Category: Uncategorized

Chuck is sensitive on the Dear Leader’s behalf:

…nobody enjoys a sore loser, compadre.

P.S. If you really must call someone “Dear Leader”, I’d suggest you emigrate to someplace they’ll appreciate it.

Who’s sore? I predicted George Delano’s re-election long before any of the pundits were willing to commit to a candidate, I never wavered from it throughout all the ups and downs of the daily polls and I was proven right in the end.

As for Dear Leader, I assert that it is the natural nickname for a second-generation political leader who, as William F. Buckley has opined, holds the right to rule unquestioned. Like Kim Jong Il, the president considers himself to be a friend of the Chinese government, is the primary symbol of a red state movement and believes in a powerful and activist central government.

It also fits the passionate way in which the Three Monkey sorts absolutely love the guy. I mean, Ronald Reagan was my idea of a near-perfect president, but the enthusiasm with which some conservative writers write about George Bush the Younger manages to put even the over-the-top Clintonistas to shame. Okay, maybe not the one reporter who was wishing she could have been in Monica’s place, but let’s be honest here; until her surprisingly skeptical piece on the inauguration we were all expecting something in a similar vein from Peggy Noonan.

But I do find it intriguing that the president’s defenders are already so sensitive that a deficiency of enthusiasm for him should be considered grounds for exile. Although I suppose that’s a step forward from the notion that a defiency of enthusiasm for Middle East nation-building should be grounds for execution.

The Dear Leader manages to alarm even Peggy Noonan:

Ending tyranny in the world? Well that’s an ambition, and if you’re going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn’t expect we’re going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it’s earth.

There were moments of eloquence: “America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.” “We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do not accept the possibility of permanent slavery.” And, to the young people of our country, “You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs.” They have, since 9/11, seen exactly that.

And yet such promising moments were followed by this, the ending of the speech. “Renewed in our strength–tested, but not weary–we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom.”

This is–how else to put it?–over the top. It is the kind of sentence that makes you wonder if this White House did not, in the preparation period, have a case of what I have called in the past “mission inebriation.” A sense that there are few legitimate boundaries to the desires born in the goodness of their good hearts.

One wonders if they shouldn’t ease up, calm down, breathe deep, get more securely grounded. The most moving speeches summon us to the cause of what is actually possible. Perfection in the life of man on earth is not.

And rather more to the point, history is most eloquent with regards to those who seek to establish Heaven on Earth through the use of force. They always end up unleashing all Hell instead.

The Fraters Libertas lament a Voxless syndicasphere:

It is with dismay we note the chasing of Vox Day from the marketplace of syndicated columnists (or as he would say – and did say – So much for dreams of media whoredom.)

I understand our man VD may not have been everyone’s cup of tea (he’s more like a gallon jug of grappa), but when you compare his abilities and output with the majority of gainfully employed syndicated opinionoscenti, the injustice is clear. I find it hard to believe there aren’t more people out there interested in thrice weekly Vox Day ruminations than, say, the edgy conventional wisdom recycling of a Neal Peirce or the cornpone BS radicalism of a Molly Ivins.

Beyond an original and entertaining prose style, Vox’s main asset is logical thought and consistency of philosophy (which happens to be libertarianism) and the practical application of such to real world conditions. He takes the time to think through scenarios and to make sure his arguments make sense before he promulgates them. No one can easily do a “gotcha!” on the guy (which is the soul of blogging, perhaps explaining why he never became prominent via the fishing expeditions of those desperate for easy material).

While I do very much appreciate the kind sentiments expressed by so many people, rest assured that this comes as neither a surprise nor a disappointment to me. I don’t expect my political writing to appeal to most people; given the fact that only 400,000 people voted against the bi-factional ruling party last November, it’s clear that my views are in the extreme minority.

And that’s just fine. Either I’m on the leading edge and more and more Americans will finally begin to see the necessity of pursuing freedom and liberty or I’m just another radical outlier, to be safely marginalized and ignored. I am content to leave dreams of television cameras, political power and 20-second sound bites to those who value such things and continue to write the truth as I see it.

One may have 10, 1000 or one million readers, but the text remains the same.

The Dear Leader speaks:

“We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world. America has need of idealism and courage, because we have essential work at home – the unfinished work of American freedom. In a world moving toward liberty, we are determined to show the meaning and promise of liberty.”

These pretty words would be far more convincing if the Bush administration hadn’t just spent four years working towards the further destruction of American liberties. Not all those who cry freedom actually seek it.

How, precisely, does the survival of liberty in our land depend upon the success of liberty elsewhere? The Constitution was written to defend Americans, not from monarchies in England and France, but from the depradations of the federal government.

Believe him if you like. I don’t. We’ll just wait and see who events prove right.

A naval commander agrees:

Well said, Mr. Vox Day. I just wrote Pat Buchanan for also writing a tough questioning article on the U.S. policy in Iraq. I thought he was the only conservative out there with the courage to express an opinion different from the administration. I see that he wasn’t the only one and that you did a fine job too.

I am a retired Navy commander, Annapolis graduate, conservative and Christian. I think what we are doing in Iraq borders on lunacy…. a pie in the sky dream of establishing a democracy that will “make the desert bloom” and be the envy of all the other Muslim dictatorships…. hmmm. Hasn’t anyone seen what has happened over the last 56 years where a democracy was established in the heart of the Middle East that actually did make the desert bloom and is the envy of all the other countries in the area? Yes, Israel. Israel hasn’t made all the Muslim Arab countries want democracy. Anyway, great article, keep being courageous!!

And RT wants to declare war on the unsupportive half of America as well. I find his notion that we will lose more liberties by bringing our troops home and not engaging in permaware to be… interesting, assuming that one defines interesting as bizarre to the point of being almost completely contradictory.

What’s up Vox !! We can’t win when half the population wants to cut and run at the first sign of resistance. But I guess the LIBERALterrians and Commie liberals have now joined forces to make sure America loses ANOTHER winnable war. If we cut and run we can be sure of losing more liberties here at home (where the new front will end up) and then our troops WILL be needed here. I prefer to keep the fighting over there where we can draw these radicals to the flame and slaughter them. If we could just get Boxer,Kennedy,Gore,and now you to go to the flame we might win, though it would be tough without such fine Americans of such intestinal fortitude.

My central point is that THE WAR IS ALREADY WON! The Hussein regime is toast. The WMDs are either no longer there or were destroyed long ago. The current nation-building program was never successfully sold to the American people nor have they embraced the notion of sacrificing American lives for it.

While still in the midst of licking my post-syndication wounds, the Perfect Aryan Male and I celebrated some successful operations at a Thai restaurant. It wasn’t such a good idea, because apparently the cute little Thai girls serving us there wanted me out of the way. Which is to say, the Sesame Chicken gave me a rather nasty case of food poisoning.

I went from feeling completely fine to shivering uncontrollably and committing unspeakable acts in the bathroom in about five minutes. I’ll spare you the lurid details and simply say that it was a long and unpleasant night.

Fortunately, it went as quickly as it came and I feel fine now, except for the tired, drained and feeling as if I just played substitute for a heavy bag bit. Don’t expect random showers of brilliance today.

FB commends yesterday’s column:

As a veteran and the father of two career military officers, I want to thank you for saying what must be said.

While WH thinks it’s real simple and I’m real dumb and probably disloyal:

You “Win the Peace” by defeating the enemy. It’s the ONLY way you left wing half-wit

.

Yep, anyone who questions the Dear Leader’s wisdom is clearly a left-winger. Quick, someone phone the Joint Chiefs, WH has the answer! All we have to do is defeat the enemy! How extraordinary that no one ever thought of that before! JJ, meanwhile, doesn’t seem to follow through on his own logic:

Just to pacify my curiosity, do you honestly think that pulling out of Iraq will solve the violent situation in the Middle East? Son, you need to get your head out of the sand; those people have been killing each other long before Jesus Christ was a thought in Gods mind! I seriously doubt pulling out will stop them now.

No, I don’t think anything will solve the violent situation in the Middle East, including American troops occupying Middle Eastern countries. But I’d rather they occupied themselves with killing each other, as they are wont to do when not provided an external enemy, instead of American troops.

Nick expresses full faith and confidence in the US government:

If we cut and run now, then we will have made it clear that our word does not mean jack shit… and not one single government or people will trust us for the foreseeable future.

Yes, because they trust the word of the US government so much now…. I don’t see why they would, either. I certainly don’t.

From Universal Press Syndicate:

After a survey of our salespeople and some reflection over the sales performance for past year-and-a-half, I’ve been given the mandate to tell you that Universal Press Syndicate has decided to terminate the active syndication of your column.

The decision was based on the tightness of the text/column market, the immergence of Ann Coulter as a name brand and the sales division’s inability to sell your column into newspapers.

I think the strategy behind deciding to syndicate your column was the right one: a young, intelligent conservative to fill the void when/if some of our “old guard” stopped writing. Unfortunately, the market did not respond. I know we’ve talked about sales tactics, market truths and the realities of a modern-day newspaper editor, and I think all of these combined (along with Ms. Coulter’s prominence) presented too much of an obstacle for us to overcome.

So much for dreams of media whoredom. Actually, this is no surprise, as UPS was unable to sell the column to a single newspaper in 18 months. You needn’t send any condolences, however, as I was always dubious that there was any room for libertarianism in the legacy media. My indifference to this sort of thing is not a pretense; the media is not my career, in fact, it’s not even my primary hobby.

The big flaw in the strategy seems pretty obvious in retrospect. I keep telling everyone that I’m not a conservative, but no one ever believes me. In any event, I wish UPS all the best… and this isn’t the first time they couldn’t sell my column. Seven years ago, they couldn’t sell the video game column either.

An admiral writes in:

How do we get out of Iraq without looking weak? A large part of defense is perception. I doubt that we can reshape the world because the forces that formed these United States of America are not present in the middle east and are not even recognized here. It will not take. Even in Afghanistan, success cannot be assured. Too much has been done for politics in conflict with reason.

My problem is that I do not wish to draw active hostility toward our homeland. If we look weak, then it will be easier to recruit agents for another attack on American soil. Our adversaries must think twice before launching such a strike. How can we pull back without making our adversaries feel that they can defeat us?

We can’t. And this is why it was so apallingly stupid for the Bush administration to enter Iraq without a coherent and public exit plan. Had they stuck to their public professions of being led to act by the need to remove a dangerous dictator and eliminate WMDs, the troops would have been home a year ago and the world would still be in shock and awe at the ease with which we accomplished our military aims.

But because it was either misled by the seemingly effortless success of the venture or because it had made the mistake of signing on to the World Democratic Revolutionary program from the start, the administration will now look weak and feckless when it pulls out. As I see it, the primary question is this: does the administration wish to give an impression of apparent defeat by pulling out now of its own volition, or does it need to suffer an actual defeat and be forced to withdraw under fire. The impression is to be preferred to the reality, in my opinion. In any case, we cannot win a war of attrition, that should be obvious to everyone.

There is a third possibility, of course. An attack on America by Syrians or Iranians that so inflames the American people that they discover a new appetite for the increasingly misnamed War on Terror, but that would only buy the administration some time and lead to a repetition of the exercise. Then again, if one considers recent history, one can’t dismiss the possibility that this administration would respond to an Iranian attack by invading Indonesia.

The truth is that immigration controls and enforcing existing immigration laws would do far more to reduce the likelihood of attacks on American soil than killing another ten thousand Iraqis. Our soldiers in Baghdad didn’t prevent that Coptic family from being murdered in New Jersey last week, after all. Europe has only begun to consider its immigration-related perils; we haven’t even started. It is said that the best defense is a good offense, but I’ve never seen an NFL coach tell his quarterback to line up in the secondary. Our defense isn’t even on the field.