Here It Is...

...the link I promised in the post immediately below. Not that all y'all couldn't find it yourselves. Just trying to be helpful! As I noted below, the Q&A session is priceless.

Gen. Michael V. Hayden, Principal Dpty. Dir. of Nat'l Intelligence
General Michael V. Hayden, Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence, talks about what the intelligence community and the NSA are doing to protect the country.1/23/2006: WASHINGTON, DC: 1 hr.

Great Briefing

Another reason I love C-SPAN: I just finished watching General Michael Hayden (Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence) give a briefing on NSA’s “domestic spying” on C-SPAN this morning. Gen. Hayden used to be the Director of NSA before assuming his current duties; his talk on NSA's intelligence gathering activities was about as straight-forward as can be expected, given that he was discussing a highly-classified program. There should be a video of his speech and the subsequent Q&A session up on C-SPAN’s web site later today. I’ll post the link if and when I see it.

One highlight of the Q&A session was a moonbat who pointedly asked Gen. Hayden if “the Bush Administration was /is spying on domestic opponents of the Bush Administration.” When I say “pointedly,” I mean this guy was clearly exercised. He identified himself as a member of “World Can’t Wait,” a virulently anti-Bush organization*. This individual was obviously deep in the throes of Bush Derangement Syndrome, bordering on paranoia. Something to ponder: Does this guy have a legitimate fear, or is he and/or his organization doing things that MERIT monitoring by the government? Just wondering, ya know. God, but we do seem to have more frickin’ nut cases than we really need.

* Any organization who’s supporters include individuals such as Susan Sarandon, Harry Belafonte, Sean Penn, Cindy Sheehan, Ward Churchill, Mumia Abu-Jamal and organizations such as Code Pink, the After Downing Street Coalition, and the Impeach Bush Coalition has to be seriously suspect. If I were the NSA, I’d monitor them. And shame on the Rev. Al Sharpton, Bobby Rush (US Representative, Chicago), and Maxine Waters (US Representative, D-CA) for even being associated with this rabid organization. Shame.

Just Another Manic Monday...

...not really; I just like the song and the title popped right into my head as an appropriate post title.

Via Lex: What's your perfect major? A fun quiz, and in my case, almost accurate.

You scored as Journalism. You are an aspiring journalist, and you should major in journalism! Like me, you are passionate about writing and expressing yourself, and you want the world to understand your beliefs through writing. English 83% Journalism 83% Theater 75% Mathematics 67% Philosophy 67% Psychology 58% Linguistics 58% Sociology 58% Anthropology 50% Chemistry 42% Engineering 42% Art 33% Dance 33% Biology 33% What is your Perfect Major? (PLEASE RATE ME!!<3) created with QuizFarm.com

So anyway. Math? You've got to be kidding! Past, present and future: I hate math. I failed second year high school algebra, the only course I ever failed in my entire life. Paid the price for it, too. My Old Man was the martinet's Martinet. My pennance: Summer school and being placed "on restriction" all summer. Not a single date for three months, and this while my 16 year old hormones were raging. Not that there was much chance for a geeky 16-year old to relieve those pressures back in the day. We're speaking 1961 here, and things were different then. Trust me.

I made up for that teen-age deprivation later in life. (Note to self: this subject deserves an extended post. There was a finite "window" of time in which the much-discussed sexual revolution took place. I speak of that brief (relatively speaking) "post-Pill, Pre-AIDS" era. It didn't last long. And I was oh-so-there.)

Lileks looks at Iran in the latest Screedblog. Excerpt:

The American left believed in Iraq’s WMDs and terrorist links in the 90s because it gave them much-needed hawk cred; it was Viagra for their dovish side. Also, it was true. But they've spent the last two electoral cycles preaching defeat, insisting that the Administration says something’s a threat, it’s a lie, a diversion tactic, an election ploy, a floorwax AND a dessert topping. Oh, they’ll suggest that Iran should have been the main target in the first place, but if the US had invaded Persia in 03, we’d be looking at huge casualties, an occupation that continued to this day (quaqmire!) and evidence that the Iranians were still years away from a bomb. Years! And we invaded on that slender pretext? Impeach!

More on Iran: The BBC reports Israel "will not accept an Iranian nuclear capability." Biased BBC doesn't like the Beeb's tone and suggests we look to Fox News for a "fair and balanced" approach. Agreed. I read the BBC's web site and occasionally watch the Beeb's half-hour newscast tailored for Americans. They ARE biased.

In case you missed it, The Grey Lady had an article yesterday titled "Why Not a Strike on Iran?" Interesting that the leading anti-Iraq war print outlet publishes an analytical article about a pre-emptive Iranian strike. Are they daring Dubya to act? Captain Ed explores the possible motives behind the NYT's sudden interest in pre-emption. Sample:

Beyond the Times' inability to give an honest rendition of history is an interesting political question: why has the newspaper become so interested in covering pre-emption when the matter has not yet even come before the UN Security Council? After Hillary's speech at Princeton earlier this week, it seems a little more than coincidence that the Paper of Record suddenly finds pre-emption a valid diplomatic tactic for debate, especially given its vehement opposition to the doctrine entirely when it came to Iraq.

You got it, Cap'n!

It's gonna be warmer today (55 and sunny) than it was yesterday (46 and sunny), but it's jes a lil bit too chilly to take the top down! Nonetheless, I'm cruise on over to Clovis later this morning to get a fresh supply of Mobil 1 for the Green Hornet (plus a wash!) and see what's goin' on in The Big(ger) City.

More later. In the meantime, there's coffee to finish! (and Babs, you can come on down anytime, Hon!)

Checkin' In

Ameriprise Update: I checked site meter this evening around 9:30. Eight of the last 20 hits were looking for “Ameriprise guitarist” in one form or another. I had one hit from British Columbia, one from Connecticut, two from Missouri, two from New York, and one from an unspecified US location. I also had one person come looking for “NHL on NBC theme music.” Nice to get a little variety.

Just my opinion: the NFL is boring. I watch the playoffs in just about any and every sport, even if I’m not a fan. And that’s true for the NFL. I watch football every Saturday during the season; never on Sunday. But, anyway…here’s my point. Today’s NFL games were remarkable only for the fact Pittsburgh won. I didn’t have a dog in that fight, but since I don’t particularly care for Colorado (in general, and the Avs in particular), the Broncos’ loss made me smile a bit. The Seahawks killed Carolina; it wasn’t even close. I predict the Super Bowl will be just as lopsided – Seattle by 10. Just sayin’.

If you were wondering: the beans are excellent. I ate two large bowls today, and there's enough left for two more bowls, maybe three, tomorrow.

Never Mind

Still fooling around. The template changes seem to appear now when I click on November's archives. I swear they didn't work, before. Strange. Very strange.

Strange Behavior

I was playing around with my Blogger Template, a dangerous thing to do if you don't know HTML. Or if you don't know what you're doing, in general. I added a "Greatest Hits" section to the sidebar and changed "Links" to "Blogs I Read." Didja notice?

Pretty easy stuff, right? Well, sorta. In the "unexplained occurances" division, I noticed the "Greatest Hits" section appears when I click on the January and December archive links, but NOT when I click on the November archive link. And "Blogs I Read" is still "Links" in the November archives. I'm not gonna fool around with the template any more. The changes I made appear on the current page and in two of three archives. Close enough, I suppose.

Still, it makes me wonder. How can HTML edits only appear in two of three archives? This doesn't compute, logically speaking. I've also thought that since November is the first month of my blog there are no previous archives to reference. Weak, I know. But it's the only thing I can think of. But then again, I'm NOT a coder. Oh, far, far from it!

If either of my readers have any ideas, I'm ALL ears. I want things to work right. I'm also something of a perfectionist, a curse I've had to endure all my life. It is what it is, however.

Up Early, For a Change

Went to bed early, thus I’m up early this morning. Way early…like 0500 early. Spent the first 45 minutes of the day getting a batch of Navy Bean soup started. El Casa Móvil de Pennington already smells pretty good! Here’s the recipe I use, from the Better Homes and Gardens New Cook Book. I couldn’t find a date, but the intro talks about “…you, the cook of the ‘90s.” It’s sorta old.

Ham and Bean Soup

1 cup dry navy beans
4 cups water
1 to 1 ½ pounds smoked pork hocks or one 1 to 1 ½ meaty ham bone
1 ½ cups chopped celery
1 cup chopped onions
¾ teaspoon dried thyme, crushed
½ teaspoon salt
¾ teaspoon pepper
1 bay leaf

Soak beans overnight in a covered pan. (Alternatively, you can combine the dry beans and water in a sauce pan, bring to a boil, reduce heat and simmer for two minutes. Remove from heat. Cover and let stand for an hour.)
Drain and rinse beans. In the same pan, combine beans, 4 cups fresh water, pork, celery, onions, thyme, salt, pepper, and bay leaf. Bring to boiling, reduce heat. Cover and simmer for about one hour or until beans are tender. Remove meat. When cool enough to handle, cut meat from bones and coarsely chop. Discard bone and bay leaf. Slightly mash beans in sauce pan. Return meat to sauce pan. Heat through. Makes four main dish servings.

OK…that’s the basic recipe. I begin with five cups of water and simmer the beans for at least four hours, sometimes longer, stirring occasionally to ensure the beans don’t stick. I also chop two or three habanero peppers (depending on size) extremely fine and add them to the mix. If my grocery store is out of habaneros, as it was yesterday, I add about a tablespoon of crushed red pepper. I also use three bay leaves, rather than one. I leave the meat on the ham hocks and don’t mash the beans.

You simply can’t beat Navy Bean soup on a chilly winter’s day. My favorite soup!

The Better Homes and Garden cookbook is the only cookbook I retained from my previous life when I moved into the RV. I kept that particular cookbook because it’s a very good general purpose reference book. One of the things I regret, in retrospect, is getting rid of all the other cookbooks I had. I particularly miss the Time-Life (don’t laugh!!) French cookbooks, of which I had at least three. Lotsa great recipes in those books, and they were used a lot back in the day.

Missed an opportunity to flog the blog on C-SPAN this morning. I had Washington Journal on as I was chopping onions and celery, and the initial discussion topic was blogs. The call-in question was “do you read or contribute to blogs?” C-SPAN apparently attracts a lot of moonbats, Democratic Underground and dKos were frequently cited as the blogs most read. When I say I missed an opportunity, I mean the moderator kept saying the Republican line was completely open. I have my priorities, though. Soup over calling in to Washington Journal. Kinda surprises me the Republican lines were open…I always thought Republicans were pretty civic minded and early risers.

C-SPAN doesn’t get a lot of respect, it seems. I recall reading an editorial during the Alito hearings that said something to the effect that since the major news networks have cut-off times for live coverage (usually around 5:00 p.m.), “only about 7 shut-ins watching C-SPAN actually saw…” the event or remark the editorial was commenting on. Well, I‘m one of those “shut-ins.” I watch C-SPAN a lot. And it seems to me I’m not alone, either. I could never get through to Washington Journal on those rare occasions I’ve felt motivated enough to call in. Seven shut-ins, my a$$.

I’m watching Bruce Laingen, the former US Charge d’Affaires in Iran, on C-SPAN right now (somewhere around 0700, as I wrote). Mr. Laingen was one of the captives that were held for 444 days during the seizure of the US embassy in Teheran during the Carter administration. He began speaking about four minutes ago, but his thinking seems to be classic State Department Lifer, which is to say Liberal-Left. He began the conversation by saying we need to have a “dialog” with the current Iranian administration and “get closer” to them. Mr. Laingen says: “I’m a diplomat, I was a diplomat. My prejudice is towards talking. We NEED to talk. I’m sorry, but that’s the way I feel.” (quote paraphrased, check the transcript on C-SPAN’s website later. You can bet I’m close enough!) Anyway: Bullhockey. We need to kill the bastards, not talk to them. (Sorry, I’m feeling a little belligerent this morning.)

If you don’t remember, Thursday was the 25th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s inauguration. Here’s the text of Reagan’s first inaugural address. I remember the event pretty well. I was a relatively new Republican at that time, and I voted for Reagan. His inauguration was a time of renewed hope for America. We had NO idea just how profound a change was about to take place in America, and the rest of the world, for that matter. January 20, 1980 was the beginning of the end of the Cold War, and marked the beginning of one of the most prosperous times, economically speaking, this country has ever enjoyed. Quite a change from Mr. Reagan’s predecessor.

The 20th of January was also the 25th anniversary of the release of the US hostages in Iran. Here’s the BBC on the anniversary of the hostage crisis. Some believe Iranian president Ahmadinejad was a key player in the hostage crisis. And some don’t.

Time to stir the beans!

Hockey Day in Portales

The title is a play on words concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Company’s (CBC) “Hockey Night in Canada.” And it is Hockey Night in Canada, as it has been every Saturday night throughout the Great White North since, well, since forever! I sure do miss Channel Nine out of Windsor, one of the BEST things about my ten-year sojourn in Detroit. But I digress.

Today was a real treat; I got to watch the beloved Red Wings beat arch-rival Colorado, in Denver, 4-3. It wasn’t as close as it sounds, however. Detroit beat the PANTS off the Avalanche in every single category that’s measured in hockey: final score, shots, scoring opportunities, face-offs, you name it. But it was a good game, well-played. David Aebischer, the Avs goalie, is the sole reason the score wasn't 7-3 or 9-3. If a lesser goalie had been in the Avs net, the score would have been much higher. There’s not a team in the NHL that can beat Detroit when The Great Red Wings show up. And that means consistency has been a bit of a problem this year. But not today.

Iran update: The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is crazy like a fox, or so says Victor Davis Hanson in The not-so-mad mind of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Mr. Hanson has a point (or three. or four.). Excerpt:

But for now, barring divine intervention, Ahmadinejad's task poses two small hurdles: getting the bomb and preparing the world for Israel's demise.

Oddly, the first obstacle may be easier. An impoverished Pakistan and North Korea pulled it off. China and Russia will sell Tehran anything it cannot get from rogue regimes. Ultimately, Moscow and Beijing will probably veto any punitive action by the United Nations.

Impotent European diplomats will always defer to such an important global figure, "ruling out" force to stop the Iranian nuclear industry as they offer money and trade deals if Tehran will just act sanely.

The United States has a growing anti-war movement, and 180,000 of its troops are busy birthing democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq. And the unpredictable President Bush has less than three years in office anyway.

As it’s said: read the whole thing.

In A Date With Destiny…, a guest posting at Ace of Spades HQ, WunderKraut is getting all depressed at the options, or lack of same, we have in dealing with Iran. He catalogs what he sees as “all available” options. Most aren’t good (as I’ve mentioned before), but he does have a novel option that many of us have left unsaid, but have certainly thought about: Threaten to turn Iran into a sea of glass. Also in the “unsaid” department regarding this particular option, my thoughts/daydreams have revolved around that ol’ Nike advertising slogan: Just do it. But then again, I’m just a little to the right of Genghis Khan, when you come right down to it.

Web 2.0

Many of you have encountered the term "Web 2.0" whilst cruising the 'net. Some of you understand what it means. I thought I knew what the term meant; it was only this morning I discovered I had absolutely no conception of the true meaning of this buzzword. Enlightenment follows!

In “What Is Web 2.0, Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software” Tim O’Reilly discusses and explains the significance of the next generation of web applications. Don’t let the sub-title put you off. Although O’Reilly is the geek’s geek, he writes in a way that makes even the most esoteric information technology concepts accessible to the layman. Here’s an excerpt from this five-page article:

But as with many areas of Web 2.0, where the "2.0-ness" is not something new, but rather a fuller realization of the true potential of the web platform, this phrase gives us a key insight into how to design applications and services for the new platform.

To date, iTunes is the best exemplar of this principle. This application seamlessly reaches from the handheld device to a massive web back-end, with the PC acting as a local cache and control station. There have been many previous attempts to bring web content to portable devices, but the iPod/iTunes combination is one of the first such applications designed from the ground up to span multiple devices. TiVo is another good example.

iTunes and TiVo also demonstrate many of the other core principles of Web 2.0. They are not web applications per se, but they leverage the power of the web platform, making it a seamless, almost invisible part of their infrastructure. Data management is most clearly the heart of their offering. They are services, not packaged applications (although in the case of iTunes, it can be used as a packaged application, managing only the user's local data.) What's more, both TiVo and iTunes show some budding use of collective intelligence, although in each case, their experiments are at war with the IP lobby's.

…

This is one of the areas of Web 2.0 where we expect to see some of the greatest change, as more and more devices are connected to the new platform. What applications become possible when our phones and our cars are not consuming data but reporting it? Real time traffic monitoring, flash mobs, and citizen journalism are only a few of the early warning signs of the capabilities of the new platform. (emphasis mine)

You’ll have a pretty good understanding about why Google is well on its way to owning the world after reading this essay. But don’t sell your Microsoft stock just yet. MS has some powerful minds working on Web 2.0, as well.

Boy, do we ever live in interesting times!

Haircuts, Past and Present

I forgot to tell you a couple of things about my barber shop experience yesterday, chief among which is the price. Inflation being what it is, the price of a haircut in Portales went up from nine dollars to ten. Still cheap, after all. But I pay about half again as much as I used to, when I patronized the sheep-shearers at the Cannon AFB Base Exchange. The upside is I get a much more personal experience and better service, to boot. The average time-in-the-chair at the BX was about seven minutes, on the outside; I spent at least 45 minutes in the chair yesterday. Yesterday my ten dollars (plus tip, of course) bought me a beard trim, too. The downside is Jay doesn't quite have the physical attributes of my former barberess, who occasionally treated me to inadvertent and unintended, in a lascivious way, brushes with her soft bits. Those were nice.

Which leads me to tell you about the best haircut I ever got in my life, a birthday gift from a very eccentric friend of mine from days gone by, Rick Hovarter. Before I tell you about the haircut, let me digress and give you a flavor for what Rick was like.

I first met Rick in Klamath Falls, Oregon. We were both stationed at Kingsley Field, he a meteorological equipment technician, me a radar guy. I’m not quite sure how we first met, but I’ll never forget the first time I walked into his room in the dorm. Rick was a bit older than the average young enlisted troop, being in his mid-twenties. Old, for a two-striper. Rick was also, to put it mildly, a bit strange. He had a fascination for antique Americana, and by that I mean his prized possessions were, just to name three, a fully-functional Underwood typewriter, circa 1925; a beautifully finished and immaculately lacquered propeller from an old Jenny biplane; and an original and pristine 1941 Mercury two-door sedan that had been in his family since it was new. The prop and the typewriter were prominently displayed in his dorm room. I used to love riding around in that old Merc, too. Rick had an antique 30-caliber revolver in the glove box of the Mercury and had the disconcerting habit (to me) of occasionally pulling off to the side of the road while we were riding around the Oregon countryside to pop off a few rounds at gophers and other assorted varmints. Out the window of the Merc. Most of the time he’d fire out of the driver’s window, other times he’d lean across the seat and fire out of the passenger window. Drove me nuts, that did.

Anyway. We became fast friends. As is the case in military life, I left Kingsley Field and was reassigned to Yokota AB, Japan. A few months after I arrived at Yokota I walked into the dining hall for lunch and who did I see in the line ahead of me? Rick. A great and good surprise, and we took up where we left off.

Fast forward a couple of months, to my birthday. I had the day off and was lying in my bed in the dorm early in the morning, wondering what I was gonna do, when someone knocked on my door. I got up, answered the door, and let Rick into the room. Rick told me to get dressed and come with him; he was going to give me my birthday present.

We went to breakfast first, brunch, actually (Rick bought), then got into Rick’s old Toyopet Cedric and drove off-base into The Ville (Fussa City, right outside Yokota’s main gate.). Rick parked the car, we got out, and he said “follow me.” We then walked down an alley and into a barber shop. There waiting for us was an old man, the barber, and two young Japanese maidens, all three smiling broadly. The old man waved me into one of the barber chairs, and I dutifully sat. The old man reclined the barber chair and I stretched out, fully supine. One of the girls then proceeded to take off my shoes and socks, while the other fetched a large handful of steaming towels from a container. She artfully wrapped my entire head in those towels, leaving a small space for me to breathe through. All the while this is going on, the other girl is washing my feet. After a few minutes, the second girl unwraps my face and the barber proceeds to shave me. The first girl is still working on my feet, giving me a pedicure and ending up with a prolonged and wonderful foot massage. After the barber finished shaving me I was escorted to a wash stand where the first girl washed and towel-dried my hair. Then it was back to the barber chair for the actual haircut while the two girls gave me a manicure. The whole experience ended with both girls massaging my entire upper body. I walked out of that place feeling like a million bucks, and I’ve never had a “haircut” like that, ever again. A truly unique experience, and classic Hovarter.

I lost touch with Rick after leaving Yokota and have often wondered what became of him. We certainly had some wild times, equal to or exceeding the haircut experience. I miss the boy!

Friday's Child Is Loving And Giving

Monday's child is fair of face,
Tuesday's child is full of grace,
Wednesday's child is full of woe,
Thursday's child has far to go.
Friday's child is loving and giving,
Saturday's child works hard for a living,
But the child born on the Sabbath Day,

Is fair and wise and good and gay.

I’m supposed to be “fair of face,” according to Mother Goose. Wha’ happened? I must be the exception that proves the rule… Don’t know on which day of the week you were born? Go here.

So. I was up until 0400 before the ol’ eyes got too heavy to read another line. I slept the sleep of the just even though the jury is decidedly out on my “justness.”

What an Instalanche does to site traffic: I was reading Glenn Reynolds early this morning. As you probably know, Glenn is one of, if not the, leading lights of the blogosphere. Glenn had numerous links to folks who are blogging about a UCLA Alumni group looking into radical-left proselytizing by UCLA professors, a subject of interest to me (see the SC&A links, below). One such article is “It's About Time: UCLA Professor Radicalism Gets a Closer Look,” by Gina Cobb. Good article; Gina has an interesting and well-written blog. The illustration above shows the impact a simple one-line mention in Instapundit has on traffic to a blog. Here’s the mention, in its entirety:

UPDATE: UCLA Alumna Gina Cobb says it's worse than I think.

Amazing, isn’t it? I checked out another blog’s site meter after reading a Glenn-linked article on terrorism. This guy had an average of 1,500 hits a day, quite respectable in his own right, and his Instalanche took traffic over 40,000 hits on that day. Never underestimate the power of exposure!

Ameriprise update: eight hits in the last 24 hours, from Arkansas, Nebraska, Mississippi, New Jersey, Texas, Virginia, and two from Washington (state).
Just for the record: the song in the commercial is “Gimmee Some Lovin’” The guitarists are Spencer Davis and Steve Winwood. (Yes, THAT Steve Winwood.) The album was released in 1967 and was titled “Spencer Davis Group, Featuring Stevie Winwood.” The Spencer Davis Group Official Web Site has a complete recording of “Keep On Runnin’” as the site’s theme music. I hadn’t heard that particular track in a long, long time, and it sounded GOOD! And by the way, you don’t have to be “of a certain age” to like this song, it rocks!

Late Night Reading

My noctural ways persist. I've spent the better part of the evening as I usually do, cruising my favorite blogs. I did take an hour off to watch The Simpsons and South Park, though! One needs some relief from all the sturm und drang that's been the biggest part of my reading of late. South Park is great for this purpose.

So, anyway. The inimitable Dr. Sanity provided the links to the following three articles. Actually, she provided two, I got the third from following links in the Sigmund, Carl and Alfred post the good doctor directed me to. There are worse things you can do with your time other than reading what's linked below!

The Coming of the Bomb, at The Belmont Club. Since this is a relatively old post (this past Tuesday), the comments section is long and extensive. It is also, for the most part, enlightened and informative. Wretchard runs a tight ship, in more ways than one. Some heavy hitters weigh in in the comments section; don't miss it. You can always scroll through and cherry-pick. Very provocative, and, in my eyes, required reading.

And here’s two interesting nuggets, if only for a change of pace!

Sigmund, Carl and Alfred encounter “reality” on a college campus.

Also by way of SC&A is commentary (What I Told Pennsylvania's Academic Freedom Hearings) by David Horowitz on another of my hot-button issues, academic indoctrination. Horowitz’s article is a relatively long read, but it is damning testimony about the level of left-wing indoctrination that passes for “education” in academia today. Horowitz is the leading proponent of a movement to guarantee students’ rights against academic indoctrination. He describes the movement thusly: “The Academic Bill of Rights is furthermore an attempt to express and codify as student rights what are already recognized as faculty responsibilities in regard to academic freedom.” Horowitz isn't about silencing the left side of the house, he's all about equal time.

Here’s a sample from the article:

Here is a comment taken from an interview we conducted with a Temple student: “The Chairman of the History Department, who is my adviser, told me during advising that ‘If Bush gets re-elected we will have a fascist country.’ He [told me] he will be scared for his survival and will consider possibly moving to Canada. That’s scary coming from a history professor.”

It is also entirely unprofessional. This student was in his adviser’s office for a “graduation review” – that is, for advice on the courses he needed to complete his major and graduate. This particular student also observed in the interview: “All the professors had Kerry [election] signs on their [office] doors…. Every single door to the offices, all the professors had a Kerry sign….We also have ‘God Is Not A Republican’ signs all over campus.”

I wonder what will be the outcome of the Pennsylvania hearings? There is positive movement in this area: Colorado, Ohio and Tennessee have all changed their academic policies as a result of academic freedom efforts spearheaded by Mr. Horowitz. And that is good news, indeed.

Out and About Today

Finally got that haircut. I'm pretty sure I've written about my local barber shop before, so stop me if you've heard this. The place I go is a real, down-home, traditional barber shop, complete with a great selection of men's magazines, like Field and Stream, Popular Science, and so on. You need the magazines, too, because you're gonna be in the shop for a while. All the barbers take their sweet time cutting hair, and that's a positive comment. Case in point: I walked in to the shop at 1:30 and walked out at 2:45. I was first in line. There's lots of banter going on all the time, and the guy that cuts my hair, Jay, likes to talk politics with me. We have a shared political point of view.

Today Jay asked: "Well, ya think we're gonna get into it with Eye-Ran?" And we were off to the races. General consensus in the shop: the sooner the better. With the exception of the university, Portales is pretty much Red-State. The U is a big exception, however. No one from ENMU in the barber shop today...

I also met a retired AF fighter pilot in the shop today. We discovered we had quite a few duty stations in common, most which were/are in Asia. We swapped a couple of war stories and he made me think of an incident that may make the cut for the next installment of "Weird Scenes Inside the Gold Mine." That remains to be seen, however.

Wrapped up the day with a cruise out to the base to do my monthly "big shopping" run to the commissary. My timing was perfect...four F-16s were taking off upon my arrival at the base, and there's not a lot in life that's more thrilling to watch than high-performance fighters taking off. My entry point into the base is just beyond the end of the runway; you take the base perimeter road from the gate around the end of the runway to the main part of the base. Thus: those jets took off right over my head. And it was a nice day; my top was down. O, the noise! I love jet noise!

All in all, not a bad day...

Who Are Your Heroes? (updated)

In a comment to my "Reunion" post the other day, someone said (in so many words) her heroes are Ronald Reagan and Winston Churchill. She and I have a mutual admiration for those two great men. I have more than a few heroes, actually.

It's not fashionable these days to have heroes. I've asked this question to a few people in the recent past and have received mostly blank looks in reply. I don't think it's passé at all to have heroes; I've always had them, from early childhood down to this day. Perhaps we should just refer to our heroes as "role models;" that may be more socially acceptable.

I've laughingly referred to the "A" rank and the "B" rank of my heroes, and that's my way of discerning between those people I try to emulate and those I have a great deal of respect for. In actuality, the people in the "B' rank have the same sort of traits as those in the "A" rank, they're just not as well known, or the jury is still out, historically speaking. And what are these traits? Strength of character, moral vlaues, accomplishment, intellect, persistance, and, to no small extent, an extraordinary command of the language. Having led a "good" and productive life is also important, to me.

So. Here's my "A" rank:

Ronald Reagan
Winston Churchill
Harry Truman
Sir Thomas More
William F. Buckley
Margaret Thatcher

And the "B" rank:

Steve Yzerman
Kenny Roberts
George W. Bush
Ivan A. Pennington
Samuel E. Pennington
The First Mrs. Pennington
The Second Mrs. Pennington

"C" Rank

Joni Mitchell
Van Morrison
Lyle Lovett

Lord knows there are many, many people in the world that could qualify for my list(s). The individuals above are just a few.

Update, 1/19/2006, 5:20 p.m. Added Maggie to the "A" list (I can't believe I left her off in the first place!) and the two Mrs. Penningtons to the "B" list. The First Mrs. Pennington gets 90% of the credit for the way my two adult sons turned out and she's a hero to me for that alone, aside from her other sterling qualities. The Second Mrs. Pennington almost literally saved my life. I was headed down a bad road when I met this woman; she turned me around and is, in large part, responsible for who I became and who I am today. Besides that, anyone who put up with me for 23 years deserves to be a hero.

And the "C" rank? Three musicians who made, and continue to make, my world considerably brighter, besides being minor philosophers in their own right.

My Buddy Ed in Florida e-mailed to tell me his hero is George "Bud" Day, Colonel, USAF (Ret). And there could be no better choice. Colonel Day's bio is here, and here's an amazing tale about Col. Day from Air Force Magazine's "Valor" series.

More on Iran

In The Case for Invading Iran, Thomas Holsinger provides in-depth analyses of the justifications to invade, the military strategy and methodology of invasion, and the costs. Mr. Holsinger makes a convincing case, including the high probability Iran already possesses nuclear weapons. After reading this essay and the supporting collateral information, I believe invasion makes sense, as opposed to bombing known Iranian nuclear facilities.

There’s just one little problem.

It’s doubtful we, and by “we” I mean the collective body-politic, have the resolve to act quickly and forcefully given the political climate in this country right now. The President simply cannot order an invasion of Iran and let the chips fall where they may. Our system requires Congress to give its assent. It’s highly unlikely the President could make a case to initiate another war, what with the perception that Iraq is a “quagmire.” When it comes right down to it, how would the President make the case for war? Given their past failures, our intelligence services have serious credibility problems. Any intelligence, no matter how reliable the source, no matter how recent the information, no matter who or where it came from, would be viewed as suspect by “certain parties.” It’s almost to the point where one would need to drop (and I mean “give” or “place”) an actual, functioning Iranian nuclear weapon, gift wrapped, into the laps of Reid, Pelosi, et al, before they would believe it’s time to act. And even then, I suspect they’d not believe their eyes.

Aren’t the bellicose, threatening statements of the current Iranian regime enough? History seems to say “no.” Isn’t there adequate evidence at the moment to intervene, what with the IAEA going on the record as stating the Iranian’s intentions are “suspect?” It takes a lot to make a skeptic out of Mohammad El-Baradei, and he is skeptical about the true intentions of Iran’s nuclear program. Even the Germans and the French acknowledge the EU negotiations were a failure, and they are advocating referring Iran to the UN Security Council. As I wrote last evening about the efficacy of the Security Council: Yeah, that will work.

It’s apparent there is a clear and present danger. I hope we, collectively, recognize it as such and have the will to ACT.

More Gore, and Iran

First, more on Gore's speech from an op-ed in the Investors Business Daily: Al-Qaida On Line Two. Excerpt:

Saying the "very nature of our government" was threatened and that "the Constitution was in grave danger," the hyperbolic inventor of the Internet told an audience at Constitution Hall in the nation's capitol: "If the president has the inherent authority to eavesdrop, imprison citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then what can't he do?"
Now, before anybody goes looking in the White House basement (the place where Gore's boss had the FBI files of Americans stacked) for citizens on the rack or being loaded into an iron maiden, just which citizens have been plucked off the street on Bush's say-so and shipped off to East Bongastan or wherever to be tortured?

The whole piece is worthy.

I’ve been watching the Iranian mess get…uh…messier. It seems like there aren’t many, if any, good options vis-à-vis the Mad Mullahs in Teheran. From what I can tell, the U.S. position is to dump the whole mess in the lap of the UN Security Council and place our bets on sanctions. Yeah, that’ll work. In the meantime, there’s been a lot of ink spilled on this subject, and the views and suggested actions are many and varied. What follows are four different opinions on Iran. All of these op-ed pieces are worth reading in their entireties.

In The Iran Charade, Part II, Charles Krauthammer simply tells Britain, France and Germany “You wasted two years of our time with futile negotiations. Thanks a lot.” Actually, he does go a bit further, illustrating the hard place we find ourselves in:

Indeed, the threat here works in reverse. It is the Iranians who have the world over a barrel. On Jan. 15, Iran's economy minister warned that Iran would retaliate for any sanctions by cutting its exports to ``raise oil prices beyond levels the West expects.'' A full cutoff could bring $100 oil and plunge the world into economic crisis.

Which is one of the reasons the Europeans are so mortified by the very thought of a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. The problem is not just that they are spread out and hardened, making them difficult to find and to damage sufficiently to seriously set back Iran's program.

Simon Jenkins, a columnist for The Guardian (UK) predictably says we should just give up:

Iran is the regional superstate. If ever there were a realpolitik demanding to be "hugged close" it is this one, however distasteful its leader and his centrifuges. If you cannot stop a man buying a gun, the next best bet is to make him your friend, not your enemy.

Let's give Iran some of its own medicine, says Mark Steyn, in The Telegraph (UK).

The majority of Iran's population is younger than the revolution: whether or not they're as "pro-American" as is sometimes claimed, they have no memory of the Shah; all they've ever known is their ramshackle Islamic republic where the unemployment rate is currently 25 per cent. If war breaks out, those surplus young men will be in uniform and defending their homeland.

Why not tap into their excess energy right now? As the foreign terrorists have demonstrated in Iraq, you don't need a lot of local support to give the impression (at least to Tariq Ali and John Pilger) of a popular insurgency. Would it not be feasible to turn the tables and upgrade Iran's somewhat lethargic dissidents into something a little livelier? A Teheran preoccupied by internal suppression will find it harder to pull off its pretensions to regional superpower status.

Simon Heffer, in another Telegraph (UK) op-ed titled Doing Nothing in Iran is Not an Option, comes much closer to a realistic point of view:

Any military action against Iran, whatever it is and whoever takes it, is likely to be provocative to the wider Islamic community - but none is likely to be quite so internationally combustible as a unilateral decision by Israel to bomb - by conventional or possibly other means - Iran. This seems to leave only one feasible option, which is for a United Nations-endorsed series of air strikes on suspected nuclear installations in Iran, made after due and reasonable warning and only as a last resort. All that must be made clear - but it must also be made clear, by the united powers of the United Nations, that any insistence by Mr Ahmadinejad on pursuing his present policy will be met with such a response.

I would sincerely hope the combined intelligence agencies of the US, UK, France, Germany and Israel have been working diligently during the last two or three years on Mr. Steyn’s proposal. We’ve known for years that there’s a restive, rebellious element in Iranian society. The possibility of open rebellion is pretty small, however, given the opposition’s embryonic state, the (apparent) absolute control of the Iranian police state, and the mullah’s “govern by fear” approach.

The Iranians certainly aren’t afraid of sanctions, in the unlikely event the Security Council authorizes any sort of sanctions. When it comes to sanctions, the Iranians can hurt the West much more than the West can hurt them, simply by cutting off the oil tap, by whatever means.

We’re in between the largest of rocks and the hardest of hard places. A pre-emptive strike, our best option, is pretty scary. The good news is a lot of intelligent people have anticipated this situation, contingency plans have been drawn up, and our military is capable of implementing those plans. The bad news is no one can adequately predict the outcome, beyond delaying or, hopefully, eliminating Iran’s nuclear program. The bad news? There are always unintended consequences. But, as Mr. Heffer says, doing nothing is not an option.

Wednesday Wanderings

A week ago today I said I needed to go get a haircut. Still haven't done it, dunno why. While I'm never again gonna look like I do in the picture above (at work in SFO, circa April 2002), I can't seem to bring myself on down to the barber shop and get shorn. And, by way of explanation: I was in the military the entire time long hair was en vogue. When I retired in 1999 I decided to grow it out, just to see what it's like. I went nearly three years before I got back into the mainstream. It's interesting how one's appearance affects the perceptions of your personality in others. Oftentimes strangers would engage me in conversation during my long hair days, assuming I had the classic, liberal-left moonbat world-view. Boy, were they ever surprised when reality smacked them upside the head! This was especially true during the year I lived in Berkeley and hung out in coffee shops and such.

I am so nocturnal these days! I was up again last evening until the wee, wee small hours. A part of me feels guilty about this, the other part of me sez "Why?" Listening to the internal argument is interesting. To me, of course, certainly much less so for you. At some point in time I'll probably become a day-lady again. But in the meantime, it is what it is. ("Day-lady" is a term USAF shiftworkers used to describe those folks working normal hours, i.e., 0730-1630, by the way.)

Good comments to the post titled "A Conundrum," below. Thank you, BB and Sam. I also added my POV.

Just one link for you, at the moment. Lileks is good today, as he usually is. I particularly like the way he describes the interactions with his daughter. The man is a gifted writer and is always the first thing I read, every day.

More later, assuming I get motivated. BIG assumption, at this point!

Today's Ameriprise Update

Three hits, from Southfield, MI; Columbus, OH; and Smyrna, TN (a repeat?).

One reader asked how I know about these hits. It's all in Site Meter. Just click on the Site Meter icon at the bottom of the blog, then click on "By Details" under the "Recent Visitors" section in the left-hand side bar. From there you have to click on the individual visitor numbers to get the visit details. Sounds like a lot of work, but it isn't...it's just click-click-click, then hit the back button on your browser and go to the next entry. You can do it faster than you can read this. All y'all can check my Site Meter if you find this unbelieveable.

OK...am I being obsessive about this? I'd really like to know what the HELL this is all about!

Gored

Well. Aside from ruminating about forgiveness, I've spent the better part of my day communicating with my sons, generating and responding to about a dozen or so e-mails between the three of us. That, and reading AlGore's speech to the Fringe Left and reactions to same.

Here's the transcript of Gore's speech. Here's Byron York commenting on Gore's speech in National Review. Wondering why I categorized Mr. Gore's audience as "fringe left?" Well, since you asked, here's Mr. York on the subject:

Gore's speech was sponsored by the American Constitution Society, a group founded in 2001 to be the liberal counterpart to the Federalist Society, and by an organization called the Liberty Coalition, a little-known group created last year, in the words of its mission statement, "to help organize, support, and coordinate transpartisan public policy activities related to civil liberties and basic human rights." To show its "transpartisanship," the Coalition claims as partners the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Conservative Union; MoveOn.org and Americans for Tax Reform; Democrats.com and Townhall. It's not entirely clear just how broad the Coalition is — the American Conservative Union, for example, says it is not affiliated with the Coalition and had nothing to do with the Gore speech — but in any event, organizers tried hard to suggest that the day's program was not about Republicans or Democrats.

Whatever the case, the crowd at Constitution Hall was not at all transpartisan, or even bipartisan. From all appearances, it was a classic MoveOn-style gathering; indeed, MoveOn's political chief, Eli Pariser, had sent out e-mails inviting members to the event. The crowd gave Gore a standing ovation when he walked to the podium, and thunderous applause when he accused the president of breaking the law. There was more heartfelt applause — and one shout of "Right On!" — when Gore referred to "the shocking decay and degradation of our democracy." Whatever the crowd was, it wasn't transpartisan.

And since Mr. Gore spent the better part of his time criticizing the President and flat-out accusing him of consistently breaking the law, vis-a-vis the NSA "wiretapping" wannabe-scandal, I spent a LOT of time going from link to link chasing down the latest on that subject.

I'll save you a lot of time by simply pointing you to The Anchoress, who was engaged today in the same sort of activities as I, albeit earlier, and better. Amazing linkage! If you choose only ONE link to follow at her page, go to AJ Strata's comprehensive posting on the NSA's activities and the clue-impaired reporters at the New York Times. Mr. Strata does excellent work!

I'm left with the overwhelming impression that SO much has been written about this subject by SO many people with SO little direct knowledge. The subject at hand is one of the most highly-classified programs in the intelligence community today. Aside from the folks at the NYT who have the benefit of discussing this subject with their anonymous sources, who have undoubtedly revealed no small amount of classified information, the rest of the pundits know precious little from whence they speak.

To their credit, most of the President's supporters have issued the required caveats when discussing this issue; this is not so true with the President's detractors. While the President's more moderate opponents have hesitated to use the I-word, those less inhibited are clamoring for his impeachment. Interesting, to say the least. The jury is out regarding the legality of the NSA activities and I've read arguments on both sides. ALL of the arguments have been based upon "informed speculation," to be kind.

I'm with the majority of Americans when it comes to passing judgement on the President, based on what little we know at the moment. It's very, very hard to fault the Chief when he seems to be doing what must be done, and doing it based upon competent legal advice obtained from the Justice Department. On the one hand, I think it's amazing the Left jumps to such negative conclusions so easily. On the other, the answer is obvious: it's Bush Derangement Syndrome. Or perhaps it's all those damned black helicopters buzzing about.

A Conundrum

and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us.

Is there such a thing as an unforgivable trespass? I've been mulling this over for a few days, at least, more like a week. Truth be told, the subject is a recurring question and has been for quite a while.

An old friend called me recently. I inquired about a mutual acquaintance during the course of our conversation; my friend told me that he hadn't spoken to this person in years and, frankly, doubted if he would ever speak to them again. It seems there was a serious betrayal of confidence and a line was crossed that, in my friend's eyes, was simply unforgivable. I listened to his tale sympathetically, and I understood what he was saying.

I'm not a religious man, yet I respect that religion has codified the moral values we hold to be correct and accept as "the rules" for our interaction with fellow human beings. Thus the excerpt from The Lord's Prayer, above. I could have just as easily quoted the Golden Rule. When one truly doesn't know, or understand, what course of action is appropriate in a certain situation it is helpful to turn to The Word for guidance.

While it's easy to acknowledge the correctness, or lack of same, in our everyday actions, living up to The Rules, in practice, can be very difficult. Forgiveness isn't easy when your core values have been violated with malice and forethought, and that was my friend's point. His closing argument was "some things in life are simply unforgivable."

I've spent a lot of time wondering about that. I believe he may be right.