Archive Logo.jpg

October 19, 2004

Morning Reads.

Let's start with a picture.

Of a bunch of dicks. Standing by a really big dick.

Marines from Bravo Battery, Battalion Landing Team 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines, stand by the 155 mm Howitzer they used to assist the BLT’s Alpha Company Oct. 4 in south-central Iraq. The 24th MEU is currently conducting security and stability operations in Northern Babil Province. Photo by: Lance Cpl. Zachary R. Frank

Matt Maynard pointed out this story of Marines in action, with this tagline, "Yes, they're jarheads, but they're artillery jarheads." True enough. It's also enough for us that they're dicks. We don't mind if they dress funny. Y'know the good/bad thing about Team America, World Police? For a good segment of the population, it's going to force us to quit using "You dick!" as a pejorative. It's overnight become a superlative. And if I inspire a lefty to call me one, I'll have to shake his hand and say, "Thank you!"

At ¡No Pasaran! this morning: Operation Rooster Crow: Infiltrating the Pro-Kerry Rally Under the Eiffel Tower. Protest Warriors Avant!

Bryon Scott, at Backcountry Conservative, shockingly questions Kerry's diplomatic skills. After all, Kerry did get dissed by the UN - funny thing about that Global Test.... so far Kerry ain't been getting good grades!

Baldilocks discusses an interesting aspect of the Democratic Party's relationship with black americans. Talk about co-dependency issues!

Blackfive has an interesting take on the issue of the Reservists refusing the mission in Iraq. As I suggested in my first post - what was originally reported came across as mutiny - but is probably something much more complex. Matty has a pretty good assessment, given that we don't really know the whole story yet.

Owen at Boots and Sabers points out some liberal hypocrisy on the issue of concealed carry, and a little later gives us his analysis of the genius of the Founders. I like his take on the Constitution - of course I do - it mirrors mine.

The Puddle Pirate at Brain Shavings offers up reasons The Reason Democrats should vote for Bush. "A vote for Kerry is a vote for appeasement. Protect American lives. Vote Bush." But the best part is Chet and DeadScot, two apparent Dems who wanna argue about it in the comments. I wish I could score some commenters like that. I guess the Arsenal scares 'em away.

Say Uncle is not going to vote for Bush. Nor will he vote for Kerry. He explains why here. I respectfully disagree, even though I see his point, even if I think he's hiding a little bit behind the protective coloration offered by the Electoral College. For me - it's about the Judges. I don't want a Democrat nominating Supreme Court judges, given how squishy the RINO senators are. The RINOs in the Senate will roll for the Dems so they can be 'statesmanlike' - which is why the Dems have been so successful killing judges during Bush's term. Oh, yeah - Purist!

Joanie at Da Goddess has been traveling, to New Jersey. Her take on Bush's chances in Jersey are certainly different from the CW - while I hope she's right, I suspect she was in a Red Fort. That said - she's got a subtle message for you in a picture. Hint - you need to look at everything...

Dean points out a more scientific study of military people than the one by Military Times. This one targeting Reservists. Guess what? They like Bush even more than us Regulars do. Which the media still manages to spin negatively.

Over at Eat The Lettuce, they have a Healthcare debate. I like Norman's comment best: "You mean there aren’t thousands of Americans crossing the Canadian border for better healthcare? " IIRC, the flow is south, not north...

I wouldn't risk the babies either, Claire. Just because they're furry makes no difference. Who are the real animals? Then there's them vegetables!

Graumagus had, well, a, er, um, chilling experience.

If you'd like a discussion of Team America, World Police that isn't quite as full of potty-mouth as mine, go read Ghost of a Flea's.

At the Daily Brief, Kevin points us to a story that speaks volumes about discipline. In mechanics.

That's enough for now. On to other things!

Comments on Morning Reads.
SayUncle briefed on October 19, 2004 07:39 AM

Well, Bush is a RINO, john. I'm just saying, you know.

John of Argghhh! briefed on October 19, 2004 07:59 AM

I agree there, Uncle. What he hasn't fought for is as amazing as what he has fought for. But I'm also pretty certain that I'll never get my 'perfect candidate' elected, either, so I gotta work with what's there.

Norman briefed on October 19, 2004 09:52 AM

Thanks for the mention - and I agree with John on the Bush issue. Not a big fan, but unless I want to toss my vote away Libertarianally, he's much much better than the alternative.

Ben briefed on October 19, 2004 10:30 AM

I'm not sure I agree with you there, John.

I mean, suppose that President Bush does what I hope he will and nominates Justice Thomas for chief justice if/when Rehnquist retires. (The best choice for libertarians, IMHO, especially for those who wish to roll back some of the decisions of the last while.) Could you imagine Senators Spector or Chafee or Snowe crossing party lines and voting against him?

Perhaps the deciding factor will be whether Daschle gets re-elected -- if he is turfed, it's a signal that obstructionism gets the obstructor a ticket back to private life.

(But then, if I'm a Republican, I'd probably be a RINO. :-) I'm mixed.)

John of Argghhh! briefed on October 19, 2004 10:40 AM

Ben - I think perhaps I'm guilty of assuming everybody has followed my thought on this subject and forgot that you kind of have to write a post as if it's the first time...

What I was referring to is that the Dems play dirty, or, from a different perspective, they fight hard for their beliefs. Hence the obstruction over judges - because the Dems know that their most effective policy implementations have been through judicial fiat or forcing functions, the electorate just doesn't buy the whole package. Ergo, the Dems understand the Judge thing, and have pulled out all the stops.

The RINOs, on the other hand, are squishy, don't like being referred to harshly by anyone, and want to be collegial and statesmen-like. In other words, the Republicans will not fight Dem judge picks with anywhere near the ferocity the Dems do. They pick a few token fights, but when the press starts getting grumpy with them, the RINOs roll. The Dems don't care, and they also rely on the press to not get grumpy with them. Of course, the Internet has complicated that calculation for them, so it will be interesting to see if Senator Daschle takes a fall. One can only hope.

So - the point I was making above is that if Kerry is elected, we cannot rely on the RINOs to fight as hard as the Dems have to keep the more leftwing judges off the higher benches, effectively shifting the bench leftward.

If Bush is elected, I wouldn't expect the RINOs to fight against him - but they haven't been roaring lions of support, either, in my admittedly limited examination of the subject. Does that make it clearer?

Ben briefed on October 19, 2004 10:49 AM


I'm from Canada -- you don't have to tell me about judicial activism. We wrote the book on it. One wing of our supreme court has been arguing in favour of a constitutional right to welfare. (We have left and more left sides to it.) It was a decent-sized factor in my decision that being a Canadian lawyer wasn't for me -- not that there was a left-wing side, but that it was the only side being taught.

I was assuming, I think, that the President will be re-elected. Which is by no means certain. I just can't imagine the alternative.

But yes, of course, in that case, the Republicans need more than just control of the Senate -- they need a margin, to be able to block effectively certain Democratic nominees.

Da Goddess briefed on October 19, 2004 01:42 PM

Aside from the three Kerry/Edwards stickers I saw affixed to cars, there was definitely the smell of Bush in the air.

Fred Boness briefed on October 19, 2004 04:08 PM

Driving around Wisconsin this week I saw a car with three bumper stickers: Kerry/Edwards, Feingold, and Daschle. Daschle? In Wisconsin?

It occurred to me that South Dakota is just the excuse for Daschle to be in the senate and play the national stage much like New York launched Hillary.

J.M. Heinrichs briefed on October 20, 2004 09:08 AM

... spotted dicks ....


SangerM briefed on October 20, 2004 09:26 AM

Re: Soldiers Disobeying Orders

Blackfive wrote: The junior leadership of the unit is still the main problem. This would never have happened with a unit that was led by mediocre officers and sergeants...let alone good ones.

This was pretty much the point I was trying to get to with my post about the time I said no. I am not sure I would punish everyone, but I do not recall seeing before that the mission was completed by other soldiers, which changes everything for me, as far as it goes. It's one thing to have a consensus in the unit, but it's another when it's a small part of the whole saying no.

Again, without more details, I didn't know what to think except that it seemed there were bigger problems related to NCO and junior officer leadership. And I especially appreciate Blackfive's argument that armor should have been gotten by the unit. Hell, I personally paid for plywood and lumber so we could have a hooch on our platoon HQ truck when we went to the field... and that was peacetime Germany.

Anyway, just my 2.5 cents...