Saturday, September 11, 2004
6:20 pm
Daniel J. Summers
(This one's long, but I hope you take the time to read it and think…)
Three years ago, our country was attacked. It was not the first terrorist attack on our interests, or even the first attack on our own soil. But three years ago was, by far, the most successful (from the terrorists' point of view) attack on us yet. Over 2,500 innocent Americans lost their lives over the span of a few hours. Looking back, the fact that this number is so much lower than it could be (around 100,000 people were employed in the two WTC towers) is due to the grace of God, and the heroic efforts of firemen and policemen who helped thousands of folks flee to safety after the towers and the Pentagon were hit. Still, the fact remains that we were attacked on our own soil, and that attack resulted in a large loss of life.
Sit back from the computer for a minute or two and think back to where you were, and the thoughts that went through your mind that Tuesday morning. I remember very vividly where I was. A co-worker said “someone flew a plane into the World Trade Center!” It clicked for me right away, although it took some time to accept it - with all the talk about it being an accident, I didn't buy that. Moments later, as we all watched on our IPTV windows, we saw the second plane hit. All the talk of an accident evaporated in an instant - we were under attack. More bad news - another one hit the Pentagon - was there an explosion outside the State Department? - a plane went down in Pennsylvania - FAA grounds all flights - international flights are turned back. We went to FPCON Delta, the post-attack posture under which every vehicle coming on and off base is searched, and, for a time, no traffic is allowed on or off base.
I also remember clearly that all these things weren't what was foremost in my mind. My oldest child was going to school only during the mornings on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, so they weren't gone when it happened. I live on base, so I knew that I wouldn't have to leave the base, and neither would my family. I was still concerned for them, though - what if our base is on the target list? At this point, we didn't know nearly as much about al-Qaeda as we do now. I came home and just held my wife, then my kids. My second child was barely over 1, so he was pretty much oblivious; but my 2 1/2-year-old (who even then was very bright) couldn't understand why they would fly those planes into those buildings. He also didn't understand why mom and dad were crying, or near tears, the whole time.
I'm going to link that amazing site that's linked at the bottom of the page - never forget what happened that day. Since that day, we've engaged in two major theater wars - one in Afghanistan and one in Iraq. Despite warnings of quagmires the likes of which we haven't seen since Vietnam, we have been successful in both these operations, installing democracy and freedom into two areas of the world that desperately need it. During that time, we've lost 1,000 combined in those two theaters. In Vietnam, that number was over 58,000. (source: DoD) It's a tribute to our men and women in uniform who have shown ceaseless dedication to their country, and to the development and use of the best tools of war on the planet. Although some may classify me in that category, as stateside support, the only thing I've sacrificed for this war is a few longer hours. I am deeply grateful to my comrades in arms who are out there in the desert, on the lines, loading bombs, driving patrols, doing everything they can to keep us free and return home to their families.
This is the reason it is so important to have a leader in this country who is not afraid to stand up to terrorists. When the WTC was attacked the first time in 1993, we did nothing. When the Kenyan embassies were bombed, we did nothing. When the USS Cole was bombed, we did nothing. Could we not see this coming? When I was in school, I was told that studying history was important, because “those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.” I believe that. We've seen what inaction brings, and we cannot afford inaction any more, not even if it's cloaked in the term “diplomacy.” Since 9/11/01, al-Qaeda has struck in Bali, Madrid, and most recently, in Russia, as well as cooperating with Hezbollah in bringing terrorism to Israel.
Americans are, collectively, the most kind-hearted people in the world. We recognize the true threat that lies before us, and we are choosing to take the fight to them. I have a really hard time not questioning the intelligence of someone who thinks we shouldn't have gone into Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a dictator who used instant execution, limb removal, and rape as methods of governmental punishment. He used WMD on his own people in the north, and was completely uncooperative with United Nations inspectors who were verifying that he had stopped production. And the “there were no WMDs” crowd doesn't seem to consider enough Sarin gas to kill 60,000, or a large stash of low-enriched unranium, to be weapons of mass destruction. I say to those folks, how would like for what we've found to be detonated or released in your neighborhood? Would it become a WMD then?
So, we've got a dictator, who rapes, mutilates, and kills his own people, who has taken a hit out on a sitting United States President, and who is sympathetic to terrorists. Even the most obtuse among us should be able to see that we do not need that man in possession of WMDs, or even parts that can be made into such. Russia is our ally, and even they have some suitcase nukes they can't find. How much more easily would it be for nuclear or chemical weapons to find their way into terrorists' hands if the leadership of the country just hands it to them?
During the Republican National Convention, just after President Bush's speech, I listed to the talking heads dissect it. (I think the channel was on CBS.) The folks there said that the parts of the speech that dealt with domestic issues got applause, but with nowhere near the passion of the applause in the national defense portion. I think that's because the vast majority of Republicans (and a lot of Democrats, which is why I predict Bush will roll in November) know that without a secure national defense, domestic programs are meaningless. You may have seen this, but I'm posting it here in case you haven't. Stephen Ambrose said “It is the soldier, not the poet, who gives us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the reporter, who gives us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who gives us freedom to protest. It is the soldier who serves beneath the flag, who salutes the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives the demonstrator the right to burn the flag.”
So, on this Patriot Day 2004, remember the lives of those whose crime was only that they got to work early that morning. Remember the 1,000+ defenders of freedom who have lost their lives while ensuring that anything like 9/11 never happens again. Remember the sons and daughters who will be celebrating Thanksgiving and Christmas this year, for the first time, without their mom or dad. Remember the spouses, who have lost a life partner and best friend. Thank the Lord that you live in a country that does not let these acts of aggression stand, and thank the Lord that George W. Bush made the tough decision to defend our nation. May God bless this great nation.
Wednesday, September 1, 2004
9:45 pm
Daniel J. Summers
The Republican Party is missing an opportunity this week in New York. I don't think it'll be a fatal mistake, by any stretch. Britney Spears, former virginal Mouseketeer who has become a bit more sensual as of late, is a Republican. There had been some folks considering inviting her to the Republican National Convention to entertain the delegates. However, some groups within the RNC claimed that her presence would send the wrong message to the nation.
Britney has, in the past, done much to make the nation blush. From her appearance on Nickelodeon's Kids Choice Awards wearing a white tank top and no bra, to her kiss with Madonna last year during MTV's Video Music Awards opening act, from her initial video that some said played on the “naughty schoolgirl” image, to her more recent videos that are quite sensual (the award-winning “Toxic” being bounced from daytime play on MTV after the Super Bowl incident), she has given folks plenty of room to develop these concerns. For many of these folks, the straw that broke the camel's back was her 55-hour marriage last year.
However, Britney seems to have turned a corner. She's been dressing a bit more conservatively (and, no matter what she wears, she's still going to be smokin'), and she seemed to be willing in initial overtures to her to perform at the RNC. The inclusiveness already demonstrated at the convention is great, and I think that a Spears appearance would have gotten the GOP some votes among younger voters. And, with class acts such as Martina McBride and Faith Hill there for her to hang out with and learn from, who's to say that an invitation might just have been the acceptance that she needed to continue her transition to becoming a real woman.
Acceptance is a powerful motivator, especially to someone who is trying to make a change. Jessica Simpson originally wanted to be a Christian singer; but, due to her well-endowedness, no Christian label would sign her. How different would her life and music be if she had received encouragement from the Christian community, and spent her teen years among Christians, instead of out in the pop world?
The true irony in all this is that Kid Rock was invited to play an after-party at the convention. If Kid Rock can lend his support, why not Ms. Spears?
Thursday, August 26, 2004
9:15 pm
Daniel J. Summers
And so little time to say it!
John Kerry - I can't believe that we have an anti-war activist running for President who is actually being taken seriously. I also can't believe that the self-same anti-war activist is running for President on his war record. I guess now that the military is back in vogue, the Democrats like it.
Gov. Jim McGreevey - At least he has more respect for the state of New Jersey that Bill Clinton had for the nation. Although it's now coming out (no pun intended) that the cause is corruption more than his penchant for those of like gender, his stepping down is the right decision. (He is muddying the issue with his “I am a gay American” schtick - that link has a very interesting take on that part of the situation.) I think he should step down immediately, though, rather than his political ploy of not stepping down until after the election.
The Olympics - Go Team USA! And congratulations to all the folks who, through their individual and team accomplishments, have made our country proud. Check out the medal count on NBCOlympics.com.
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth - Keep on keepin' on. McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional, and will be ruled as such by the time the next election rolls around. It's amazing that no one was upset when these 527 groups accused President Bush of poisoning pregnant women (a charge that is repeated on the Democrats' own web site [scroll to the bottom]), but let them use facts to challenge something a Senator says, and now they need to shut up. (Still no call for moveon.org to stop their ads…)
President Bush vs. Catwoman - Sharon Stone recently said that because of President Bush, there wasn't a lesbian kiss between she and Halle Berry in the movie Catwoman. I'm not quite sure I buy that - why would arch-enemies be kissing in the first place? And, if our President could control Hollywood, wouldn't he be using that control to silence the hateful drivel from Michael Moore and his ilk? Sharon Stone has had plenty of opportunities to play oversexed bisexual characters (in fact, wasn't that her first big role, in Basic Instinct?).
There are so many talented writers out there, so I think today I'm just going to let them do the writing. One site I came across during my travels was City Journal, which boasts a quote from Peggy Noonan crowning it “the best magazine in America.” It has two thought-provoking articles on marriage - “Gay Marriage vs. American Marriage” and “Redefining Marriage Away”. As best I can tell, these are not “Christian” folks per se, and one of the things I really enjoy is proving my beliefs using means other than the Bible. I feel that this type of proof may be more easily accepted by a world that doesn't believe the Bible in the first place. For another perspective, Cal Thomas (who is a Christian) writes that instead of pushing for a new law, Christians should try setting a better example first.
Thomas Sowell had two great columns this week, addressing what he calls the “grand fallacy” of our times. In Part 1, he exposes the fallacy of the belief that “equal opportunity = equal results.” And, in Part 2, he shows the danger of how preconceptions plus statistics equals “proof,” and puts the burden of proof off on the accused, instead of the accuser. As always, an excellent read.
Just one parting note - our next-door neighbors and great friends for over three years are moving on to California. Have a safe trip, guys!
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
10:15 pm
Daniel J. Summers
Arnold Schwarzenegger (R - CA), the Governor of California, made some waves over the weekend by calling members of the legislature who have failed to pass a budget "girlie-men." One would think that the San Francisco delegation wouldn't like being called out, but he was talking about more than just them. The California legislature seems to be taking a page from the US Senate - stall legislation so you don't actually have to vote on it. Last week, the US Senate failed to vote on cloture for the Federal Marriage Amendment. What this means is that these folks can go home and campaign, and try to convince the conservative among their constituency that they're not really against it, but they just didn't have a chance to vote for it.
This is the same technique the same estimable body of legislators has used to keep judicial nominees from receiving their due up/down vote. These “elected leaders” also voted not to change cloture motion voting rules, so that each takes successively fewer and fewer votes to break a filibuster. As the author in article stated, the now Democrat minority in the Senate is using a technicality to thwart the will of the people - and these are the folks who were screaming 4 years ago that voters were disenfranchised! They've taken Slick Willie's obfuscation to a whole new level - the Republicans can't use my voting record against me if I don't actually vote!
This really comes down to a character issue. One of the favorite slogans of the Democrats in elections past was that character didn't matter - only a candidate's ability to do the job. I submit that the job of President of the United States, or Federal legislator, demands character - these critical leadership positions are chosen by the people based on what the candidates say. Now, I know political double-speak has been around for longer than I have; what I'm talking about is the lack of character, as a whole.
These people may just be a reflection of today's society. Can you believe someone when they tell you “'til death do us part?” 2,000,000+ couples a year can't. You used to be able to believe someone if they said they would do something - now, you end up suing them for breach of contract when they don't do what they signed saying they would do. Politicians have long talked out of both sides of their mouths; but, you usually were able to go to their voting record and see if their actions and words agreed. The new “girlie-man” technique removes this - how do you know for whom to vote if you don't know how those folks would vote on the issues? This was Gov. Schwarzenegger's point - are you going to represent your constituents by voting the way they want you, or by voting the way Political Action Committees want you vote? As it turns out, there is a third option - throw a hissy-fit over a hyphenated word (lifted from a skit on SNL), and prove that the Governator had you pegged all along.
The blog (and the other pages here on the site) were in need of a facelift, so I decided to give this look a shot. I tried to improve it without making it too busy, and still maintain a clean, professional look. What do you think? Let me know… (Especially if it's good!)
[tap] [tap] [tap] Is this thing on? ;)
Update: Link removed from this post; this way-old site no longer exists
Grateful to our founding fathers, and all those who have fought to ensure our continued freedom; I wish each of you a joyous and restful day. And to this great land, a hearty “Happy Birthday!”
Many disastrous mistakes, in both public and private life, are not due to people thinking stupidly but to their not bothering to think at all. If you don't stop and think, then it doesn't matter whether you are a genius or a moron.
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
3:15 pm
Daniel J. Summers
He's at it again. The 42nd President of the United States, William Jefferson Blythe (Slick Willie, Bubba) Clinton, has resurfaced to promote his new book. Some folks fault him for not accepting the Sudan's offer to give us Osama bin Laden several years ago. In his defense of himself, he's providing many of us a reminder of just how grating he is to listen to. Did he admit that he had dropped the ball on that particular occasion? (Come on - are you kidding?) Did he adamantly deny this charge? He tried - he said "There was a story, which is factually inaccurate, that the Sudanese offered bin Laden to us. As far as I know, there is not a shred of evidence of that."
That's not a denial, folks; that's an assertion. “Factually inaccurate” means that the story could have the wrong date, or inaccuracies in the timeline - the phrase sounds nice, but it had a different meaning than “substantively inaccurate,” which is how I would describe something like that. (Actually, I probably would have called it a “pack of lies” or something like that…) And to his next phrase - he can't bring himself to say “I didn't do it,” he uses the cop-out “There's not a shred of evidence of that.” (If you'll recall, he's used that phrase before - when speaking of Mark Rich, the fundraising of Charlie Trie (paragraph 3), even when describing his own life. I saw that one person said “The proper way to parse that statement (“There's not a single shred of evidence”) is 'There are many shredded pieces of evidence.'” And, as if that's not a wishy-washy enough statement, he preceded it by saying “as far as I know.” Does this mean he's not sure whether there are shreds of evidence (or maybe even whole pages his staffers missed)?
This is the sort of pedantic double-speak that makes Clinton so dear to his party, and so frustratingly annoying to those not in his party. I would think that someone who was trying to rehabilitate their reputation would start talking straight. Ladies, think about it - if you accused your husband of having an affair with someone, and he said “As far as I know, there's not a shred of evidence that we ever had an affair,” would you be satisfied with that answer? What you would hear is something like “We did, but we covered our tracks really well, I think.” Back when the Godfather (Rush Limbaugh for those in Rio Linda) came into popularity (way back during Bush 41's presidency), one of his most common themes was that “words mean things.” (Sounds like a no-brainer, right?) Through Clinton's use of terms like this, and his creative narrowing of common terms such as is and sex, he harmed the moral fabric of this country immensely.
This mysogynistic, impeached rapist, who was held in contempt of court while seated as this nation's top executive officer, needs to go back into the shadows from where he came. The policy differences some folks have with our current President are nowhere close to Clinton's pattern of personal corruption, abuse of power, and illegal activities. Let's just hope against hope he doesn't become our first “First Gentleman”…
I've begun an adventure in using Linux. Along the way, I was jotting some stuff down, and I decided to post my chronicles here. Just click on My Linux Adventure.
(Note - this has been moved to the tech blog. This link takes you to the first post, and you can click the titles at the bottom left of each post to view the next.)