Bound to fail

Sometimes I don't know what's wrong with me or humanity. Often, we seem bound and determined to rationalize all of our ugliest impulses, to create a resigned and tragic fate for ourselves. On the alter of our own pride, of course.

One day back from Thanksgiving and I'm baraged, again, with news of a world determined to fail, I think. Or, more accurately, determined not to take responsibility for its failure.

Nice thing about a free society is that you end up looking like a fool if you persist down that path. Even if you are a major world power.

I think I just need someone to love and to watch the fireworks as we all go down in flames. Either that or watch us take a turn for the better.

Eventually it's got to be the latter.

The question, now, is how long will we fail before we acknowledge it to ourselves honestly.

Not too long, I hope.

Lot of good things to do in the world.

The way forward

The New York Times, of all publications, offers a piece that points us in the direction of more genuine progress. (Anyone who knows me well must realize what an astonishing thing that is to come from my keyboard. Let's just say the Times won't be getting a Christmas card from me this year.)

This is what those liberal democratic values, liberal and conservative, are all about.

Right and Left Join Forces on Criminal Justice

"In the next several months, the Supreme Court will decide at least a half-dozen cases about the rights of people accused of crimes involving drugs, sex and corruption. Civil liberties groups and associations of defense lawyers have lined up on the side of the accused.

Edwin Meese III, a former attorney general, once referred to the American Civil Liberties Union as part of the 'criminals' lobby,' but on this issue, he says, he is willing to work with the group.

But so have conservative, libertarian and business groups. Their briefs and public statements are signs of an emerging consensus on the right that the criminal justice system is an aspect of big government that must be contained.

The development represents a sharp break with tough-on-crime policies associated with the Republican Party since the Nixon administration.

'It’s a remarkable phenomenon,' said Norman L. Reimer, executive director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. 'The left and the right have bent to the point where they are now in agreement on many issues. In the area of criminal justice, the whole idea of less government, less intrusion, less regulation has taken hold.'

Edwin Meese III, who was known as a fervent supporter of law and order as attorney general in the Reagan administration, now spends much of his time criticizing what he calls the astounding number and vagueness of federal criminal laws.

Mr. Meese once referred to the American Civil Liberties Union as part of the 'criminals’ lobby.' These days, he said, 'in terms of working with the A.C.L.U., if they want to join us, we’re happy to have them.'

Dick Thornburgh, who succeeded Mr. Meese as attorney general under President Ronald Reagan and stayed on under President George Bush, echoed that sentiment in Congressional testimony in July.

'The problem of overcriminalization is truly one of those issues upon which a wide variety of constituencies can agree,' Mr. Thornburgh said. 'Witness the broad and strong support from such varied groups as the Heritage Foundation, the Washington Legal Foundation, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the A.B.A., the Cato Institute, the Federalist Society and the A.C.L.U.'

In an interview at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research group where he is a fellow, Mr. Meese said the 'liberal ideas of extending the power of the state' were to blame for an out-of-control criminal justice system. 'Our tradition has always been,' he said, 'to construe criminal laws narrowly to protect people from the power of the state.'

There are, the foundation says, more than 4,400 criminal offenses in the federal code, many of them lacking a requirement that prosecutors prove traditional kinds of criminal intent.

'It’s a violation of federal law to give a false weather report,' Mr. Meese said. 'People get put in jail for importing lobsters.'

Such so-called overcriminalization is at the heart of the conservative critique of crime policy. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce made the point in a recent friend-of-the-court brief about a federal law often used to prosecute corporate executives and politicians. The law, which makes it a crime for officials to defraud their employers of 'honest services,' is, the brief said, both 'unintelligible' and 'used to target a staggeringly broad swath of behavior.'

The Supreme Court will hear three cases concerning the honest-services law this term, indicating an exceptional interest in the topic.

Harvey A. Silverglate, a left-wing civil liberties lawyer in Boston, says he has been surprised and delighted by the reception that his new book, 'Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent,' has gotten in conservative circles. (A Heritage Foundation official offered this reporter a copy.)

The book argues that federal criminal law is so comprehensive and vague that all Americans violate it every day, meaning prosecutors can indict anyone at all.

'Libertarians and the civil liberties left have always had some common ground on these issues,' said Radley Balko, a senior editor at Reason, a libertarian magazine. 'The more vocal presence of conservatives on overcriminalization issues is really what’s new.'

Several strands of conservatism have merged in objecting to aspects of the criminal justice system. Some conservatives are suspicious of all government power, while others insist that the federal government has been intruding into matters the Constitution reserves to the states.

In January, for instance, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in United States v. Comstock, about whether Congress has the constitutional power to authorize the continued confinement of people convicted of sex crimes after they have completed their criminal sentences.

Then there are conservatives who worry about government seizure of private property said to have been used to facilitate crimes, an issue raised in Alvarez v. Smith, which was argued in October.

'A joint on a yacht, and the whole thing is forfeited,' said Paul Cassell, a law professor at the University of Utah and a former federal judge appointed by President George W. Bush.

Some religious groups object to prison policies that appear to ignore the possibility of rehabilitation and redemption, and fiscal conservatives are concerned about the cost of maintaining the world’s largest prison population.

'Conservatives now recognize the economic consequences of a criminal justice leviathan,' said Erik Luna, a law professor at Washington and Lee University."

After many dark years of backsliding in America and liberal democracies, this is a sign of the light at the end of the tunnel.

Progress in liberal democracies means we become more liberal, not more repressive. It means we become more committed to our own values. No matter what uglier impulses we betray in the meantime.

Our recriminatory, illiberal impulses are what animate the long record of tragedy that is the history of humanity.

This is what distinguishes us from mobsters, terrorists and despots. This is what makes all of us, liberal and illiberal, better people.

Finally, a beginning of the end to this dark, vengeful path.

May we all be forgiven our trespasses.

True colors

Jonathan Cohn lets slip his true colors in this really revealing piece of the attitudes of too many leftists, and conservatives, and so many folks, sadly.

Should We Laugh? Cry? Both?

"To be sure, Liberals can flex their muscle, too. Bernie Sanders made very clear, in his own statements over the weekend, that he wasn’t guaranteeing to give his vote--particularly if conservative Democrats (and former Democrats) extract even more concessions.

Sanders is right to play hardball like this, but, at the end of the day, it’s hard to imagine he’d cast the vote to kill health care reform. He simply cares too much about the people even a weakened bill would help. The same goes for Sherrod Brown, who’s emerging as a leading voice for progressives. Their interest in helping their fellow man is, in strategic terms, a great weakness."

You see, for too many leftists, as, sadly, with too many conservatives, and just pricks of all stripes, genuine concern for others cannot be interpreted as anything other than weakness.

Why?

Because it helps Jonathan sleep at night knowing that he's such a shithead. Oh, and giving a shit gets in the way, apparently, of the exercise of overwhelming power.

It couldn't possibly be that Jonathan Cohn is a sanctimonious, self-centered prick who can't even imagine that he might be wrong, on this or any other issue. You know. Exactly the type of guy that folks like Baron de Montesquieu, James Madison, and Lord Acton were trying to check and keep away from power.

This guy's got to be a real winner as a husband and father, doesn't he?

"Sorry, honey. I can't make love tonight. It demonstrates weakness."

Or maybe you're just a dumbass, Jonathan, who can't quite face the fact that your poor policies and means are getting your ass beat in the last and next election.

Hmm. What do you call proud dumbasses who keep losing because they don't give a shit about people?

Weak. That's what I fuckin' call them. You know. Folks who whine like a little bitch while they're losing because they can't acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, it's them.

Jonathan doesn't want to look weak. So he whines like a little pussy about how his weak-ass, cowardly efforts to force Americans to take on obligations they think are a bad idea are not persuasive enough to win public support.

In every circle I've ever swam in that is called weak.

Hitler was weak like this.

And that little bitch lost, motherfucker.

You will too, Jonathan.

Except, like every other motherfucker who has espoused force as a governing philosophy, noone will give two shits when you eat dirt.

Because you're such a fuckin' prick, that's why.

And you deserve to eat some topsoil.

Enjoy, Jonathan. From the bottom of my heart. Enjoy.

The heart of the matter

Jim Hoagland finally gets to the heart of the matter.

Awash in Unintended Consequences

"Israel's long occupation of Palestinian territory has helped produce the cynicism and weak leadership on both sides that confound would-be international shapers of peace and moral rectitude. Outsiders cannot resolve this conflict: Only an Israeli decision to end that occupation in fast order can lead to the security Israelis need and deserve, and the dignity Palestinians seek through a state of their own. That is the broader, more vital decision that Netanyahu needs to make."

It is a bit more complicated than that. Israelis will need a security partner in Palestine who will cooperate in arresting or killing terrorists who will not end their murder of Israelis. Palestinians need a state. The two states will need to develop workable ways to share Jerusalem, religious sites, scarce water resources, etc. Security will be needed for those Israelis who settle in Palestine and Israeli settlers should be put on notice that they settle at their own risk. Israelis will need to address right to return issues for Palestinians with family members murdered and forced from their homes in Israel.

And much time and healing will need to take place. A truth and reconciliation process like the one in South Africa and East Timor might facilitate this better.

But the truth is that the heart of the matter in the Middle East as in most difficult political issues is for people to have the courage to do the hard thing rather than fiddling around the edges of the cowardice of those who posture as tough in lieu of the genuine courage that would end their ugly legacies.

This is the heart of the matter on almost every political issue, is the truth. Various partisans not wanting to face honestly their ugly and abusive legacies and the bitterness and cycles of recrimination they inspire.

And the situation in the Middle East symbolizes the cowardice and failures of the world at large better than any issue we face today.

There is only one way through. A commitment to a resolution. And nothing else will ever, ever, ever end the murderous and tragic legacy that Palestinians and Israelis have heaped on one another until they decide to seek resolution of the pain that a hundred years of murder and tragedy has inflicted on their populations.

And the truth is that doing so takes courage that most people in the world, right now, nevertheless in Israel and Palestine, have rationalized that they just cannot find in their hearts.

While they watch the world burn down around them in consequence.

The only way through is the path of courage. On every issue. From here until the end of humanity.

And the path of courage is one of freedom, of conscience, and of our highest liberal ideals, an end to the legacy of manipulation and intimidation and power as a means of circumventing more honest resolution of each of these very serious matters of the heart.

Until Israelis and Palestinians find the courage to forgive their murderous pasts, their family, friends and neighbors will continue to die on the alter of their cowardice.

The same is true of most very serious matters of the heart in the world today. As Jim's headline alludes to, until we face the very sad and ugly unintended consequences of our legacy of trying to force resolutions that only genuine commitments of the heart can honestly resolve, we will continue to fail on almost every single major and minor issue we confront.

All so we do not have to face our own cowardice.

It is sad. Tragic, in the case of Israel and Palestine.

But it is not hopeless.

Because no matter how long we fail to make the more honest choice, the choice of courage sits in front of us like a child waiting patiently for its mother to claim it.

We just need to decide if we will choose the path of courage or not.

And, until we do, we can expect to reap what we sow and live with the consequences, in the meantime.

That is the heart of the matter.

May we choose wisely.

I'm alive

Be just terrible, wouldn't it, if everyone worked together this way? World just be awful if people treated each other decent, like this.

Thanks, Kenny. Thanks, Dave.

This was what I needed right now.



We definitely needs to tell the cynics to go to hell, to muck things up down there and to leave the rest of us alone.

And we need to give up the cynicism, frankly, that creates so much unnecessary tragedy in the world.

But, in the meantime, this is the sentiment I needed going into Thanksgiving. This is the why we celebrate, after all.

Giving a shit about one another. Even when folks are bound and determined otherwise.

Time to appreciate one another for a bit.

Same as it ever was

I'm taking charge. I'm just not taking responsibility.

The oldest philosophy in the book.

Choose wisely

Which is it gonna be? Freedom? Or repression?

Muslim countries seek international blasphemy ban

Choose wisely.

Christmas Song

My new roommate, an old friend from my speech and debate days, just introduced me to my new favorite Christmas song.

I'm sure I'm the last person on earth to hear it. But if you haven't heard it, you might check it out.



What this season and the legacy of the man it celebrates is all about.

Question

How's all that vengeance and recrimination goin'?

Discuss amongst ya'selves.

And that's all she wrote

I have to say that watching the last 10 years of politics in America and in the world, I have no doubts whatsoever in Lord Acton's wisdom.

He was right. Power corrupts. Period. And that is all she wrote.

Power is one long lie, sadly and typically, for why I cannot even consider admitting that I might be wrong that my efforts to use force, to bully and intimidate my friends and neighbors, except to prevent physical violence and, even then, when no other alternatives literally exist, are foolish and tragic efforts to get my way, no matter how much damage is done to both my and their larger purposes and to my and their sense of dignity and self-respect.

Power generally becomes one long justification for why I can and should impose as much tragedy for whatever purposes I please. No matter how much it hurts the people I impose upon and their efforts to improve their lives and the lives others.

And noone is immune. Period.

And, as with sin, the people to be most concerned about are those who believe they are incapable of its corruption. Especially those who would use power to remove sin, and all inevitable mistakes of life, from human existence.

Those who claim they are immune are not only wrong, their use of power becomes one long justification for their conceit in the matter, almost without exception.

And that's all she wrote.

And you know why I still remain hopeful.

Because every single man, woman, and even children who covets and holds power as inevitably falls. Every single one. Without exception.

As it should be.

And, over time, the romanticism of aggression to resolve human conflicts in lieu of more honest appeals to conscience gives way to a recognition that the ugly reality it imposes is far more dangerous than our fears about the absence of its use.

It is the only honest standard for progress, in fact.

And, deep down, we all know that is true. Because the yearning for freedom is univeral in every man, woman, and child. And it is universal because it is a necessary condition for our learning and growth, which is the only honest measure of our progress. No matter our fears to the contrary.

Lord Acton was right. And all of his contemporary, self-important challengers are wrong. Every one of their protests to the contrary.

Think that ideas are not as powerful as the use of force? Think that power trumps better conceptions of people and the world?

Watch. And learn.

And ask yourself whether it is force of the Roman Empire or the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, the might of the British Empire or the ideas of men like John Stuart Mill, Lord Acton, James Madison, and Baron de Montesquieu, the legacy of American imperialism and unchallenged American power or the wisdom of Mark Twain, Martin Luther King, Mohatma Ghandi, Desmond Tutu, Mohammed Yunus, Shirin Ebadi, and the like that is standing and will stand the tests of time.

Military and legal force can achieve important and limited purposes. But without a respect for those limitations - namely, a respect for the liberty and self-determination of individuals except when engaged in physical violence against others - those purposes are regularly undermined. Including and especially the purpose of encouraging compassionate, moral, and responsible learning and development. And the behemoth that is American power in the 21st century demonstrates that fact of human existence as clearly as any example today.

And the fact that most students of political life know Lord Acton and his wisdom, even if they have not fully internalized or acknowledged its implications for their own adventures with power, demonstrates the much more substantial power of the marketplace of ideas and free thought and action to correct for the very serious mistakes of power that Americans and most peoples of the world commit today.

And there will never be any real progress ever until that legacy is corrected. And a thriving human race will not be fully realized without it being fully corrected. Ever.

As long as that takes.

And that's all she wrote.

We've got work to do.

Fucked up

I've never been the kind of guy who school was something I just had to do but hated. In general, I've been someone who loved school, warts and all. I've had my problems with school, of course. As everyone does. But, when push came to shove, I generally enjoyed studying and learning more than most people. Still do.

When I was a senior in high school, my school won the state basketball championship. So our senior class had a senior gyp day to commemorate the honor. Virtually all of my fellow seniors left school that afternoon, except for me. I was in a child care class, in preparation for a teaching career. And I went and took care of the kids while all my friends took the afternoon off.

I just liked school more than most people.

Until now.

With all the Federal, state, and local legislation. With No Child Left Behind and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and every layer of bureaucracy I face at the local, state, and federal levels, as a teacher. For the first time in my life, I'm really beginning to hate school.

With all the bureaucracy and all the implicit leveraging behind them, I am, for the first time, beginning to hate being somewhere that I have organized my whole life around, I loved it so much.

It's really fucked up is what it is.

To take something someone loves and to fuck it all up. Because you care more about controlling them than just letting them do what they love.

For three weeks, I've been really hating my job, and all the bullshit that goes along with it, for this reason. The more people around me act this like is the way things are supposed to be, the less I want to be a part of it.

And you know what the really fucked up thing is about it? Most of those people never have and likely never will love education the way I have. It's a job for them. Or it was something they had to put up with until it was out of the way.

It was never like that for me.

Until now. Fucked up.

And I've gotten to a point where I don't even care anymore. I just want out. I want to support myself independently and just get away from people until they learn to stop twisting my arm to do something I already love so their egos can feel more secure that they are responsible for my efforts than I am. It's a really fucked up way to think about others, really. And I am tired of being subject to it, is the truth.

And now I just want a life of independent work so I can avoid it all as much as possible.

And let someone else let everyone else bully them into their own warped sense of how education and the world should work.

All so they can avoid the real challenges that come with an honest liberal education. And learning to reason better through life.

Do as I say, not as I do (or go directly to jail)

It's really the most bullshit part of the current health care legislation.

Pelosi: Jail time "very fair" for failing to buy your patriotic Obamacare coverage



Bill Clinton and Michael Moore don't take care of their own health. But they lead the campaign to put people in jail who don't buy insurance to take care of theirs, even if they don't need or want it.

Oh, and these are liberals, by the way. In case you'd lost track. Liberals are the folks who put people in jail who decide they don't want health insurance, or who are homeless, or who otherwise inconvenience them. Or really anything they disagree with these days.

Because that's what liberals are. Liberals are people who put people in jail or who bully and intimidate people who disagree with them. In case you had any questions what it meant to be liberal.

That is, of course, what it means to be a liberal, as anyone who has ever been one knows. It's what the term liberal means.

To put people in jail who disagree with you.

Could be the opposite. I've lost track myself.

George Orwell, I'm pretty sure, would have something to say about this political period. And I'm fairly certain it would not be flattering.

All I know is that liberal kid I was not too terribly far back would not recognize this as liberalism at all.

To be a liberal meant to be compassionate and thoughtful, when I was growing up. It was the reason why I admired such people when I was growing up.

And legislation like this health care proposal demonstrates just how much liberalism has turned away from its original and strongest principles.

So enamoured they've become of power.

Because that's what a liberal is. Someone who covets power. Because too little power to fix our problems is exactly what has ailed the world for most of its history. And liberals were the folks who finally figured that out.

Power enobles, as one famous liberal once said. And absolute power enobles absolutely.

And now, finally, we can make the progress that all that power makes possible.

Attention dicks of the world: Back the fuck up

The worst fate is to not just be repetitive. It's for your endless loop of redundancy to be unendingly wrong.

This is no time to kowtow to China

John Bolton is right that we should stop acting like China's totalitarian Communist regime is stronger than it really is. And that's about where it ends.

What John can't get figured out, right now, is that most people thought he was kind of dick when he was in office for a reason.

Because he is kind of a dick.

And it hasn't quite occurred to John, at this point, that he and his boss were removed for exactly that reason. For being dicks.

So how does John respond to that sequence of events?

"I must not be a big enough dick."

Sound more and more like a leftist every day, Mr. Bolton. In fact, you sound much more like that Chinese Communist leadership than you would ever want to admit. Which is appropriate. Because that's what so many leftists want to sound like, as much as possible, these days. Just so everyone knows they're serious.

Trick is, everyone knows they're serious. We just don't give a shit.

Because Americans don't back down to intimidation easily. That's what makes us Americans, you fuckin' prick.

Dicks is dicks. And they can all eat a dick. And we will take them down, one by one, until they get the fuckin' message.

Or until they aren't a concern, at all. Whether they get the fuckin' message or not.

Intimidating your way to failure

John Judis just doesn't get it.

Anti-Statism in America

"Where the Obama administration has stumbled is in handling the Republicans in Congress. In its eagerness to avoid attacks from business and conservative Republicans, and to win over the few Republican moderates, the White House has appeared willing to ditch significant parts of its reform program, including the public option from its health care bill and strict regulation of derivatives from its financial-reform proposal, even though these kinds of measures have remained popular among the public.

The White House has also mishandled liberal and left-wing movements when they have run ads against wayward Democrats who appeared unwilling to back the administration’s reform agenda. Generally, the White House has tried to discourage them from taking positions independent of the administration’s. And it has thrown its support to Organizing for America, a quasi-political machine that grew out of the campaign and that is united by its loyalty to Obama rather than by its support for liberal reform. That’s a mistake. Obama and the Democrats need active, unruly, and independent pressure from the left to combat Republican conservatives, intimidate Democratic fence-sitters, and persuade business that, if it doesn’t back Obama’s reforms, it could face much more radical measures.

Still, with these exceptions, Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress have done well under conditions that are not as favorable for reform as they seemed in January. Obama and the Democrats understand not only the opportunity for reform, but also the long-standing ideological obstacles they face in obtaining it, and they have adopted a strategy of dividing business and framing their proposals as market reforms. If they continue to do so, and if they are not scared off by pressure from the right, they should succeed in getting a health care bill and new financial regulations. A climate-change bill will be more difficult but not impossible, as long as they can keep the voting public focused on the specifics of liberal reform rather than the atmospherics of ideological conservatism."

What John Judis just can't get through his thick fuckin' skull is that it is exactly this kind of bullshit and intimidation into trusting government more than it has earned parading around as something more honest that is leading independent voters like myself to vote for Republicans and let Democrats eat some serious fuckin' dirt.

We know you're game, shithead. We're voting against it, moron. You're just too stupid and stubborn to face up. And so be it. So you lose. Boo-fucking-hoo, you fuckin' bully.

"I'm so fuckin' scared that my ideas suck - which they do, as it turns out - that I can't even have an honest discussion and debate about them. Because that might expose how little substance there is to my thinking.

And my ego and my power to bully on this and all such matters is far more important than getting to better ideas.

Because being a shithead for a favored cause is just how things are done. And always have been. And nothing's going to change that."

Except for elections, you stupid arrogant fuck.

Note to John Judis and all leftists:

Maybe it's you.

Either way, you are losing. And for good reason.

Whether you will ever be able to admit that you are wrong about anything, at all, ever in your lives, or not.

In the meantime, the good guys will win. Bank on that.

No matter whether you ever get over yourselves or not.

Americans took care of one arrogant President. We'll take care of you, too.

And every single son-of-a-bitch who doubts that freedom is what America is all about.

Doubt that?

Watch, motherfucker.

Courage or cowardice and the stakes in Afghanistan

Boris Johnson, conservative mayor of London, makes plain the stakes in Afghanistan.

To abandon Afghanistan now would be a betrayal of the fallen

"We are there with the Americans not just because it is our function to be their loyal lieutenant, the fidus Achates of Washington. We are there with the Americans in Afghanistan because the Americans are right to be there. We are there because our forces are doing their level best to improve the lives of the people of that poverty-stricken country. We are there to try our hardest to teach them the value of democracy and of educating women. We are there to do what we can to wean them off the opium crop.

Of course, no one could pretend that things are going well. Yes, it is difficult to promote women's liberation and democracy and drains and habeas corpus when you have a constant risk of attack by a resurgent Taliban. How can our troops hope to deal with the opium crop when the very brother-in-law of President Karzai turns out to be one of the biggest drugs gangsters of the lot? Of course, it is depressing that British soldiers fought and died to ensure that Afghans in Helmand could vote – and yet one in three of the ballots turns out to have been fraudulent. The position is grim.

But what is the alternative? The answer is that the alternative is even grimmer. I have an Afghan sister-in-law, and she remembers the chaos and the carnage when the Russians finally pulled out in 1989. She doesn't want the Taliban to take over the entire country, as they did before. She doesn't want Afghanistan to become a giant version of the Taliban mini-state of Waziristan. Are we really going to follow the advice of the Independent on Sunday, haul up the white flag, bring our troops home, and consign Afghanistan to a bunch of thugs and religious maniacs?"

And I do want to point out the obvious.

At every point, in these two wars, Americans and their allies have done the right thing not because they had to or were compelled to.

But because it was the right thing to do. And we just chose to do it.

And that should be contrasted with the cowardice of those who would compel our will otherwise. And still choose cowardice over that more genuine courage.

Courage is something you either choose to demonstrate. Or not. It cannot be compelled.

And that is a fact of life that only those who demonstrate it know.

Because cowards can do nothing but take that courage for granted. Because they could not possibly know any other way of life.

Because it is those with courage who keep them alive. And keep all of us moving in the right direction.

If we don't want to demonstrate that courage, that is all fine and dandy.

But folks without that kind of courage need to stop pretending to have it when they don't.

And learn to let those of us who do to do our jobs.

And stop being hamstrung by those who can't find it within themselves to offer it up.

Why I gotta live a life I love

It's finally occurred to me why I have to live a life I love, as I fight through a paper for school, right now, that I am utterly disinterested in.

Because I would be thoroughly bored if I chose any other kind of life.

Why choose a life worth living, even with the hassles?

Because a life without important challenges is mindnumbingly boring. Which may be why this is the most common complaint among kids in school and adults with their work (outside of feeling like you're being treated or getting paid like shit).

Why do I want to marry someone who is thoughtful and loving, even when that often makes them somewhat complicated and unpredictable?

Because those are the kind of people I most like to hang out with. Because they keep me interested. And they are the ones who can challenge me in a way that keeps me learning and growing. They also happen to be the folks who treat me nicer, typically.

And nice and loving trump all the rest any day of the week. No matter what talking heads tell you different.

I gotta have a life I love because I want to love my life. And I can only love my life if I'm doing something worthwhile. And the worthwhile stuff always comes with headaches. That's what makes it worthwhile.

But, mostly, I gotta have a life I love because I want to meet a girl, someday, who has a life she loves. And I want to share a life I love with someone else. And some kids, at some point.

And, if I don't, I'll always be faking it. Trying to pretend I love a life that really makes me unhappy. And that unhappiness will be clear as day to everyone else. No matter how much I try to fake that my life is going better than it is.

Find a life you love. So you're not pretending that you love your life when you don't. Or worse, so you're not pretending that a life you've settled for isn't really so bad just so you don't have to take the risks that would be involved with living a life you love.

You only get one. Choose one that's close to your heart. Because it's the only one you'll get to live. No matter how you choose to live it.

So choose to love it. And choose one you love.

So none of us has to pretend otherwise.

The heart of the matter

This is what this health care debate is about when we finally get down to it.

Government Force at the Heart of Obama-care

This is the heart of all of our political debates, right now.

Are we going to rationalize force as a governing philosophy?

Or is freedom the animating spirit of America and liberal democracies.

I know where I stand.

Do you?

The Berlin Wall and what it really means to be liberal

Mags said it best.

You think different? Keep trying motherfuckers. And watch the quest for freedom keep running circles around you.

Liberal democracies are liberal for a reason. And it's certainly not to sell out all that liberty in the sheep's clothing of "liberalism".

No matter how many ways leftists try to spin this commemoration, the bottom line is this.

Today is a celebration of freedom.

And that's exactly what we'll be doing.

With or without the permission of our masters.

How's that stimulus workin' out for ya?

U.S. Unemployment Rate Rises to 10.2%, Highest in 26 Years

I know, I know. All that Keynsian activity that preceded these numbers couldn't possibly have made things worse. It's all George Bush's fault. Democrats make all the right calls. Republicans make all the wrong calls.

Even when things go to shit on your watch.

To even conceive that you might be wrong is the greatest sin in politics, apparently.

That and really giving a shit.

Thank goodness we have political leaders who do neither.

Because what a goddamned mess the world would be then.

Lovable, whiny little bitches

After much reflection, I have come to the conclusion that Americans, and most people in the world, really, are my crew. My humongous crew of lovable, whiny little bitches.

Forgivable, to be sure. But the biggest bunch of whiny bitches I've ever met, just as surely.

No matter how much opportunity they have to make a life they love, no matter how much more they have than the rest of the neighbors around the globe, and no matter how much, despite that, they end up, generally unintentionally, making life miserable for themselves and others, they are just never satisfied. No matter what kind of solid chance they have to make a life worth living.

Kinda sad, really. But I love 'em anyway. They're my crew. My American crew. My crew of humanity. And I will stand with them through thick and thin. Whiny little bitches and all.

Denial, apparently, is a river in San Fransciso

Nancy Pelosi: We Won Last Night



Catch that forced smile? Sure sign of confidence, don't you think?

Denial, apparently, is a river in San Fransisco. Wonder what water the rest of the Democratic Party is drinking, this morning?

Distilled by power, I'm sure.

The most honest kind, of course.

Or maybe that's just another lie we tell ourselves. Just like all the rest.

Coffee-shop foreign policy

I'm pretty sure I should have been a rock star, at this point.

I'm just thoroughly disgusted by the cowardice of most "grown-ups," at this point.

As liberal peoples all-too-quietly celebrate one of the most important events of the 20th century - the fall of the Berlin Wall - and as a I read all this nonsense about China as some kind of serious autocratic alternative to Western liberal democracy I just want to scream at these shitheads, "The Founders' courage was wasted on you stupid fucks."

Cowardice in the West is what embolden these shitheads. In China. In Zimbabwe. In North Korea. In Iran. In Cuba. And all over the world.

Cowards need to learn the courtesy to shut the fuck up if you aren't going to stand squarely behind people with more courage who challenge these regimes on principle, not as a matter of easy pontification.

Anyone who rationalizes these regimes deserves to be imprisoned, tortured, or killed at their hands, just to make sure they still hold the same opinion, once their done.

And if they don't think that's a fair test, perhaps they might want to rethink their cowardice.

Or perhaps they might want a more intimate knowledge of their favored coffee-shop foreign policy.

Getting by with a little help from our friends

It's becoming a trend. An encouraging one.

Iran police, protesters clash at U.S. Embassy rally

Progress doesn't depend on power. Quite the opposite. Progress generally happens despite and at the expense of those in power.

Because becoming responsible for our own lives and one another does not and should not depend on power, ideally.

And that is the direction of liberal progress. Whether governments and their supporters want to face that fact or not.

Why power is so dangerous

It's not a new story.

Two assumptions behind the wise use of power.

People are, generally, unerring in its use.

And, barring that, that they are willing to readily admit their mistakes.

Which one of those assumptions is true? Of anyone?

Neither.

Which is exactly why it is a good instinct to, generally and really almost always, not trust people with power, except when there are literally no other alternatives.

Because they can fuck with peoples' lives. And because they are prone to fucking up with its use.

And, most importantly, because they are loathe to admit when they are fucking up.

Everyone.

Even teachers.

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That's what Lord Acton meant.

And that's why he is the badass to end all badasses.

Literally.

Bank on that.

Puritan's progress

Progress.

Battle over face veil brewing in Egypt

The way forward, you see, is less religious freedom, not more.

That's what the Enlightenment was all about, you see. It was about limiting religious expression so that everyone has to play by the same rules.

Right.

The Puritans would be proud.