~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I O 93 93/93 I O ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My Photo
Location: LaGrange, Kentucky, United States

The opinions and interests of a husband, analyst and Iraq war veteran.


Monday, October 27, 2008

Hey Pocky Way

I enjoyed this. You might enjoy it, too.

<< Home |

Saturday, October 18, 2008

The coveted Kadnine endorsement goes to...

... John McCain. And here's why:

Preface - Both candidates are flawed in my opinion, but between them one is clearly more preferable from my perspective. I don't much care for horse race politics anymore. The heady, passion filled drive to win more lever pulls for "my guy" over "your guy" tramples all over discussion of deeper issues. Oh, there is still rational debate over policy and philosophy even in election years, but good luck trying to find it amidst the constant shouting. But such is my desire to be an informed voter rather than a naif scooped up by the "Rock The Vote" bus on the way to the poll, that I've shouldered my way through this (insanely long!) election cycle and managed to come to these conclusions.

John McCain - Here is a man who has devoted his entire adult life to public service. 22 years as a Naval Officer, pilot, five years as a POW, and even after torture left him physically disabled, still he devoted his voice to furthering his contribution to public service. It's clear to me by his actions over a long lifetime that he wants what's best for America's future. His instincts are sound. It's his execution skills that need improvement.

John McCain regularly practices the politics of "compromise" (in the best sense of that word. As the old story goes, two women once fought over an orange, and eventually split it down the center. One ate the flesh while the other used the zest in a cake.) He frequently "reaches across the aisle" to find out what the other side's chief desires are in order to be recognized as the facilitator of a win-win deal. For this, he's earned the nickname "maverick." Too often though, while his intentions are refreshingly transparent, his execution lacks a certain savvy that I would prefer to see. Too often he comes back to the Republican base (meaning me) saying things like, "I got that authorization for the border fence you wanted! And all I had to compromise was the funding. Why are you so mad?" Or, "I'm cleaning up the cess-pool of campaign financing! All you have to do is shut up 30 days before a primary election, 60 days before the general. Problem solved! What? Still mad?"

But for all his flaws of execution, America as a whole is still strong enough to weather a McCain Presidency, and may even prosper under it. John McCain 1) has the executive experience (as commanding officer of a Navy Squadron) that Obama lacks, 2) a working knowledge of how Washington actually operates and a desire to improve it (as opposed to Obama's limited experience as a first term Senator,) 3) has promised to remove troops from Iraq after cementing their honor with victory (as opposed to Obama who promises to remove forces ASAP, victory or no, and I need not point out that I'm more than than a little invested in victory after seven months over there) 4) has never voted to raise taxes, and 5) only once voted against a tax cut (out of a belief that during a time of war and no draft,it was consistent with his vote for invading Iraq. He later acquiesced.)

As for Barack Obama - I'm not deaf to the historical significance of Obama's campaign as the first viable (probable?) black presidential candidate. But I'm growing ever more resentful that he initially sold himself to us as the post-partisan, post-racial-divide candidate. As it turns out, research into his scant background doesn't reveal anything new except race. His policy preferences are not substantially different than the old platforms of previous Dem candidates (Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, etc.) I hasten to add that this research was NOT done by our traditional, legacy news media who are more in love with the idea of riding on the coattails of history, than actual, um... facts. The job of vetting Obama was done by journalists working for small-time magazines both left and right leaning, and blogs.

I'm deeply unhappy with the (to my mind) dishonest manner in which Obama has presented himself to us. That's not to say he isn't an ambitious (just as all successful politicians are ambitious,) intelligent, educated, nice guy who wants what's best for the country. I believe he's all of those things. But I'm disturbed by his tactics. I'm disturbed by his... comfort level about hiding things from public view.

He constantly asserts publicly he'll cut income taxes for 95% of us when 40% don't even pay taxes. Under his plan that 40% will get a "tax credit" (read: welfare check) paid for by taxing the upper 5% (i.e. all the evil companies in your 401K portfolio.) More than half of Americans have their entire life savings in the stock market. Obama is hiding the fact that his tax proposals will essentially rob your retirement account to pay for his grandiose social welfare programs.

This is not "change" I can believe in. This is more of the same, "big government is the ultimate solution to all societal ills" type policies that I oppose on general principle.

- Keith

<< Home |

Friday, October 17, 2008


Tacitus on conservative Palin-bashing:

Quick Note to the Elite, Inside the Beltway Conservative Pundits: You’re not Martyrs

Ok, I’ll bite. There is no reason that you (Peggy Noonan), Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker, David Brooks, or any other member of the self-anointed conservative intelligentsia should be surprised at the amount of anger outpouring from your readership towards you when you write articles that appear to “pile on” an already struggling conservative campaign effort.

You dutifully qualify every criticism of Palin with some snippet along the lines of “I’m not doing this to get invited to all the cool parties,” yet the first thing you do once you’ve been booed off stage by your own readership is exactly that - you show up onto some sort of liberal haven like Hardball or The Colbert Report to apologize for how stupid and ignorant your own political movement is. You claim that your articles against the McCain campaign are written out of some concern that true conservative principles are dying, yet you express your disagreement by cheering on a man [Obama] who supports out-in-the-open socialism. You all claim that you are wholly invested in traditional bread-and-butter conservatism, yet all of your actions contradict such claims.


Let’s make this clear: when you’re getting bombarded with angry emails from your subscribers, you know, the people who pay you money to write stuff that they want to read, [emphasis original] you don’t have any right to call their treatment “unfair” when you’re the one being a duplicitous asshole. Just a thought.

Mark Steyn adds:

So, when a conservative pundit mocks Wasilla, he's mocking conservatism as it's actually lived, as opposed to conservatism as a theoretical fantasy playground for the purposes of cocktail-party banter.

As the son of a preacher, and having once (in my teen years) been a quasi-anarchist, by-default libertarian, but now an autodidact-conservative let me just say this: I grew up grokking the practical points of conservatism long before I read WFB, Adams or Hayek. And by most accounts, so did Sarah Palin. From my perspective, that's a point in her favor.

UPDATE: Ross Douthat responds to Steyn. I'm still with Steyn and even Ace. While I, too, find it troubling that first-term governors Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal seem to be our only conservative back benchers these days, you can't deny that your Palin bashing neatly helps your future as a relevant pundit voice in the event of an Obama win, Ross. Either acknowledge that, or move on to other topics, buddy.

<< Home |

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Chris Buckley quits National Review

Meh. As a subscriber, I've been reading his back page columns for a few months now, and to tell the truth I wasn't all that impressed. He seemed to be going for a kind of aimless, purposefully digressive writing style better suited to his novels than to the pages of NR. I really miss Mark Steyn's concise, witty pieces and look forward to Steyn's return to the back page.

As for Christopher's "argument" for why he's voting Barack Obama? What can I say? Even at this late stage, Chris still thinks Obama will see the folly of his leftist ways and tack to center... but only after America elects him President and Commander in Chief. Um... No. That's a fantasy, Chris.

Stick to novels.

<< Home |

Saturday, October 04, 2008

The year is 02008...

... you know, so as to avoid any potential Y10K computer failures.

The Long Now Foundation takes a broad, general view of things. Take a moment out of your hectic schedule and leisurely peruse some of their projects:

- The Clock of the Long Now

- The Long Bet

<< Home |

Dirty look received digitally

I was chatting online last night with an old acquaintance of mine, letting him vent a bit about the "outrageous busybodies" running his subdivision's Neighborhood Association. "They won't let me decorate for holidays, they won't allow me to go away on vacation for more than a couple of weeks lest my grass gets too tall!"

I wrote, "Hey, now. What's so wrong about a little 'community organizing'? Aren't these hardships of yours all for the 'greater good'?"

He's a hard-core Obama fanatic. And I may have lost a friend at that moment.

<< Home |

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

Yay again!

Here's to hoping this will become a regular thing at Blogging Heads. Peter and Jonah have a wonderful... call it a chemistry. Their original appearances thogether "back in the day" are a big reason why I still watch BloggingHeads.tv these days.

<< Home |