Sunny Days in Heaven
Spiritual/Political/Philosophical Blog on the Nature of Truth and Falsehood and Heaven


Thursday, October 07, 2004  

My contempt is now bottomless

The Washington Times reported this:

Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry conceded yesterday that he probably will not be able to convince France and Germany to contribute troops to Iraq if he is elected president.

The Massachusetts senator has made broadening the coalition trying to stabilize Iraq a centerpiece of his campaign, but at a town hall meeting yesterday, he said he knows other countries won't trade their soldiers' lives for those of U.S. troops.

"Does that mean allies are going to trade their young for our young in body bags? I know they are not. I know that," he said.


Let's look at that last paragraph.

"Does that mean allies are going to trade their young for our young in body bags?"

This is the way, offhand way, demeaning, diminishing way he refers to our sacred and honored dead. This is the man who would lead those men? How lovely it would be to be led by someone who honors your service in this manner. How wonderful for parents, wives, husbands and children to hear of their loved ones referred to in such a contemptible manner. How incredible that this vain poltroon (yes, I said it again!) should be so absolutely consumed with himself that no one else matters to him.

Did he think he was going to score some points by reference to body bags a la Viet Nam. As he so easily did in 1972? Does he really think that Americans enjoy hearing, revel in the image, applaud him for his grim assessment of reality and the facts of war?

Does his reference make anyone want to step forward and defend their country when they know how little their suffering and sacrifice will be valued?

Is there a single man or woman in the armed forces of the United States of America who would happily serve under such a man?

I could strangle him. Simply strangle him or rip that stupid, idiotic and sickening tongue out of his mouth. 3000 dead in New York mean nothing to him. 1000 dead in Afghanistan and Iraq mean nothing to him. Thousands of Iraqis dying and being blown up mean nothing to him. Hundreds of children slaughtered in Russia mean nothing to him.

But we have to endure his smug, poisonous arrogance day after day after day. It's simply unbearable. I want this to end tomorrow. Another month of this? It's unendurable, while good men are defamed, smeared, and slandered by this heaping pile of crap!

I read from Drudge how he appeared on Dr. Phil. For a moment, when they talked about him playing broom hockey on Christmas with his kids, he seemed human -- maybe even a half decent guy.

Now you can't help but wonder if he wasn't playing at being the good dad, watching himself in his mind's eye -- "now, I'll give the kids an image of me to remember. Show them just how swell I am. Make them think I really care, because God knows, the only thing I care about is me. Maybe I can relate this story a few years from now to show what a warm guy I really am. Hey, is everybody watching me now?"

The narcissism of the man is so great that I'm almost ready to believe that he hasn't got an iota of soul and realness in him.

And this is the man the MSM want to win the election. This is the man they are pulling out all the stops to help win. The man who they skew the polls for so they can boost him headlines. The man they say won a debate where he called the President a liar and promised not to defend our country.

I have met some politicians face to face who inspired rage in me. Their imperviousness to reason, their "invincible ignorance", infuriated me because I could see the harm they were doing to others and children; but this man is the worst I have never personally met but whom I know so well for the crepuscular scoundrel he is. There is not one ounce of intellectual honesty or real human decency in the man.

Enough.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 11:18 PM |
 

Tom Paine's Blog (Not Bill Moyer's)

Tom has some strong language about the threat we face. (Via Joyful Christian)

Darkness at noon

Like James Lileks, I think I'm resigned to losing an American city to an atomic device.

It's a hideous thing to contemplate, to be sure, but the way nearly half the US electorate and a solid majority of Western Europeans are jamming their hands over their ears and shouting "La la la, I can't hear you" as radical Islam marches ever onwards, it's obvious we're going to drop the ball in this war at some stage.

***

Actually, come the terrible day when maybe a million or two people have the flesh flayed from their bones in an instant and an entire city is destroyed, those people may themselves have to run and hide. It may be that we are unable, as a socity, to sustain any longer the self-delusion that we are civilised, rational people who will never resort to violence to solve anything.

Because we are raging beasts beneath the surface, aren't we? Admit it - on September 11th you felt the same way I did. You had your teeth bared, and you were looking around for an enemy - any enemy - and a handy rock with which to kill him. Sure, we have more sophisticated weaponry these days, but the principle is the same.

Danger to the tribe! All warriors report to the chief! Bring weapons! Get the women and children into the cave!

Yes, we reverted to the ways of our primitive ancestors on that day, and frankly I feel perfectly okay with that. After all, we are the descendants of those who managed to survive, usually by killing their enemies before their enemies got a chance to do the same to them. We come from a long line of natural born killers. It's called the human race.

********

I was impressed with the Vice-President this week. I thought he debated well, and certainly seemed to win the event. But I noticed that many commentators seemed to think he was "dark" and had a message which concentrated on threats and how to respond to them. Personally, I rather think Dick Cheney would be an excellent wartime President, but I wonder if in fact he goes far enough.

What I'd like in a President is as follows.

1) I want him to declare war. Not on any nation in particular, at least not yet. Just declare war. A proper war. One which everyone can realise we're actually in. Mobilise society, aluminium drives, victory gardens, a huge military expansion, re-tool industry for the war effort, that sort of thing. Not out of some sinister plan to brainwash the public or bring back the ghost of Joe McCarthy or anything - just letting people know that we're up against it and now is the time when we have to pull together if we want to survive.

[Note: My position on the draft exactly matches Heinlein's. If a society can't get enough men to freely choose to defend it, it probably isn't worth defending. A military draft should not be introduced. Ever.]

(Ed. I disagree with this because it means the best people will be getting killed while the scoundrels enjoy a safer life chortling about patriotic fools. The loss of the best people is irreplaceable under such circumstances. Better to spread the casualties across the board.)

2) I want him to apply the Bush doctrine harshly and without any mercy whatsoever. Any nation that supports or harbours terrorists is to be regarded as hostile. Not every Syrian supports the Baathists? North Koreans have no ability to change their government? True. And irrelevant. This is survival of civilisation we're talking about here, and perhaps one or two salutory bloodbaths at the start will save many more lives further down the track when our enemies realise we're in deadly earnest. Innocent people are going to die in this war, as many already have. The least we can do is make it as quick and decisive as possible.

3) I want Darth Vader in the White House. I guess Cheney would do in a pinch, but I want a Dark Lord sitting on his Throne of Blood in the situation room, commanding vast carrier battlegroups, legion after legion of grim-faced troops and waves of aircraft so thick they darken the skies over enemy countries. I want a President who will say things like "I find your lack of faith disturbing, Mr Spanish prime minister" and "You have failed me for the last time Mr Bremer". I want the President to go on "The Daily Show" so he can toss a drinking cup made from Saddam's skull into Jon Stewart's lap, just to laugh at how green Stewart would go. I want the heads of terrorists impaled on stakes at the entrance to Congress. I want the mere prospect of having the President pissed off at them to make Chirac and Schroeder soil their silk underwear.

4) I want a President who will outline what sort of victory we require, and what we will need to do to achieve it. And then I want him to do whatever is needed to achive it, and if anyone feels like sabotaging it in any way because it offends their delicate post-modernist sensibilities I want him to personally sign their execution warrants. Think I'm extreme? Take a look at how Abraham Lincoln tossed the constitution into the shredder for the duration of the Civil War and then tell me I'm extreme. He suspended free speech and had people who encouraged young men not to enlist shot, and he was right to do it.

This is not a game. We are not playing. The survival of human civilisation is at stake here. This isn't a war like all the others though. It will be fought militarily, economically, politically, culturally, ideologically and most important of all, religiously. A front in this war can be a jungle encampment in the southern Philippines, an airliner in the skies of Europe, a skyscraper in Sydney, a crowded market in Yemen, a synagogue in Haifa, a TV channel in Dubai, an internet chatroom in cyberspace...almost any setting in fact. The combatants are you and me.

I know you think I'm painting in the darkest possible colours as a way of trying to make a point. And that's probably true. But although I'm sounding extreme now, wait until you get a phone call from a friend in tears who says "Oh God, it's horrible! Turn on the TV! They did it! The actually went and did it!" and you switch to CNN, your heart full of dread, and you see....well, I tried to imagine how I would feel when they nuke a city, as they will, and I couldn't do it. I just can't imagine the unspeakable rage I will feel when that happens. But for me, that red mist descended on September 11th, and has never lifted. I'm not sure it ever will. I may go to my grave feeling this way.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 6:55 PM |
 

Outstanding Work

JunkYardBlog has a link to a military video of a helicopter crew taking out a group of jihadis.

It makes it almost seem unfair what we can do. And that's the point. We don't ever want war to be a fair fight. We want to be able to annihilate the enemy at no cost to ourselves whenever possible.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 6:38 PM |
 

Ancient Coin

I've been wanting to own an ancient Roman coin for many years now. Last week when I went to an Art Show there was a Coin Show next door. Last year I passed up on a coin of Nero that was about $60. I found another Nero this year, but it cost too much. I also saw a silver coin of Hadrian (or Trajan), smaller than a dime but thicker that looked like it had been minted yesterday (maybe it was), but was in perfect condition and the detail was amazing. As good as any coin you see today. But the cost was more than I wanted to spend.

Then a woman asked the coin vendor about a Tribute Penny. That coin was a Tiberius denarius which Jesus would have used to pay the Roman tax and would have used in answering the question about who should the Jews pay taxes to. It was a very cool thing, but again, about $100.

So instead, I bought this Caligula bronze coin for $27. The images are from slightly different angles.



posted by Mark Butterworth | 4:02 PM |
 

Shatner Rocks!

A music album by William Shatner which isn't a joke, but is pretty cool. Especially "Common People". Go here and listen. It will make your day.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 3:19 PM |
 

Today's Quote:

To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.

G. K. Chesterton
(1874 - 1936)

posted by Mark Butterworth | 2:26 PM |


Tuesday, October 05, 2004  

Blogger is screwing the pooch

$%&*^#@(*^!!!!!!!!!!!

I have no idea when the system will publish my blogs. It's eaten a number of them, and behaves inconsistently. I couldn't even email them yesterday. That page for contacting them was no good, too.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 3:06 PM |
 

Fear and Loathing

I have a fear that Kerry might win the election. Six months ago, if you'd asked me what I'd think if Kerry were to win, I'd say something like, that's a darn shame and real setback to war against terrorists.

But watching the level of attacks, deception, and viciousness coming from Kerry and now Edwards (SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC) (clip of a speech): "I'd say if you live in the United States of America and you vote for George Bush, you've lost your mind." ), well, I don't just have a fear of the Democrats, I have a horror.

That there remains a month until the election pains me. I want it over now.

Even at its worst, Nixon and Reagan hatred never sank to these depths.

The kind of personal attacks by Kerry at Bush are not only sickening, but diminish respect for the office, and undermine its prestige. The day will come when a president who is not as thick skinned or temperate as Bush will retaliate more forcefully.

A republic like ours cannot tolerate this level of vicious discourse. Kerry has aimed fighting words at another man. The excuse that politics is hardball and that this is nothing extraordinary is a lie and a myth perpetrated by the Democrats, particularly Clintonites.

Attacking someone's record, distorting it or exaggerating it to the opponent's disadvantage has always been fair game. Even the dredging up of moral failures in private life of candidates is a sad fact, but what we are seeing, or rather hearing, today takes the ad hominem to a new level.

It is one thing to say your opponent is wrong. It is another to say he is wrong because he is stupid, stubborn, misguided, corrupt, and vain.

These are things Kerry keeps saying and hammering on. The ironic thing being, of course, that such terms are projections which best describe himself.

My prayer is that Bush will win decisively and the Democrats will dissolve discredited and hopeless. My fear is that the election will be closer than it ought to be, and that the Democrats have simply begun round one in a relentless assault on rational democracy.

Abetted by the MSM, the Democrts have no shame, but after Kerry, what kind of brigands will they turn to? Dean? Gore? Hillary?

posted by Mark Butterworth | 1:31 PM |
 

Inculcation vs. Indoctrination

In a post called America the unBeautiful, I wrote about the loss of inculcation of the Bible in our people and the devastating effect that has on society.

It occurs to me, though, that some may insist that inculcation is indoctrination of children and people. That being a bad thing, it is supposed, smacking of Nazi and Soviet style eduction systems and propaganda machines.

The difference, though subtle, is serious.

I was taught in grade school and in daily life a set of principles, historic facts, and ideas which I absorbed easily, and were convinced by without a great deal of thought.

I learned of the American Revolution and Founding Fathers and other heroes like Nathan Hale, whose last words stirred my soul -- "I regret that I have but one life to give to my country."

I was moved by the courage and heroism of John Paul Jones -- "Don't give up the ship. I have yet begun to fight!"

Even as a child the concept of Freedom moved me deeply, and having the antithesis illustrated by the Soviet Union made it that much more poignant. I shuddered at the thought of the kind of mental and physical slavery that existed in Russia. It was viscerally repugnant to me.

But does that mean I was cleverly indoctrinated to think and feel certain ways?

We are, no doubt, conditioned by our societies, but Freedom and desire for it seems to transcend it. It is natural to want Freedom. It is unnatural to deprive others of it or be deprived of it. Every animal knows this for the most part.

Inculcating children in the Bible has one real object in mind (and intentions are important). It is to make us familiar with thoughts, ideas, morals, beauty, and wisdom. The goal is not to impose severe restrictions, but to improve the mind and its furniture. The profound and the great have influence.

You could do this with Communism, I suppose, and even use the Bible for that purpose, but no one taught me that I had to love America; that I had to love the Patriots who made it possible; that I had to love God, and so forth.

But indoctrination makes that demand. One must not only know of but love Lenin and Marx. One must love the System. One must love one's restrictions.

Inculcation tells the child (or adult immigrant) here is what we admire, respect, and love about ourselves (or others). This is what we believe is good. It's up to you to decide if it matters or not. We will not force a response.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 1:09 PM |


Monday, October 04, 2004  

Old Will and me were raised the same
If childhood is in a name . . .


I have had a long love affair with Shakespeare's plays. I immersed myself in them in my twenties, took part in one, studied them in college with field trips to Ashland,OR to see them, watched the movies, read the plays anc countless books of criticism and literary history surrounding them.

At one time, I sought to deconstruct Shakespeare's genius to its simplest, most basic template and basis. What I discovered was that when you boiled Shakespeare down to bare essentials of plot, his histories and tragedies were melodramas. Elizabethan soap operas.

It briefly shocked me that the Bard's serious plays were not as great and grand as Greek tragedy. Until I began to understand that all dramatic storytelling is melodramatic. The Greek tragedies and Hebrew Bible stories have little melodrama which is explicitly illustrated, whereas Elizabethan drama tends to have a larger amount and range of emotional characterization.

It's not that Shakespeare isn't melodramatic, but it's what he does with it that counts.

But not according to the contemporary filmmaking genius, Billy Bob Thornton:

He said: “I think Shakespeare’s overrated. It’s bulls**t. I’d never go and see a Shakespeare play. Who’d want to see me in Hamlet?

“Who cares? I don’t know why actors do it. Shakespeare is just a bunch of soap operas.

“It’s not that I don’t understand it. But people think if you speak with an English accent it somehow makes you smarter.

“I don’t believe in all the flowery language — all of his plays are just a series of soap operas.”


You just can't pay for quotes like these. The reporter must have felt he hit a rich vein.

Cost: Priceless.

Oh yes, that title at the top? I once wrote a poem about Will and me since I grew up as a boy in Stratford, too. Connecticut, that is. On the Housatonic. (There's a Shakespeare festival and playhouse there, also.)

posted by Mark Butterworth | 11:03 PM |


Sunday, October 03, 2004  

Liberal Guilt?

In Parade magazine's Personality Parade today, Walter Scott reported that Chelsea Clinton had some cosmetic surgery done after a query as to her new found beauty. The picture that accompanied the blurb did not strike me as an improvement, though.

What struck me the most in Scott's response was that he mentioned that the 24 year old, besides living with her boyfriend, was pulling down six figures as a marketing consultant.

That means she's earning at least $100,000 dollars as a history major in the advertsing field. To start. As an entry level employee.

How is it possible for this young woman who has never had a job or done anything that relates to business and marketing get such a high salaried position fresh out of college with a humanities M.B. degree?

Clinton, who is studying international relations at Oxford, will be one of 5,000 McKinsey consultants worldwide who research topics ranging from health care to corporate finance.


To find out what McKinsey says about a consultant's job, you can go here and see if Chelsea qualifies.

Actually, in some respects she may qualify for the position, but it's more likely that 1) her old man got her the job, and 2) the company values the Clinton connection.

Chelsea didn't get this job on her own accomplishments which aren't very distinguished.

Who wants to bet that Chelsea will or will not remain a classic Liberal?

Liberals often believe that since they had life handed to them, and had little struggle in attaining comfortable livings, they know in their hearts that they did not earn what they got. In fact, they probably fear (with reason) that they could not have earned what they got by the sweat of their own brow. They are also likely to think that no one really earns the good life, and thus the poor don't have a chance since they are shut out of the Favor Bank or the favored status.

I supose Chelsea can learn the job she has. It's not that tough, and a little application can get it done, but I wonder what happens when the novelty wears off, or if they start hitting on her for her parent's influence, contacts, and shmoozing?

Well, with such screwed up parents, you worry about children like Chelsea anyway.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 3:28 PM |
 

The Mind Boggles

I am not a man who jumps to conclusions rapidly. I prefer to weigh evidence before judging, and giving people the benefit of the doubt. But anyone who looked at what Little Green Footballs did within hours of CBS's forged documents, well, Johnson's demonstration was a tour de force and immediately definitive to anyone who had ever used a typrwriter and now a computer.

Thus, I immediately agreed - those documents were frauds. It couldn't be more obvious to a rational and knowledgeable man.

Now, we have a video of John Kerry (via Drudge) taking something from his pocket before the debate with Bush and putting it on his lectern. The act itself was a violation of the agreed upon rules. The next step is to say that whatever cards or paper he took out of his pocket, it is unlikely they would be blank. If they were unlikely to be blank, what would they then be? Obviously, something meant to assist Mr. Kerry in some other way than the making of notes.

We also know from Kerry's past that lying and cheating, exaggerating and embellishing is a character trait of his.

I must conclude from these facts that Mr. Kerry cheated in the debate. Imagine if Bush had done this, the level of outrage that would follow in the MSM. I can only hope that Fox News will jump on this and get some buzz going.

I must use one of my web friend's, Paul Cella, favorite words -- Kerry is a poltroon. There is nothing he will not say and will not do to grasp for power. In some ways he takes Bill Clinton to a whole new level.

What Kerry said in the debate was often horrifying. The thought of him in a position to determine foreign policy is frightening. The act of him obviously cheating, though, puts a kind of putrid icing on his crap cake.

Update:

Some are saying the object Kery removed from his pocket was a black pen. He may be holding a pen in his right hand, but the video shows him removing something white with straight edges with his left hand. It is not a black pen I have seen in the video I looked at.

It doesn't look like this little event is going to get any more scrutiny, and so the field is muddy with supposition, suspicion, and dismissals. I cannot say I stand 100% behind my original assessment, but I haven't heard or seen anything that flatly disproves it, while there is also no proof for what I and others have accused Kerry of doing.

In the absence of supporting proof (a better evaluation of the video, or new video from other angles), I must apologize for thinking the worst of Mr. Kerry.



posted by Mark Butterworth | 3:06 PM |
 

American Beauty

My wife and I attended an annual Arts Festival Expo yesterday. This is the second year we've gone. We particularly wanted to see what the photography vendors were selling, and learning what it cost to participate in the three day event in case I wanted to try my hand at earning some money that way.

I was pleased to learn that as fine and innovative as some of the photography was, I was not entirely outclassed, and could sell my work as the others were to some success. (But the cost of start up would be high in having to construct a nice, modular booth with excellent lighting to manufacturing the stock both framed and unframed. I might cost between $5-10K just to get out the door because of needing a high end inkjet printer, framing goods and mats, a better camera and computer, and special paper.)

One aspect of the beautiful and marvelous things we saw at the show was an emphasis on the Beautiful.

Having to sell to ordinary, but also discerning, people meant that they had to appeal to a finer sense. The artists are all juried to enter the show (which is produced in many cities like a tour by the same company), and have to pass high standards. You don't find any cheap, sentimental, maudlin kitsch there, which is why we love to attend.

As I said, the emphasis was generally on the beautiful and innovative new techniques or styles. It was a joy to see and meet artists that desired to please rather than insult or offend; but not please in a submissive, unchallenging manner; instead, attempting to express themselves in a deeply authentic and resonant way that would appeal to others.

However cleverly done many of the works were, they were not sold on that basis, but on the impression of delight the work itself, not its technique, gave. These were not art school, academic poseurs. Many of the artists we spoke with had been doing other things with their lives when their hobby developed into a profession, or their skills in one field were turned to use in another (art).

It filled me with joy for my fellow artists, their perspicacity, their entrepreneurship, their independant spirits, their deep love for creative work, and their love of beauty itself.

It was a good day for America.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 2:22 PM |


Saturday, October 02, 2004  

Undeniable Truth

An important article by Ryan Zempel at Townhall begins thus:

A 22-year-old man stands before a classroom of middle schoolers, describing how he came out as a homosexual and going so far as to declare, "there are gay students in this classroom."

The young man is Noe Gutierrez, Jr., and the scene is one from "It's Elementary," an award-winning 1996 video (widely aired in 1999) which aims to give "practical lessons on how to talk with kids about gay people."

You won't find that scene in Gutierrez's latest video, however. Although he requested permission to use it, producer/director Debra Chasnoff turned him down. Apparently, she doesn't want schoolchildren knowing what's happened since then.

You see, Gutierrez is no longer gay.


Zempel concludes:

The existence of ex-gays remains one of the biggest untold stories today. Generally ignored by the media, ex-gays are often shouted down by gay activists when they try to raise their voices.

They are misunderstood by both a secular society that largely accepts homosexuality and a religious world that largely doesn't.

But they won't remain closeted forever.


The documentary, I Do Exist, is here.

posted by Mark Butterworth | 11:14 PM |

links
archives