's speech. Then the Harlem Boys Choir. They were good. At some point during my convention night channel surfing I found out that Dana Glover is an attractive woman with a great voice.
So far the Republicans have been far more successful at keeping my limited attention than the Democrats. But then the Democrats failed to keep me as a supporter too.
Governor Schwarzenegger related how he chose to be a Republican. It was after having seen Richard M. Nixon speak. I'm sure this relation will be harped on by his adversaries. Because of C-Span 2, I've actually been able to see Nixon's speech at the 1968 RNC. It's incredibly impressive and I can see how it affected him. I'm glad I did get to see him speak since Nixon is of little actual interest to me and I wouldn't have gotten to see that side of his history. In fact the only part of Nixon's history I actually know is the bad stuff, now I know a bit more and that helped put a bit more perspective on Arnold Schwarzenegger's speech.
He's also a dang good speaker. Better than I had known. I had assumed he would be, but when I was living in California I never got to see an entire speech by him. It simply wasn't a priority for the broadcast news there. I got to see soundclips and snippets of his speeches, but I'm guessing there was too much in the state more important than the recall at the time. God forbid we should miss a re-run of Everybody Loves Raymond, or That 70's Show in order to show any of the speeches by those running at the time.
He spoke more than a few words about the military and our men and women in the military. Arnold Schwarzenegger never served in the US military. He's not an American veteran. He did, however, serve his time in the Austrian Army (tank driver, Graz Tank Unit Panzer Battalion); compulsory service there. Oh, and he went AWOL. Yup Arnold Schwarzenegger went AWOL from the Austrian Army; why? To compete in a body building tournament. He didn't desert. He went back, got put in the brig, and was then allowed to compete officially. Having won the Junior Mr. Europe competition with a perfect score probably helped mitigate his problem. I don't know how it is in the Austrian Army but from my experience in life I'd bet that the old sayings of, "Nothing succeeds like success," and "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission," probably works there too.
Update: Oh, and public speaking and humorous interpretation do not seem to be strong points for the Bush girls (I think I just like using that phrase). I don't know exactly what they said, because I couldn't much stand watching them.
Update: Here's a page with a Feed of The Governator I found last night. Hopefully it'll still work by the time ya'll read this.
I can see why he won so handily though. It's a powerful speech, an impressive speech, a speech that is both strong on defense, praising of our military personnell, internationalist and anti-war. All without seeming to be contradictory, since none of it is automatically exclusive.
It's strange looking back at this, knowing what I know, but understanding why he was voted in at such a large margin. Knowing what a paranoid prick he was, not that people weren't out to get him.
Weird. Glad I wasn't of age and around back then. I probably would have voted for him, not knowing what was going in that mind of his, or what the future was going to hold. I would have, like with Clinton, felt embarassed and ashamed of voting for him.
Monday, August 30, 2004
I saw a small bit of it on Fox News last night, but nothing on CNN; again, not that they didn't show it at all, but I have a low tolerance for CNN since 1) their attitude during their coverage of the first Gulf War, 2) Their idiocy during Somalia and Mogadishu, and 3) their concious support for Saddam Hussein. Because of this I can't seem to put up with CNN for more than 30 minute slices, which is part of the reason I go to breakfast at the hotel late, since it's on every morning there.
"I don't think you can win it," he responded. "But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world."Hmmmmm. Sounds very familliar....
Oh Yeah, that's how the US dealt with Nazism. We have never defeated Nazism, it still exists to this day, but it has been marginalized and, with the exception of whacked skinheads and a large number of muslims, is ineffectual and powerless. Sounds to me like Bush is proposing doing this to the Islamists. I see this as the only way to finally defeat Islamism. Islamism is a foul ideology that will always have some adherants, but if we can do to it what we've done to German National Socialism then we will truly have succeded.
Now if only we can finally do that to Stalinism, Maoism, Troskyism, and the numerous communist/socialist evil ideologies that populate the world and the United States.
Sunday, August 29, 2004
Now Kerry calls for a rollback of those policies, but fails to note why the rollback is needed. He fails to point out that it will take several years for all of this to happen, and only if the Democrats push for it. Doubtful since they've consistently, as a party, pushed the other way for years.
Well, maybe next weeks sojourn to DC will make up for it. After all, all the lefty moonbats will probably be too pooped after the RNC to come down there and spoil my experience.
Friday, August 27, 2004
It pisses me off to hear people say they support our troops when they engender an atmosphere where people call our troops babykiller. It upsets me that the largest political party in the US would nominate someone who, aside from actually killing a baby, was partly responsible for this atmosphere during the Vietnam era, and who has failed to condemn the groups whose actions and rhetoric also promote this view. I don't know whether their goal is to demonize our country and its military, though my opinion is that it is so, but that is the effect and its an effect they are perfectly comfortable with.
Wednesday, August 25, 2004
Most of his commentors seem to feel that it is loony right wingers making these charges. I understand, however, why the knee-jerk reaction is to blame the bookstores. Barnes and Noble, Bakersfield, had Hillary Clinton's book, Michael Moore's book and several others prominently displayed. I had to hunt to find Bill O'Reilly's book. It was three shelves below eye level. At eye level was half a shelf of Michael Moore's book, Stupid White Men, displayed with the cover out. I don't know why Barnes and Noble felt it had to display it this way when they already had it prominently displayed at the door.
Recently my wife and I went to a Barnes and Noble just outside Baltimore (Aberdeen or Abingdon or something) and I watched as an employee showed a customer where the books on politics were. Then the customer asked where Sean Hannity's new book was. He was told that it wasn't out yet. I said, "ummm, you mean that one there?" Then he asked for Michelle Malkin's new book. Again, not out yet. Again, "ummmm, you mean that one there?"
I'm getting odd looks from the employee (we call it stink-eye in Hawai'i).
It could have been that the B&N employee was new, or ignorant, or didn't know his job. I would have gone with any of those except for the looks. Oh, and the liberal and leftwing books were in the front of the store (even Chomsky's stuff). At the political display there were conservative books prominent, but more liberal books prominently displayed.
Experiences like that (and don't get me started on a bookstore in Washington I went to) will cause people to assume the worse about people and organizations. In this case they were all wrong, but that assumption is based on previous experience with the involved parties.
Tuesday, August 24, 2004
It took me this long to cool down when I think about it. My wife said, "Oh my God," when Marsh said this and stared at me, seeing how pissed off I had suddenly gotten.
Here's the thing, Sean Hannity questioned her about that statement in what was an incredibly obvious attempt to give her a chance to take her statement back, or to clarify it, or apologize, or anything that didn't leave her statement as being a serious attack that implied that anyone who didn't serve in Vietnam betrayed their country.
Will John Kerry disavow this statement? Probably, one truly hopes so. Will he condemn her and her statement? Almost certainly not. Will he do anything about her? Again, almost certainly not. Will he do anything at all without being prompted by the media or politically powerful figures? Yet again, highly doubtful.
By the way, she's not some 527 schmuck, or weird extremist. Mary Anne Marsh is described by George E. Condon Jr of the Copley News Service in the Times Reporter as a "Boston-based Democratic strategist and longtime Kerry ally..."
Guess nothing has changed since then, since John Kerry's top rating put him in the top 50%. But then I figured that already.
Sunday, August 22, 2004
Three members of the USAF’s 436th CE Squadron’s EOD flight (Dover AFB) examined a “75mm MK II WWI vintage” shell that had not been fired. They then placed a charge on it to render it safe. This cracked the shell, and a “black substance was observed coming from the residue.” The pieces were collected, placed in a container and taken to the Dover AFB munitions storage area.
The next day two of the EOD airmen reported to work with skin rashes and blisters. Those two were taken to the hospital and released. The third was kept hospitalized in stable conditions with some very nasty blisters. The photos I’ve seen of his arms are very disturbing.
The munition was found in
Mustard exposure is nasty. I personally know someone who got a single drop on himself, and the blistering was almost necrotic in nature and took a long time to finally heal.
I don’t know what the status is of that third airman, Google news searches aren’t helping, but I wish that man well. Aim High!
That written part is the important thing in reading into the PR. You look for how it's written and what is written. There are words and phrases that sound like glowing praise but are stock phrases used on almost everyone's PR whether they're good at what they do or not. Then there are the ones that sound more personal and are due to your immediate supervisor and chain of command actually giving you Kudos.
Forced myself to sit through NBC’s news again tonight. I make an effort to sit through news coverage by noted Saddam ally CNN, and noted liberal mouthpieces like NBC, and political activist papers such as the LA Times and the New York Times. And it takes effort, a lot of it.
It took supreme effort to watch them shill for John Kerry today, watching them fail to bring any of the most serious questions and accusations raised by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They mentioned the questions about Kerry’s medals, but failed to do more than that, and failed to mention his Cambodia lie, or his dishonorable actions in front of congress while still an officer in the US Navy, let alone his private meetings with the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese representatives while a US Naval officer.
Now NBC did manage to highlight the Swiftboat Vet’s funding, linked to Republican contributors and a former Bush campaigner, but utterly failed to mention Move On . org’s vastly greater number of Democrat contributors and Democrat campaigners, or the Kerry Campaign’s official presence at Move On events.
They mentioned how Bush has failed to condemn the Swift Boat Vets specifically, and failed to mention Bush’s blanket condemnation of all the negative smear campaigns (which upon analysis shows that Bush doesn’t condemn the Vets since theirs is not a smear piece). While showing John Kerry condemning smear tactics, they failed to note that Kerry only condemned them after decorated Vietnam Veterans have begun to raise questions about his unfitness to be POTUS. Of course that also means they failed to show Kerry’s praise of smear tactics aimed at Bush prior to decorated
And, of course, no mention of Kerry’s attempt to stifle free speech when it targets him.
Thursday, August 19, 2004
These guys have been fed a line from somewhere that they've bought hook line and sinker that draft dodging and war-mongering is a Republican thing, though history has shown the Democrats are the ones who have sent the most Americans to their deaths in war (WWI, WWII and the Republicans did not start the Civil War). I'm sure neither are idiots, so why do they act like them?
Oh, and for Mike, did you volunteer or were you drafted (ie forced) to serve your country? And did you realize that John Kerry only enlisted after he couldn't get another draft deferment and was going to get drafted anyway? Or that he volunteered for the safest duty he could find, and that it was a twist of fate that turned the swift boats into a dangerous duty after he volunteered for offshore duty?
Tuesday, August 03, 2004
EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) went to take care of it. They cracked the shell and one of the EOD guys was exposed to blister agent. As far as they can tell it is an old WWI chemical weapon shell.
Mustard is a known carcinogen, so this guy will have this hanging over him for the rest of his life. Not to mention the blistering, and the photos I saw were pretty nasty.
Dunno if this will make the news at all. I'm outside Baltimore, just a stone's throw from the Aberdeen Proving grounds, and haven't noticed anything locally or nationally. Though I haven't been making incredible effort to look for it either.
Okay, there's some confusion now, probably on my part. Articles online I've found say that these were found in crushed shells at poultry farms. Monday I'm going to go ahead and get a copy of the release and read the entire dang thing instead of just being grossed out by the photos.
Finally got a copy of the USAF release. Gonna read it and find out more now.
Kerry notes that he has been traveling with Affleck and Edwards and that Edwards was once named the nation's sexiest politician by People magazine. "I feel like that SAT question: Which one of these is different?"
Hmmmm, I'm thinking that it would connect better if he had used the example of Sesame Street. But he connects better with people who identify with that punchline than with a Sesame Street punchline, or NASCAR, or just about anything blue-collar.
Funny thing is, for all the blue-collar folk in his party, his party is run by people disdainful of those same blue-collar folks.
Friday, July 30, 2004
I dunno. It seems to me that it would explain why Mongolia sent troops to support America's liberation of Iraq. The Scots (who invented golf) have a reputation for being fierce fighters in Iraq...golf...Scots...Iraq...Bush... a simple coincidnece?
America's traditional allies betrayed her (France, Germany, and the Phillipines) despite owing the US a debt of blood worth millions of lives. None of those countries are well-known for their golf. Hmmmm.
I'm thinking that America failed to buy France, Germany and the Phillipines off, the price of greens fees being what they are, and that Saddam probably offered club memberships in addition to greens fees. Considering France's siding with, and aiding America's enemies it's likely that Saddam threw in a free golf cart to sweeten the deal.
It doesn't explain Japan's loyalty to her friend in the West, but as I recall they love baseball there...baseball...America's pastime...Mark McGuire (celtic name)...Scotland...Golf... Hmmmmm.
Well, gotta go put my tinfoil hat back on.
I'm sorry... perhaps it was the advance Spielberg-Protegé Hype or my own apostate politics... but the Kerry Movie came off to me as a bland infomercial. Maybe they should have hired Oliver Stone to give it some pizzazz.
From what I hear he already has, though it was back in the day, long before anyone had heard of Stone.
Tuesday, July 27, 2004
Not exactly true. He said, don't send me I'm going after my degree. He got a deferment. Then he said don't send me I'm going for my Masters. He got a deferment. Then he said don't send me I'm going for my Doctorate. He didn't get a deferment, knew he was going to be drafted, they needed officers badly, and only then enlisted.
It's being reported as a dig on Bush, but perhaps it was a dig on himself. Clinton did, after all, dodge the draft and leave the country for school and to avoid the draft.
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
That is why Sandy Berger must be charged, convicted and sentenced. Tens of thousands of Americans deal with classified information. The penalties for disseminating or mishandling classified information are pounded into their heads; hard enough that now, years later I remember it as being tens of thousands of dollars and a decade in jail. After reading some comments over at Instapundit.com - and seeing the disparity in how some Americans are treated when compared to our political elite I say hang the man and give him the max sentence possible. For him to get away with doing far worse with far more secret documents than so many of us is not just an insult to the rule of law, but an insult to us. That this man should be so special that he was allowed to do this on more than one occassion without any of the same fear of prosecution the rest of us were inculcated with is a slap in our face. That we peons should be held accountable while the elite get away with far more serious crimes is insulting.
I hope he gets slammed for it. There needs to be a message sent to all those clearance people who feel they are above the laws that the rest of us have to follow. There needs to be a crackdown on this kind of behavior.
The man needs to join Martha Stewart in the "elitists who are too good to follow the rules" prison.
"In the mean time, I have a quick pointer for the government of the Philippines about American psychology: When someone tells us what good friends they are, we usually assume they are trying to take advantage of us. Real friends don't need to say such things, because real friends demonstrate their friendship with actions, not with words."
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
How about on whether Sandy Berger gets convicted? The Democrats are spinning the theft of classified documents as an accidental shoving of documents into his pants and his socks. Wanna bet he gets off because the administration doesn't want to put up with the Left's charges that former Clinton NSA head and now former Kerry advisor is being persecuted for stealing and mishandling classified documents and not prosecuted for breaking a law. A law that I was informed, while in and out of the Air Force, carried a very hefty fine and a decade or so in jail.
Here's a sure bet, the left will get more whacked out as the campaign progresses and will make the leap from critical bordering on anti-American words to outright treason, anti-Americanism and domestic terrorism. I'm dead serious about the last. We've already seen the Left's penchant for violence, crushing of dissent, intimidation and tolerance for treasonous statements in their midst. We've already seen the ELF efforts. We've already been hearing the calls by some for violence that are tolerated at so-called "peace" protests. We've already heard the tolerance for terrorist organizations to the point of fund-raising among European leftists.
Also Kerry's wife's organization funds a leftist organization that funds an anarchist group that practices, advocates, and wants to promote violence and the overthrow of the United States.
Monday, July 19, 2004
As an aside, some, if not many, homosexuals are flamboyant and, ummmm, somewhat feminine. Not all are. I know a few kick-ass homosexuals, one of whom is a very good fighter, and another who is not the least bit feminine. I'm almost offended that the Democrats are predjudiced enough to assume that all homosexuals are less than manly.
Thursday, July 15, 2004
Sunday, July 11, 2004
From what I've heard from people who went it never actually lies the way his former movies have, but it deceives. A couple of for instances: He gives the date the Saudi flights (which included some of Osama Bin Laden's family members), but fails to mention that the flight bans were already being lifted when they were finally cleared, and fails to mention that several members of the bin Laden family were interviewed by the FBI before being allowed to leave. As an aside to this, I'm sure you'll remember that it was some time after this before Al-Qaida took responsibility for the attack, and that many people were leery about pointing towards Muslims as being responsible.
Another is the meeting with bin Laden family members in Texas. Neither Bush, nor his staff met with them. They were there on oil business and met, primarily, with oil executives. I say primarily because they also met with politicians, among those was the leader of the Texas Democratic Party.
People should get used to fact-checking Michael Moore's "facts." Also, (my English teachers are gonna want to kill me for using "also" as a bullet pointer, when viewing the movie try to remember that Michael Moore that he considers his American audience to be all morons (his words not mine) and that he considers the US to be pretty evil. It's not an attitude that lends one to trust the opinion of such a person.
On the plus side, at least he's more entertaining than Chomsky. Heck, TV Nation has been the only show I've ever actually written a letter to try to keep on the air.
I guess I'm a fair-weather fan, turns out when an entertainer's work and opinions become so hateful that the collateral damage becomes anti-Americanism (or becomes de-facto propaganda for America's enemies) I stop being a fan.
Friday, July 09, 2004
Snow pointed out that his experience was a private conversation, but then so was the one with Cheney. He didn't say it in a press conference or anything, he said it quietly to someone nearby. It's no less private than a conversation between most people in a pseud-public area.
So some Whiny decided to use this instance for political gains, whether that Whiny was the congressman in question or the reporter to whom the story was leaked... Heck it was probably both of them. You don't usually leak information to a hostile journalist, you leak it to someone who has the same political goals as you. That way you know the story will get out.
Thursday, July 08, 2004
When I go back to work next week I'll see if I can score a copy of the thing.
Sunday, July 04, 2004
The topic, however, was interesting, and I happen to agree with the opinion of this supposed "news" program. The cases cited were simply wrong. Two were defeated in court. Turns out Mesa Arizona isn't supposed to cease a brake business' land to give to an Ace Hardware, and a town in Ohio can't seize a "cute neighborhood" to give the scenic overlook land to a condominium developer. The third story doesn't end well. Turns out the New York Times' new headquarters was seized by the state and sold to them.
I think I'll go back to the Flip Wilson Marathon. Jack Benny is a crack-up, and maybe I'll get more of Geraldine Jones.
Saturday, July 03, 2004
Aside from the fisking Professor Dauber paints on her blog there is one other argument that rarely gets play anywhere. Less than twenty years ago we had an all-volunteer military almost twice the size of what it is now. It's at it's current size because of the ever-present lust for money in the government. Then it was called "the peace dividend" by people never realizing that the dividend of peace is peace itself not dismantling the tool that gained that peace.
So we could easily double, if not triple, the size of our military with a volunteer force. It would cost money, as it would with the draft, and it would cost many years of re-building the training infrastructure, recruit, train and to have GIs gain the experience of today's troops. All of that would be necessary with a draft, though the last would be much more difficult with a draft, since draftees are less likely to re-enlist and more likely to take their skills and experience away from the military.
In 1986 the US Air Force had 20 year E-5s. Sure they were never going to be senior NCOs, but they had skill and experience in their jobs that isn't quite there anymore. We had 9 year E-4s who were skilled at their craft, but who weren't going to be going up very far in the military hierarchy. During the great military purge of the 1990's things changed.
By the middle of the 1990's it no longer mattered whether you were tops in your field, what mattered was how well you did on NCO exams that had little to do with your craft. Performance reports still tended to be inflated, and some of it was based more on Squadron participation in car washes than on whether the airman was competent in his craft. So we're at a point where the technical skills and abilities have suffered somewhat because once an airman gets his journeyman level (four to five years in the 80's) he's only got another five years or so of useful trade before he's promoted out of a job he does well. There aren't that many master sergeants bucking rivets unless it's to make up for a manpower deficiency.
Also, for some technical skills in the Air Force you don't really gain competency until after you've been at the same trade for six to eight years which means that unless an airman. Say an aircraft metals technologist, enlists, goes to an abbreviated tech school, necessitating far more OJT (on the job training) he/she still doesn't really have the skill and experience to be a journeyman. At the end of their four year term they don't have the experience, though the exceptionally mechanically inclined may have the skill, to finally be of journeyman level, despite what their 623 says. Three or four years down the road (which most draftees won't ever do) that airman may have the experience to be at a level that the civilian craft sector would consider journeyman level. Then after a few years later that airman stops being a line-airman technician, turning parts on a lathe, welding flameholders, and soldering intake screens, and becomes a supervisor level NCO.
Big waste of time, money, skill and experience, and a weakening of the Air Force's ability.
PS: Damn you internet, Damn you bloggers, I should have been asleep several hours ago (12 hour shifts, remember) especially since tomorrow looks like a hard day in the sun.
Seeing Ed Sullivan in purple silk hippy clothes and Lucille Ball in hotpants (and she was still a very attractive redhead), was a hoot. Earlier the bit with Tim Conway (did he ever look that young?) and another with Rowan and Martin. I was a little kid, but this show was a weekly watch for my mother and me and it still brings back a wonderful sense of being and good memories.
Oh, and Geraldine. A lot of comedians in drag but none of them were ever of the caliber of Geraldine. Okay, maybe Ma Fricker, but not the television version.
Joan Rivers, Mahalia Jackson and George Gobel all in the episode starting now.
I had meant to comment on Zeyad's cousin, and the AP article, in the Eastern Oregonian, that reports on it, blithely ignorant of the blog connection, but it's brought up some pretty hefty feelings, and I'm going to forgo that for now and enjoy my life for a little bit with Flip and his musical guest stars..... The Osmonds!!!
PS: As I commented in a far earlier post, it's kinda funny that Blogger's spellchecker doesn't recognize the word "blog" by default.
Friday, July 02, 2004
I just want to know if she made more money from Halliburton than Dick Cheney, if she bailed out of Enron before its collapse, or if she dabbles in the reverse repurchase instruments that bankrupted Orange County, California a few years back. Is she in partnership with George Soros and does she shelter income off-shore. Heavily invested in gaming, liquor, or perhaps even the deadly tobacco companies? Please e-mail me your speculation on what is the most likely embarrassment being hidden away from public view in the locked-up tax-returns of a billionaire? Send it to email@example.com.
Hey, as Tim Blair points out, he's just posing questions. After all, if it's good for the goose...
Thursday, July 01, 2004
I have an extra reason for despising Firefox, though. After I tried it for a couple weeks, it hijacked my damn system! Even after deleting Firefox, Windows still won’t recognize IE as my default browser once I uninstalled Firefox!
I had to get rid of it because of this very reason. It wouldn't let me redefine my default browser. I love the tabbed browsing, I love opening all my daily blog reads in one browser, tabbed, all at once, then quickly going over them before work or before bed.
But Nottafinga! I need IE for stuff too, and I need it to open up in a link from Yahoo Messanger. I'll give some consideration to re-installing it and not allowing it to become the default.
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
Then one day my wife convinced me to buy a low-end laptop to bring up to Oregon with me, and we suffered through the couple of weeks it took to absorb the hit on our finances. Because of that (and internet connection now) I'm back.
Turns out I'm not the only one who is back. Ol' Glenn Frazier dot com is back, now at Mac's new place over at, oddly enough, Mac Frazier's Place: "
". I hope my four faithful (down to three now) readers enjoy his site as much as I have in the past. He's just starting back out, and his site shows it's "under construction" motif, but hopefully he'll be back yakking about politics, law, architecture, and the mongols in no time at all.
Welcome back Mac,
The reporter claims that chemical agents (WMDs to most people) weren’t considered as a possibility in an incident, several years ago during construction, that made several people sick. Sick enough that at least one of them is claiming full permanent disability. I’m betting that the Army did consider it, but discounted it quickly since the most noticeable and immediate symptom did not seem to have occurred. Miosis, pinpoint pupils. Never seen it myself, though I’m told it is very distinctive, not something you could possibly miss.
The gist of the article is that the Army, the clinic and everyone else neglected to look for miosis. No one seems to remember any miosis. Since no one looked for it, it must have been missed. The thrust is that the workers were exposed to sarin and this proves it. Now at the bottom of the article the reporter does point out that it would have affected people between the storage bunkers and those who got sick, but that no one knows if anyone was there.
Here’s the thing, I got to talk to one of the people who was in the building at the time. He walked out and just then people “came pouring out of the building sick.” He confirms that no one looked for pinpoint pupils, but he also confirmed that he didn’t notice any either. We’re not talking about walking into bright sunlight pupils either, we’re talking about the eye looking like it is all iris with no pupil. It’s freaky looking.
The Army did not check cholinesterate levels, but it wouldn’t have mattered much since there was never a baseline made either.
So here’s the gist of the article and the lawsuit (yes, they’re suing the Army for exposing them to Sarin), Sarin leaked out of a bunker unnoticed, wafted towards the plant ignoring anyone who happened to be there. It drifted into the building selectively hitting some and ignoring a bunch of others.
Sarin is nasty stuff, but the amount that would have had to be sitting in a pool next to one of the bunkers to have been effective at making people sick hundreds of yards away, in a building, is a LOT. Consider that sarin needs to be distributed properly to be effective. In Japan, a sarin attack on a crowded subway killed 2 people (at least in the account I’m reading right now) despite having been delivered by puncturing containers left on the ground (hundreds got sick). Agent has been detected outside the bunkers once, but no one standing outside the plant got sick. Here it is being alleged that an amount toxic to a lot of people managed to leak out of the bunkers with no one noticing.
It’s about the money, but the newspaper has no business promoting the plaintiff’s propaganda. It should be trying to report both sides, and pointing to logical fallacies and factual errors on both sides.
Monday, June 28, 2004
Perhaps we should get Chomsky to write the rebuttal we plan, but then any word from him would probably hurt rather than help.
Saturday, June 26, 2004
As to myself, today is the first day of three twelve-hour night shifts. My days will consists of going to work this afternoon, coming back to the apartment, sleeping, and waking up in time to do it all again. One of these days I'm going to have to go back to a normal schedule
I no longer remember when I first read grok, but I liked it. I liked it, I still like it. She has a perspective that I'm passingly familiar with, having been married to a military wife, and she's a great communicator.
On a side note, all you kids out there be sure to get a full eight hours sleep a night. Don't be like Kalroy or you'll end up tired, cranky, and forgetful. I had meant to thank Sarah a couple of days ago and let it slip. Also, stay in school, don't do drugs and if you don't have the willpower to practice abstinence then at least practice safe sex.
Except for you, Arrowatch, don't have any sex at all until you're at least 24 years of age.
Friday, June 25, 2004
Sorry Peter Jennings, the Taliban did not sign, neither did they adhere to the Conventions. Either action would have gained the Conventions protection. Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, did not sign or adhere to the Conventions. Al-Qaeda and other terrorists do not adhere to the Conventions, just ask Nick Berg (but not his dad) and Paul Johnson.
Peter Jennings did not simply neglect to mention any of this, he and his story implied that the opposite was true. Pretty disgusting and it shows not only his bias, but either a total ignorance of the Conventions (which I seriously doubt) or that he is putting out anti-American propoganda. I know, I'm not being very generous, but I've been generous to leftists and the media for a very long time. I gave them the benefit of the doubt during the first Gulf War. I strived to give them the benefit of the doubt during both Kosovo and Somalia.
As far as I'm concerned they no longer deserve that benefit and will have to earn back what I had freely given them. My respect and trust.
Thursday, June 24, 2004
I mean, ever read some of the pamphlets, articles, and books that come from there? Some great, yet obscure stuff, but some real crap.
You mean "there" as in "college environment?" I agree entirely
So here's something we agree on entirely. One thing, unrelated to whether we agree, is that I approve of the college environment publishing system. Some of that obscure stuff would never be published otherwise. If not for that lax publishing style I would never have gotten to enjoy "Scotland in the Crusades." Some, if not a lot, of these college press publications exist only because there is a publishing system that places a different value on what they publish. I wonder how many times I'm going to use that word.
Anywho... I applaud the system that gives us such pearls even at the cost of some swill.
Wednesday, June 23, 2004
It's pretty obvious why I'm pissed, considering that I'm one of the people who post there and between reading anglo-saxon versions of Beowulf, and Michael Crichton's Travels, I've worked on SDI programs and Yamaha's, the YF-22 and lawn mowers. Now I'm betting that Chomsky's vocabulary is far greater than mine, though the breadth of one's vocabulary is no indication of their communicative abilities as is amply demonstrated when comparing Chomsky's writings to those of Mark Twain, Michael Crichton and Tom Clancy, all of whom have proven to be far more interesting and effective communicators than Chomsky.
Having an effective vocabulary is very important, but that is not the same thing as having a large range in your vocabulary. You can spout off about triskaidekaphobia and prestidigitation in it's historical context but it's not nearly as effective as talking about the fear of the number thirteen and slight of hand (yeah I know, these are pretty well known examples today but I'm not going to discuss things I need a dictionary to explain).
As to his assertion that Chomsky's range of knowledge is broader than anyone posting on Joanne Jacob's site I call bullshit. Can Chomsky tell me whether cast iron can be welded? Can he tell me what kind of solder to use on his plumbing or what the rating is on the breakers in his circuit breaker box? I doubt he could diagram the wiring in his house, or show anyone how a new motor is installed in a car. He's pretty ignorant about a wide variety of things and considering his reputation and what little I've seen of his writings his knowledge base is extremely limited. Especially when compared to many blue-collar sweathogs. Sure not all sweathogs speak attic Greek (though I know a union electrician who does) or study latin (though I know several who do) or study Old English (again, I know several who do) and that's in Chomsky's purvue. Leave that specialty and the sweathogs leave him in the dust. Certainly they aren't all reading about linguistics and politics but then they know a lot about a lot of things, whether it be stalking wapiti, re-building Yamaha outboards, pouring concrete, or using a laser to align the shaft on a process water re-circulation pump (just did that today).
Back to Wonkette. She's one of the guests on a section regarding kinkmeister Jack Ryan, his wife, and the release of their divorce proceedings by a California judge, despite objetions by Jack and Jerri Ryan, or any consideration for their child. It was interesting enough that I'm spending valuable sleep time (it's a work night, 12 hour shifts) trying to find the name of the judge and some history on the judge. Mostly because California has a history and reputation for left-wing activist judges that rule based on their political ideology rather than the law or the constitution.
Not finding anything yet. All the googled news articles I've gone through so far only say "California Judge." Not good enough. I want to know who the judge is. I want to know if the judge has a reputation for fairness or ideological activism.
Update: It's a "Superior Court Judge Robert A. Schnider." Interestingly, the Judge stayed his own ruling until June 28th, yet all this information has been published from it? What's up with that?
Update: Here's an interesting google find. Dunno it's providence, but it seems to imply that this judge ruled in favor of a wife moving the kids away (despite a signed agreement) because he was pissed at the father and that the judge later admitted it was wrong, but that it "was OK."
Monday, June 21, 2004
Tell me again how most Arabs are moderates and don't support America's enemies....
Well, perhaps this doesn't show support for America's enemies, so much as it gives ample demonstration of the failure to condemn America's enemies.
I ask my Democrat friends what they’d rather see happen – Bush reelected and bin Laden caught, or Bush defeated and bin Laden still in the wind. They’re all honest: they’d rather see Bush defeated. (They’re quick to insist that they’d want Kerry to get bin Laden ASAP. Although the details are sketchy.) Of course this doesn't mean they're unpatriotic, etc., obligatory disclaimers, et cetera. But let's be honest. People are coming up with websites that demonstrate ingenious technology for spraying anti-Bush slogans on the sidewalks; it would be nice if they sprayed "DEFEAT TERRORISM" or "STOP AL QAEDA" now and then. Wouldn't it?
Is that too much to ask? I ask my Democrat friends what they’d rather see happen – Bush reelected and bin Laden caught, or Bush defeated and bin Laden still in the wind. They’re all honest: they’d rather see Bush defeated. (They’re quick to insist that they’d want Kerry to get bin Laden ASAP. Although the details are sketchy.) Of course this doesn't mean they're unpatriotic, etc., obligatory disclaimers, et cetera. But let's be honest. People are coming up with websites that demonstrate ingenious technology for spraying anti-Bush slogans on the sidewalks; it would be nice if they sprayed "DEFEAT TERRORISM" or "STOP AL QAEDA" now and then. Wouldn't it?
Is that too much to ask?
Unfortunately it is too much to ask. It’s not about patriotism or even about siding with America’s enemies. It’s about power, pure and simple. These people don’t want the terrorists to win, they don’t even really want the terrorists to score a single victory. They want their power back. They want to be in charge because they have a dream. A dream of a United States made in their own image and not that of the founding fathers. After all, the founding fathers are bunch of old dead white men (rumor has it there were a number of evil masons and shrine clowns), so they must have been evil and anything they touched must have been evil. Now if the leftists can do to the country what they’ve done to the democratic party they can remake the United States as a force for good. A force where all our wealth and industriousness can be focused towards righting the wrongs done by the evil white man to all the worlds poor and downtrodden people.
So okay, if they have to support terrorist goals and hope for more American deaths in the greater effort to replace George Bush with their guy then so be it. Besides they can do all this while screaming they still support the troops.
I support the troops but decry the war. Sounds good. Too bad joe six-pack (the bane of Berke) and GI Joe know better. They know that to support them is to support their victory, so they tend to see through the illusion created by the left that you can support America’s enemies without actually supporting America’s enemies.
Sunday, June 20, 2004
I wrote the following comment in response.
To that I say, Can't Win, I remember the short spate of Abortion Clinic bombings and you are wrong about them not being condemned.
I remember the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia very recently, do you remember that we went to war to stop the masacre of muslims at the hands of christians? Have you notice that very little attention has been paid to that trend reversing or to the genocidal practices by Arabs in the Sudan?
The Catholic sex abuse scandal has been loudly and roundly condemned by Catholics, whereas the same scandal in Islam has been almost entirely ignored.
There is no schism over abortion, there is a schism over a woman's right to choose. I can't think of a single Christian denomination that supports abortion, though some support a woman's right to choose.
" But, we only bring up faith as a factor when it's Muslims involved. It's an excuse, not rational behavior."
Here is where you're either ignorant or tyring to deceive. "We" don't bring up faith as a factor when Muslims are involved, Muslims bring it up as a factor. When was the last time you recall a statement by an Islamist that was entirely secular?
As to your "moderate" muslim voices, by their number and their deviation from the majority of Imams, Ayatollahs, Muftis, etc, I'd say that they are the real extremists in a violent religion where the average/moderate supports killing jews and non-arabs.
Someone who goes by the handle of "can't win" threw some moral equivelancy around and, I guess, assumed everyone who might read it were under the age of twenty and so wouldn't remember his comparison to abortion clinic bombings.
Myself, I'm 36, I recall many Christians and Christian leaders and ministers/pastors/priests condemning the abortion clinic bombings. Still, it's a poor analogy since major islamic leaders don't simply fail to condemn islamists they praise and encourage them, so even if Christians didn't condemn the abortion clinic bombings I don't recall a single person encouraging and cheering the bombers on. This could be because it never happened, but it could also be because Christians generally marginalize extremists in their religion. Islam, the culture and religion not individuals, glorify and make heroes of their extremists.
den Beste has written about this. The condescension that comes from some pundits who work on the basis that we weren't there and wouldn't remember. He refers to the end of the Cold War, but "Can't Win" is operating on the same theory. By the way, his reference (Can't Win, not den Beste) to the crusades also neglects that Islam had already converted by the sword and conquered a large part of christendom.