Vox Popoli

I hadn’t listened to the first Linkin Park CD in a while… good stuff and I don’t think there’s many first CDs that kick off with a one-two punch anywhere nearly as well as Hybrid Theory. Papercut, in particular, is just a great tune. It’s not exactly Mozart, or even David Sylvian, but it’s great car music. In my half of the CD changer:

Creed: Human Clay

Linkin Park: Hybrid Theory

Japan: Quiet Life

The Cure: Singles

The Cult: Electric

Finally got my copy of Sunyata. It’s quite good, but I do miss the old horn sample. Check it out, sans horns, at Basic Pleasure Model.

ST sends a link: Recently, I interviewed with a school in one of the metro Atlanta counties, only to receive an e-mail from the principal stating, “Though your qualifications are quite impressive, I regret to inform you that we have selected another candidate. It was felt that your demeanor and therefore presence in the classroom would serve as an unrealistic expectation as to what high school students could strive to achieve or become. However, it is highly recommended that you seek employment at the collegiate level; there your intellectual comportment would be greatly appreciated. Good luck.”

Yeah, I don’t think I’ll so much be sending my kids to publik skool.

DM writes to point out that Al tackled the guy from behind. And he managed to break his glasses? (eyes rolling) “Franken emerged from the crowd and charged one male protester, grabbing him with a bear hug from behind and slamming him onto the floor.”

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that I’ve taken out someone from behind myself, actually, the same guy twice in a row. I was talking with a friend who travelled in similar martial arts circles one night while he was working as a bouncer at Prince’s Glam Slam. Three guys got into a pretty vicious fight right behind us, and there as were only two bouncers at that door, I tagged along and grabbed the leftover, bounced his face off the wall and held him there with an armlock. He was stunned and seemed pretty relaxed, so I asked if he was cool. He said that he was, so I let him go. In the meantime, the other bouncer, a 300+ monster, had simply picked up one guy and marched him outside, but it had taken my friend a little while to subdue the other combatant and he was just frog-marching him past at the moment I let the other guy go.

Okay, it was dumb, but I’m not a bouncer, I don’t know these things. Anyhow, the guy getting marched out spits on my guy, who then, naturally enough, goes for the spitter. My friend managed to pass off the spitter to the huge bouncer just in time to intercept, and started wrestling shoulder to shoulder with him. I wasn’t sure what to do, being paralyzed with a plethora of options, but the guy was leaning forward, so I finally just reached over and picked up both his feet. (It would have been more elegant to sweep them, but like I said, I was frozen, I had too many options. When you train with experienced fighters, you’re lucky if you get a window that’s half-open for a split-second. And if something is open, it’s usually a trap.)

He was pretty tall, about 6’2″, so he hit the ground hard enough to knock the wind out of him. My friend was extremely annoyed at this point, as he’d taken a good punch in the face from the other guy, so as the guy started to push himself up, he jerked him up by the shirt collar and gave him a little heel of the hand into the solar plexus. That was pretty much lights out. The guy went down and didn’t fuss at all when the huge bouncer came back in, scooped him up and carried him out like a baby. That was fun. Admittedly, I was either training or lifting weights seven days a week then, so my definition of entertainment was perhaps a little off.

Other than a few minor incidents like that, I never had any occasion to seriously use any of my training, which was probably for the best. Some of the other Dragons got into some interesting tangles, though. I’ll save those stories for a rainy day.

Wise-cracking funnyman Al Franken yesterday body-slammed a demonstrator to the ground after the man tried to shout down Gov. Howard Dean. The tussle left Franken’s trademark thick-rim glasses broken, but he said he was not injured. Franken – who seemed in a state of shock and out of breath after the incident – was helped back to his feet by several people who watched the tussle. Police arrived soon after. “I got down low and took his legs out,” said Franken afterwards.

At least I know what to do to get him to respond to my little challenge. Of course, if he’s in a state of shock and out of breath after tackling somebody, I have no idea how he’s going to survive going a round or two with me. Our belt tests consisted of eight two-minute rounds against fresh black belts, with one-minute breaks and a minimum number of kicks and points required, and this after four hours of going through every kick, strike, kata and weapon drill to the satisfaction of the sensei. And that was for purple! After witnessing the two-day test for black, I was ready to go into the Federal Witness Protection program if the sensei even hinted at moving me up a level.

Anyhow, when Al gets his radio show rolling, I hope all of you will join me in calling in and asking when he’s going to respond.

Al, you freaky little coward, I’m waiting….

UPDATE – it occurs to me… does this mean I can beat down anyone who tries to shout me down at a speaking engagement? I am so stoked! Forget the suit, it’s time to break out the airbrushed Dragon jacket with the metal studs at the elbows.

I have little respect for what these days passes for public homosexual intellectuals. Andrew Sullivan is hopeless on anything that involves his personal preferences – on such matters, he’s the personification of the feminist stereotype of the man who thinks with his genitalia. Sullivan, like many other homosexual advocates, furiously denied that homosexual marriage advocacy would lead to efforts to legalize polygamy, mocking the notion as “intellectually laughable” and saying: “The slope, in fact, is not slippery at all. It isn’t even a slope.” So, naturally, it was only a matter of months before events, predictably, proved him to be completely and utterly wrong. If anyone has become intellectually laughable, it’s Sullivan, who once argued that because something was a matter life and death for him, it was not a conflict of interest.

Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the Lawrence case, arguing that overturning the Texas law would open the door to challenges of Utah’s polygamy ban. Shurtleff said he believes Barnard’s case is headed for the Supreme Court, and predicted the justices would uphold the polygamy ban. “We have a long line of cases saying that the institute of marriage is the bedrock of society. Therefore, states have a compelling interest in regulating and controlling marriage,” he said.

But at least one legal expert said Lawrence’s logic leads to the legalization of polygamy, since the high court held that morality is not a strong enough justification for the state to ban a practice deemed unpopular or immoral by the majority. “It’s not a case people can sniff at,” said Richard G. Wilkins, a law professor at Brigham Young University. “If you can’t require monogamy, how in the world can you deny the claims of the polygamists, particularly when it’s buttressed by the claim of religion?”

The case for polygamy, being rooted in Judaic, Islamic, and Mormon religious traditions, is far stronger than the feeble case for homosexual marriage. It is even arguably within the Biblical Christian tradition as well, even if it does not represent the ideal. The Supreme Court could still deny it, of course, given that they are governed by nothing more than the social whims of six or seven individuals, but the justices can’t deny it based on their recent “reasoning”.

This, social conservatives, is only the latest proof of why it is foolish to rely on the state. It is a two-edged sword that will always end up turning on you in the end.

75,000 visits in the first three months, with an average of around 1,000 a day. That’s a nice round little milestone. Thank you all for continuing to swing by, and I hope you’ll continue to do so. It will be interesting to see where things are one year from now. I think the comments have worked out surprisingly well, although I urge everyone to keep it civil even when the topic is a sensitive one. Some of you -NATE- were dangling over the edge there on the Libertarian Party abortion issue – I’m claiming the monopoly on verbal abuse on this blog, thank you very much, as I have no desire to turn it into a mutually-reinforcing group-think circle.

Anyhow, thanks again.

Vroom passes on a note: “People who claim that Christ can free us from sin, including greed, shouldn’t advocate for themselves and for their spiritual brothers a system that, as y’all are so fond of saying, “actually requires human greed to function”. Believe in capitalism if you want, just quit calling yourself a Christian.”

This doesn’t require much in the way of reply. Capitalism doesn’t require greed to function. All it requires is that people place varying degrees of value on material goods and the freedom to exchange them as they see fit. The reason that socialism is always doomed to failure is that it posits the existence of absolute objective value as a basis for justifying its labor theory of value, which is required to justify a need to rectify distributive inquities as well as the existence of a party to provide such rectifications.

The notion that capitalism requires greed to function is not only trite, it demonstrates a high level of ignorance with regards to capitalism, human nature and history. The fact that some individuals may have latched onto a shallow Hollywood sound bite in a superficial defense of capitalism is irrelevant. Capitalism is not Wall Street, regardless of whether you are talking about the movie or the industry. Modern financial state imperialism can hardly be called capitalism, as it egregiously violates the freedom of exchange concept in a myriad of ways. Try buying a car with gold coins – or cash, for that matter – if you doubt me.

DD writes: I feel so defeated as an American. I also feel defeated as a human. I feel like I can see where this world is going but I cannot find it in myself to take the actions to attempt to prevent the un-preventable, albeit a true man of courage and conviction would stand up and confront evil forces regardless if he feels he will lose. How do you balance a love of country with the truth of God’s word, especially when it seems abundantly clear that the actions of ones country runs contrary to the nature of the Gospel. I am not a religious person at this point in my life. I am more confused about my faith than I am about what’s happening to our country. The more I try to learn, the more I realize that I’m clueless. On top of that, I live a debaucherous life of drinking, sex and I just stopped doing drugs.

Is there any truth left down here. What exactly are we supposed to fight for in this day and age? I wish I knew. I want something to fight for. I want to step onto the battlefield. Unfortunately for me, I see that a war is going on, against God as well as the fundamental principles of our republic, but I don’t know where to start.

You cannot be defeated by an external enemy. Whatever defeat you feel is a battle that you have lost with yourself. Before you can step onto the battlefield, you have to experience victory in yourself, and you already know why you do not have that. The ancient Greeks rightly believed in developing strength of body, mind and soul, and as most Americans are incredibly weak in all three, it should be no surprise that so many of us are prone to despair. The early Christians were not afraid to confront the might of Imperial Rome; we cringe in fear before a suspect look in the eyes of a neighbor and the threats of jumped-up accountants threatening to take worthless digital bits away from us. Where to start? Start with yourself.

What are we supposed to fight for now? The same thing that those before us and after us will fight for: the truth. No one ever said the way was easy, quite the contrary, in fact. But we have hope. George Washington almost never won a battle as an American general, but he won the war because he stubbornly and faithfully persevered. There is no secret, only a simple answer. When you get knocked down, get up again. Once you have decided to get back up again no matter how often you are knocked down, you have already won; you cannot be defeated. Some do it with saintly grace, others with snarling defiance. Hold to the truth regardless.

Your country is not your government. You can love the one and despise the other. Nor do you need to approve of something to love it, indeed, when we love something it is often the very flaws that make it unique that we come to love the most. I love the friendly, unpretentious savagery of my countrymen, the singular combination of unsophisticated good nature and lethal barbarism that makes them both amusing companions and fearsome enemies. It is this very trait that gives me hope that one day America will wake up, and turn with a vengeance on those who have tried, like Lilliputians with Gulliver, to bind her down that she might be destroyed.

But even if this is not the case and America succumbs to the eroding forces of evil, I will feel more encouraged with every satanic step towards global tyranny, implanted GPS tracking and total financial monitoring. Because we already know from the Revelation that it must get worse before it will get better, and even if our petty efforts are in vain, those of the one we serve and worship will not be. We may be the Spartans of our day, but the glory of our cause will long outlast Thermopylae.

From USA Today: Clark also has provoked two rounds of controversy on abortion. Earlier this month, he told The Union Leader of Manchester there should be no late-term limits on abortion. But on Thursday, he said he agrees with Supreme Court decisions to legalize abortion in the first six months of pregnancy and let states set some restrictions.

Gee, where have we heard this before? Saying two different things on two different occasions? Unlike Newsweek, USA Today doesn’t blame this on Clark’s tone and manner, but on his inexperience as a candidate. Sure, whatever. The truth is that this again reveals what Clark’s former boss, General Shelton, pointed out. Namely, Clark’s character issues.

JB writes: I’ll promise you that the CP and LP (as it is now) will never merge! We can work together on some things, but LP platform is pro-abortion among other things that would prohibit this.

The Libertarian party is not actually pro-abortion, although this is a common misconception. It is officially agnostic on the issue, which for all intents and purposes, is the functional equivalent of the Republican party. Saying that government should be kept out of the question is not tantamount to saying that abortion is a right, and leaving the matter up to the states is far preferable to allowing the Federal government to be involved. The Libertarian Party’s only specific platform position on the matter is that no government funding of any abortions should be permitted, which is actual superior to the de facto Republican position that allows for the funding of abortions in this country and abroad. I do not believe that the Republican Party is any more serious about ending abortion than they are about reducing the size of government, so abortion is no reason to stay away from the Libertarians if your principles otherwise lead you to support them.

Not to mention the fact that the Pro-Life movement is much larger than the current Libertarian Party, which is already 40 percent pro-life.

I am a pro-life extremist myself, but this is the actual Libertarian Party position: Recognizing that abortion is a very sensitive issue and that people, including libertarians, can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe the government should be kept out of the question. We condemn state-funded and state-mandated abortions. It is particularly harsh to force someone who believes that abortion is murder to pay for another’s abortion. It is the right and obligation of the pregnant woman, not the state, to decide the desirability or appropriateness of prenatal testing, Caesarean births, fetal surgery, voluntary surrogacy arrangements, and/or home births.