So That's It

I was in an elevator with two guys today discussing the difference between a psychiatrist and a psychologist. One could not remember which was which and the other explained...

The psychiatrist is the medical doctor and the psychologist is the pedophile.

Jumping Off of the Bridge Some More

Failing to keep only the most serious topics on my site, here is another "fun" list.

From Kim's site, with my movies:

1. Name a movie that you have seen more than 10 times.

Star Wars (any episode except for II)

2. Name a movie that you’ve seen multiple times in the theater.

Star Wars (any episode except for II)

3. Name an actor who would make you more inclined to see a movie.

Bruce Willis or maybe some of the classics like Jimmy Stewart or Cary Grant

4. Name an actor who would make you less likely to see a movie.

Sean Penn with Ben Affleck a close second.

5. Name a movie that you can and do quote from.

The one that comes first to mind is Monty Python and the Holy Grail but one of my new most favorite quotes ever just came from Grindhouse: "You know what happens to people who carry knives? They get shot."

6. Name a movie musical that you know all of the lyrics to all of the songs.

Grease and Moulin Rouge!

7. Name a movie that you have been known to sing along with.

Moulin Rouge and Pulp Fiction - really

8. Name a movie that you would recommend everyone see.

A Man for All Seasons and High Noon

9. Name a movie that you own.

Lucky # Slevin - There are others of course but it is one of the less common ones.

10. Name an actor that launched his/her entertainment career in another medium but who has surprised you with his/her acting chops.

Harry Connick Jr. - This was copied straight from Kim's site but I have to whole heartedly agree. Harry is a superb entertainer.

11. Have you ever seen a movie in a drive-in? If so, what?

Of course! Chopping Mall, Night of the Creeps, Flashdance...

12. Ever made out in a movie?

Hunt for Red October and The Rocky Horror Picture Show I think. I can't quite remember. I refuse to remember.

13. Name a movie that you keep meaning to see but just haven’t yet gotten around to it.

Smokin' Aces, 300, and maybe a few others

14. Ever walked out of a movie?

I walked out of Sleeping Beauty when I was about three. I gave my mom a heart attack. I should have walked out of The Thin Red Line.

15. Name a movie that made you cry in the theater.

The Thin Red Line - but only because I was out $14 for the tickets.

16. Popcorn?

Sometimes. Put some of the fake butter on it while you're at it.

17. How often do you go to the movies (as opposed to renting them or watching them at home)?

I average 1.5 a year however this year, I'm already up to two and it is only April.

18. What’s the last movie you saw in the theater?

Grindhouse

19. What’s your favorite/preferred genre of movie?

I generally prefer sci-fi or action movies but I need a bit more than special effects and well choreographed fights. For instance, I hated Speed and Battlefield Earth (one of my favorite books). I loved Master and Commander: Far Side of the World and The Matrix.

20. What’s the first movie you remember seeing in the theater?

Sleeping Beauty - I walked out on it.

21. What movie do you wish you had never seen?

The Thin Red Line, Battlefield Earth, Alien 3, Alien Resurrection, The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and on and on and on...

22. What is the weirdest movie you enjoyed?

Moulin Rouge!

23. What is the scariest movie you’ve seen?

Movies do not scare me usually. It is the same with books. Those that come close to it are those that can really happen. Slashers in the closet may be good for a quick "jump" but even The Silence of the Lambs did not scare me. (For the Record, the book 1984 scared me more than anything I have ever read.)

24. What is the funniest movie you’ve seen?

It depends on who is with me when I see it. For instance, I watched Bilouxi Blues with my best friend in high school and we laughed so hard our sides ached. I had seen it before by myself and thought it was funny but did not laugh as hard or as long.

Ender Refused the Lashes

My older kid is reading Ender's Game for school. She has just started and got to the part where Ender fell the bully that was hurting him. Ender tells the bully's friends that they may think they'll get the same if they try to hurt Ender but will, in fact, get worse. He then kicks his tormentor in the face spewing blood on the ground.

There is a Arab proverb that goes something like, "If you cannot kill a thing with your sword, kill it with 1,000 lashes." The meaning can be applied to almost any task from cleaning a garage to fighting a sworn enemy.

In Ender's case, his tormentors did not even want to use a sword but instead administer the lashes.

My daughter asked why Ender had to kick him in the face. We worked through it together. He did not have to kick him in the face. But if he had not, then either Stilson, the bully, or his friends would return later to continue their degradation of Ender.

My daughter is one of the kindest people I know and could not fathom why they were hurting Ender (she knows that happens but cannot reason why people are like that). She also had trouble working out why Ender chose the course of action that he did.

I explained and she understood that to dissuade the bullies from ever tauting him again, he had to be brutal with their leader. By doing so, everyone else was afraid of him.

There is certainly a parallel here with the U.S. defensive strategy. If there is a reason for me not to like George W. Bush when it comes to national defense, it is that he refuses to kick our enemy in the head while he is down, sentencing us and our children and our grand-children to the other 999 lashes to come.

Why I Still Support the War in Iraq

I have been hearing more about conservative radio talk show hosts coming out against the war in Iraq - either to increase their ratings or because they truly believe it. Many in Congress that were in support have withdrawn it. Much of America thinks that it would be best to just walk away.

They forget themselves.

Here are my thoughts on Iraq then and now.

First, there were many fine reasons for a ground invasion of Iraq. Mobile chemical munitions factories were not one of them. Ground invasion has been justified since 1998 when Saddam Hussein removed U.N. weapons inspectors from his country after years of blatantly misleading them.

Iraq had been in violation of nearly all of the conditions of its surrender in 1991. Twelve U.N. resolutions were passed since then threatening "severe consequences." Once the U.S. started building up forces for another invasion in the Middle East, the U.N. passed two more resolutions.

The United Nations would never have actually authorized a ground invasion because that would have required passage through the Security Council. The Security Council would never have authorized it because three of the five permanent members' governments were "doing dirty business" with Saddam's government. All of those countries have veto power. All of those countries were in violation of the various resolutions and sactions there were in place. In some instances, they were instrumental in creating them.

That is akin to making a law banning everyone from trading with a country, using your military to enforce it, and then trading with that very country.

Then the best reason to invade Iraq evolves: Al Qaeda is moving operatives into the country. They are setting up camps within the country. They are building their own types of "diplomatic ties" with Baath intelligence operatives. They are using lines of communication with other operatives in Iran and Syria.

Imagine being the President of the U.S. for a minute. The very countries that are instrumental in aiding us in our fight against Al Qaeda are in illicit trade with a country that is now allowing them to operate.

How would you approach this? The strain of 9/11 alone would have been terrible enough. Now, in order to effectively fight our enemy, you are faced with this political nightmare. Do we ostrasize these countries? Do we go to war against them too?

We could not repeatedly announce the program violations without damaging realations with French - and other - intelligence agencies. We could not divulge our own intelligence activies at the U.N. without endangering our own sources. That would have been a "lost cause" anyway.

Colin Powell gave a very well spoken oratory with extremely weak evidence of Saddam's weapons programs. Moreover, it was not even based on U.S. intelligence. This I believe served two purposes: It set up a straw man to be used as a grounds for arguements. It redirected the public focus from Al Qaeda to his alleged support of international terrorism and using his weapons programs. Secondly, on the face, it justified ground invasion without having to publicly discuss "other" reasons.

The first made it possible for countries in violation of the Oil for Food program (and other programs) not to be involved in these actions. The second protected our sources within the Baath Party and within Al Qaeda.

Thirty-eight countries did not join us in our invasion of Iraq because of mobile weapons labs. I believe that they were presented the same evidence that my President was presented and decided to support us based on that.

Al Qaeda is now operating in much the same manner as anarchists and Marxists (different ideologies but same MO). This is also very similar to how the werewolves operated in Germany after the fall of the Third Reich.*

They were fought with similarly over the course of years. I believe our military is capable of fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq today.

With regard to an Iraqi civil war, this too is something that can be quelled.

With regard to "pulling out", "troop reduction", "phased redeployments", etc., that is the surest way to make sure that the U.S. loses. I propose that we close our bases in German and reopen them in Iraq.

That is the surest way to win and the best way to support.


* In the movie Grindhouse there is a mock trailer of an upcoming movie Werewolf Women of the SS. While the real werewolves were intelligence and terror operatives, I found the irony of them being real monsters humorous.

Serving Big Helpings of "Huh?"

From this article from the same people who published the names and addresses of CCW licensees in VA:

"After more than two centuries, America has gained more than enough experience to realize that an armed citizenry isn't "necessary to the security of a free state." Events of recent history suggest that citizens of other countries -- Iraq, Sudan and Bosnia spring quickly to mind -- would rather not have learned such lessons the hard way."

The man is trying to justify the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and the strict state control of owning firearms.

Here are my responses by country:

Iraq (under Saddam) - a relatively modern country by Middle Eastern standards; the average family may own one (1) rifle; 85% of the country is under harsh dictatorial rule by the other 15% and are poorly equipped to fight against them.

Sudan - a very UNmodern country where only the government may have firearms; "rebels" that are armed are free to commit atrocities, crimes against humanity, and genocide at will. First Christians and later black (or non-Arab) Muslims are massacred en masse.

Bosnia - a very modern country with all the education, amenities, and prospects of a European socialist state; very comparable to Finland or Lithuania; a large mix of Roman Catholic, Greek Orthidox, and Muslim people; except for police, people are not allowed to own firearms. Infighting among people in the name of religeon escalates to civil war. Withing two years, thousands of unarmed men and boys are put into mass graves and thousands of unarmed women and girls are forced to "work" in rape hotels.

Mr Denton, do you have any other examples? These seem not to help make your point.

If 30,000 people are killed every year in the U.S. (that is a number often touted but includes suicides as well as ) and the U.S. population is 300,000,000 (it is actually more with the aliens) that equates to one one-hundreth of one percent of the population. His examples of unarmed and "under armed" people all much higher.

That small fraction of the population, while tragic, is acceptable. Other modern examples of countries that have banned or severely restricted firearm usage often leave out other violent crime statistics when talking about reductions in "gun crimes."

Perhaps now more than ever is private ownership of arms necessary to the security of a free state.

Happy Easter

Happy Easter to all of yall!

I am torn. The imams that are suing U.S. Airways and now going after the "John Does" that reported them as being suspicious seem to be exactly the sort of people that would beat a Christian preacher in Indonesia yelling, "Indonesia is Muslim!" They are also the sort of people that Christ would forgive for "not knowing what they do."

Should they be forgiven by any Christians that they are persecuting - and it is persecution regardless of its form - even as they are proceding with these suits?

I do my best to keep my politics from my faith although the latter heavily influences the former. I would like to see these imams executed for their actions. I would like for a court to impose sanctions on C.A.I.R. at the tune of a billion or so dollars. However, it may be best if the courts just refuse to hear the cases.

In any event, I would like to wish everyone a Happy Easter, including everyone at C.A.I.R., those imams, U.S. Airways, in Indonesia, and around the world.

It is OK to wish Jews, Muslims, Agnostics, and people of other faiths or no faith at all a "Happy Easter." Jesus died for them too.