Ted Cruz for Senate
Under The Marble Arch
"I slept and dreamt that life was Joy.
I woke and saw that life was Duty.
I acted, and behold, Duty was Joy."
Rabindranath Tagore

"The skepticism about human rationality that science inspires should not be taken as support for authoritarianism or paternalism… On the contrary, it should render questionable all claims to wise and disinterested leadership, including those of America’s own altruistic progressive technocrats who propose policies to “nudge” the unenlightened masses into doing the right thing. It makes more sense to think of our leaders and intellectuals as half-crazed hooting howler monkeys — just like the rest of us."
Michael Lind, Salon, August 23,2011
“Seeing what isn’t there is half the job of being on the Left. The other half is changing what isn’t there through costly, intrusive, and ill-conceived initiatives (save 10 percent for keeping Charlie Rangel out of trouble).” -Abe Greenberg, October 9, 2009
“To date, what non-Obama voters see, and fear, is a candidate content to coast to the nomination and then conduct a blandly conservative campaign. They want a more substantive choice than that. They want to have it out over the worth or danger of Barack Obama’s ideas. They want the chance to ratify Washington’s enormous long-term claims on the country’s wealth, or decisively reject them." – Daniel Henninger, WSJ, July 21, 2011
Search Me
Powered by Squarespace
Books!
  • The Line Through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction
    The Line Through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction
    by J. Budziszewski
  • The Spiritual Combat Revisited
    The Spiritual Combat Revisited
    by Fr Jonathan Robinson, Jonathan Robinson
« Wall Street, R.I.P. | Main | Giving »
Sunday
Jan042009

SB: Stuff I Need to Comment On

Gaza-a-Boom-Boom: A satisfactory conclusion to the Hamas War is in sight, but I'm not counting my chickens.  After the last defensive action, I break out in hives every time I type the letters "U" and "N", and I hear the Security Council is being mustered to condemn Israel. 

I continue to be amused by the soundbite war.  Just heard on Fox: Israel's president says the goal of the Israeli incursion is not "regime change."

If you say so.

Then some Palestinian in Gaza, Ambassador So-and-al-So, said that, among other things, it was bad for Israel to carry out military action against the Palestinians because it would solidify public opinion, and especially Arab opinion against them.

Now there's a compelling argument.  Gosh, Israel doesn't want to alienate the Arabs!  That would be terrible!  Why, that must be why all of the Arab States have been so vocal and forceful in protesting this action!

[crickets]

I've read many an interesting post/editorial on just war, proportionality, and goals for this [acute] military action.  One in particular caught my eye: there is a difference between the justification for going to war, and the just implementation of that war.  Israel, by all objective standards, is completely justified in defending itself to achieve a security goal, that is, the cessation of terror attacks launched from Gaza.  Israel is also going to pains to warn civilians of imminent attacks, with unmeasurable success.  Unmeasurable because the line between militant and civilian is pretty much non-existent in a culture where small children are taught that martyrdom in the battle against the Zionist entity is the highest form of human achievement.

Aside: I once heard from a friend that the Viet Cong would implant pressure sensitive bombs in small children, and then set the whimpering children out as lures for soft-hearted American soldiers. End aside.

Personally, I'll be very satisfied when I see about 1 million Gazanians standing waist deep in the Med, looking wistfully eastward at their former strip, now dotted with beach umbrellas, cabanas, and happy Floridians sipping umbrella drinks on Playa del Zion.

Blago-Burris-Brouhaha: I was chatting up some Federalist Society types at a party the other night, and I asked the very sincere question, "What's wrong with Governor Blagojevich appointing Roland Burris to the Senate?"  One jolly fellow said, "Legally, nothing." The whole group then erupted into laughter.

I think Harry Reid just should have ignored the whole thing.  It's Illinois' problem, and boy, does that state look stupid.  Is the complaint that Roland Burris is a hack?  I guess they don't allow hacks in the Senate now?  When did that law get passed?  Is the problem that Blago is [bleeping] under [bleeping] investigation?  Presumed [bleeping] innocent until found [bleeping] guilty, I always say.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (1)

Outside of theiir failure to deep-six Cynthia McKinney, Israel has (as usual) shown more concern for and forbearance towards the Palestinians than they deserve.

I'm still trying to figure out the grounds for objecting to Burris; that Blagojevich appointed him is irrelevant - many a rose has bloomed from a well-manured garden.
January 4, 2009 | Unregistered Commenteraelfheld

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.