May 26 - Sorry about the downtime -- I had some trouble with the computer so took it into the shop, and it turned out "the" problem was actually a number of issues.

Oh well, they got fixed. I'm poorer, but I think the new video card in particular resolved a lot of other little problems. I hope.

On more relevant issues: I don't get Mexican President Vicente Fox. The boast that the United States (and Canada) get the best and brightest from other countries is not an idle one, and one would think, if he truly wants to see Mexico advance, that he would regard the steady outflow of ambitious, energetic people with dismay.

It doesn't matter, really, because the American people are no longer buying the "defer and delay" tactics of the past 20 years from our government. The reluctant urgency by the Senate to at least appear to resolve immigration issues has been sharply challenged by the nervous House of Representatives who are scrambling to give some semblence of leadership yet who are merely following We, the People, who are determined the laws be upheld and the borders be secured. We don't always get to set the agenda but this is one of those wonderful times when the wisdom of having fixed, two-year terms for House members proves sound.

Yes, they will continue to try to wriggle of the hook, so the pressure has to kept on.

As for the Senate, I did use the down time to some advantage. I began to re-read a book from my university days, The Federalist Era (1789-1801) by John C. Miller, and find it both aggravating and comforting that the Senate was as supercilious then as it is now.

Miller writes than when the "great experiment" was launched, the Senate appointed a special committee which recommended that the proper title for the President should be "His Highness the President of the United States and Protector of the Rights of the Same" and he should be properly addressed as "His Excellency" or "His Elective Majesty."

Bush-bashers will doubtless see the above as an opening and thus miss the point: at a time when the country desperately needed to establish institutions and precedents for the governance of the infant nation, the Senate was more concerned about pomp and ceremony.

We are so used to think of our Senate in modern terms that we forget that the body after which it was consciously modeled was composed of patricians and their primary concern was remain aloof from the common man even as they placated the citizens of Rome with bread and circuses.

This week, though, the circus moved back to the House of Representatives, the members of which seem to believe that they too are above the law. Although they have been appeased, Tuning Spork has an interesting theory about the real reason behind the evacuation of the Rayburn Building after a report of gunfire -- which is now being attributed to noises orginating from a construction crew? Hmm.

Day-um, the screen looks good. The problem had developed so gradually that I hadn't realize how the view had degraded. It just goes to show: you can't beat clarity.

More tomorrow, and a good albeit bittersweet Memorial Day weekend to everyone.

Never forget those who serve.

May 27 - 18:01 Ah, this explains everything. Members of Congress are not only tone-deaf but suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder (or should that be we are suffering from their narcissism?)

Maybe we should try something different and elect adults to Congress come November.

Posted by: Debbye at 04:50 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 601 words, total size 4 kb.

May 15 - I used to love books about Elizabeth I when I was a girl and have enjoyed the Helen Mirren two-part series now showing on TMN. There are always lessons from history, but the outcome of historical events should not blind us to the fact that, had those wars not been waged, the Western civilization we celebrate today may not have evolved.

In short, had either side surrendered without a struggle, would religious tolerance have triumphed?

I think it unlikely. I can understand why so many want to take a short cut, but much as we deplore war, war has come to us just as it came to the Protestants in those days and we have only two choices: fight on our feet now or die on our knees later. This Westerner's temperment is not suited for submission and, in the spirit of the ancient Greeks to whom we owe so much of our civilization, I do not prostrate in fear before my God but stand before Him freely filled with the awe of the love and compassion He has shown both those who have accepted Him and those who have not yet nonethless walk the path of righteousness.

Don't take that to mean I am a good Christian. I'm not. I suffer terribly from pride and I find it hard to forgive my enemies. It takes me a long time to build a grudge but once I have one it's difficult for me to let it go. I pay to Caesar that which is owed to Caesar but it's only money, after all, because my soul remains free.

I believe that the theory of evolution best fits the scientific knowledge we have accumulated but I'm always struck at questions that eventually circle around to what happened one second before the big bang and that too feels me with awe. For someone who really sucked in science I am nonethleless a most curious person who can delight in the little bits of plate techtonics and quest for the Theory of Everything that I can grasp. Indeed, the theory of evolution or the prospect of life on other planets doesn't dissuade me from belief in a benign deity but confirms it, and if there is anything I don't understand it is how discovery of life on other planets would destroy our faith in God.

If God created rational, creative life on one planet why wouldn't He do it on other planets? If we truly understand what it means to celebrate life then why wouldn't we expect to find life throughout the universe?

Such thoughts fill me on Mother's Day because, like many women, I worry that I have borne sons who are destined to fight a war that my generation failed to wage. But unlike the appeasers and defeatists, I know I didn't bring children into this world to be slaves but to be free men who would chart their own destinies and that is both a blessing and a curse.

Some books stay with you longer. I can't tell you why The Last Battle, the 6th books in C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia, was my long-time favourite of the series, but the events of these past years have caused me to revisit this book and see it in a different light. Did C.S. Lewis foresee a potential danger clearer than us sophisticated, modern folk? This portion from Chapter III has haunted me:

The Ape jumped up and spat at the Lamb. .."Tash is only another name for Aslan. All that old idea of us being right and the Calmormenes wrong is silly. We know better now. The Calormenese use different words but we all mean the same thing. Tash and Aslan are only two different names for you know Who. That's why there can never be any quarrel between them. Get that into your heads, you stupid brutes. Tash is Aslan. Aslan is Tash."

[...]

"Excuse me," said the Cat very politely, "but this interests me. "Does your friend from Calormene say the same?"

"Assuredly,"" said the Calormene. "The enlightened Ape--Man, I mean--is in the right. Aslan means neither less nor more than Tash."

"Especially, Aslan means no more than Tash?" suggested the Cat.

"No more at all," said the Carormene, looking the Cat straight in the face.

[...]

... But now, as Tirian looked round on the miserable faces of the Narnians, and saw how they would believe that Aslan and Tash were one and the same, he could bear it no longer.

"Ape," he cried with a great voice, "you lie. You lie damnably. You lie like a Calormene. You lie like an Ape."

He meant to go on and ask how the terrible god Tash who fed on the blood of his people could possible be the same as the good Lion by whose blood all Narnian was saved. If he has been allowed to speak, the rule of the Ape might have ended that day; ...

My God asks that I expend my blood to save that of innocents. Their Allah demands that the blood of innocents be shed for his glory.

The martyrs of my religions gave their lives freely without taking life in affirmation of their belief in one true God. The martyrs of Mohammed's religion have become martyrs by taking the lives of others.

I wish there was an easier path. I wish it could be resolved with dialogue and no loss of blood. I wish that my wishes were not so futile.

Now read Sword Without Leniency by Bruce Thornton (via Newsbeat1) and remember that we already have been already converted to the "true faith" -- the one that gives life, not death, and the one which, through the gift of freedom, allows us to find God through affirmation, not submission, and that it is through our journeys by different paths that we affirm that the gift of free will is the path to righteousness.

On this day, the day after Mother's Day, I wish I could wish peace be upon us but I fear the best I can wish is that we raise our sons and daughters well and that we keep our faith with the mothers before us who grieved to know that their sons were needed to fight a war no one wanted but one that came to us nevertheless. It is our curse and our blessing, and although it is not of our choosing, we must take that which has given to us and know that future generations will not decry our lack of courage.

And that, in truth, is the one lesson history teaches us: that we accept the burdens bequeathed to us and bear them as have those before us.

Posted by: Debbye at 01:38 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 1222 words, total size 7 kb.

Apr. 20 - Mark's youth team (he's a lowly coach) had some exhibition games on Saturday. They seemed to field and pitch okay, but don't have game sense, i.e., they don't seem to know what to do with the ball when they field it.

It ought to be simple. Before the ball is put into play, fielders need to have a notion as to what they will do if the ball is hit to them and what they will do if it's not hit to them, i.e., what position they will back up. It's not exactly hard to figure; after all, a 3-1 play is fairly routine (that's the first baseman tossing the ball to the pitcher for the out at first) and I know the kids have seen it several times.

And relay. It's a baseball fundamental, but kids don't get it - they want to be the hero who throws it into home from left field. They also don't get why trying to hit a legitimate home run (as opposed to a single and 3 errors) is selfish. The sorriest statistic in the world is "runners left on base."

And deeking out a baserunner? Dude, we call that a balk.

Strikes are fascist, ground balls are democratic. The truth and implications of that statement is crystal clear to me but very difficult to explain to those who don't already know it. Luckily I don't have to; Mark does. Heh.

I hate the way the concept "team work" has been bastardized. In a sports setting, team work is the magic that happens when the players have a winning attitude and bust their asses to win the game. The fielders do their utmost to retire batters and "passed ball" is regarded by catchers as grounds to commit suicide. Everything comes together and the bang-bang plays create an intensity and excitement that drives the entire team. Who doesn't love a clutch hitter?

Team work is that intangible thing that cannot be artificially created but comes straight from the heart - a stubborness and perseverance that marks those who strive to win.

In a work setting, though, team work seems to be code for "some people need to work harder to cover up for those who refuse to perform." If a company really wants team work they need to do as sports teams are supposed to do: bench or release players that won't or can't strive to win in order to keep that winning edge.

It's going to be an interesting season.

I managed to get a few consecutive days off work before Easter and resolved to do those things most easily deferred: my taxes, and washing the windows and curtains.

The windows and curtains really do need to be done. I haven't done them since Sept. 11 despite my earnest intentions. Somehow it always seemed more important to surf the news channels and internet to see if there had been another terror attack - and, too often, there had indeed been one.

But I found we had only a tad of window-washing solution, so I did my taxes - sort of. Mind, I was very well prepared. I had sharp pencils, the correct forms, my adding machine, scratch paper, all my receipts, and some cold beer in the fridge to celebrate the successful conclusion of this annual ritual. When I went to get my T-4, though, it wasn't where I had seen it less than 24-fraking-hours earlier.

I began to search, and boy did I search. I found all sorts of papers and mailers and stuff I meant to look at (some of it went back to the beginning of Gulf War II, which I guess is a commentary as to how long I've been shutting out everyday stuff) and, because I still suffered with a mild variety of the spring cleaning bug, I began to toss or file. Then I went through the newly bulging files; I'm not sure why I had baseball registration lists from 1997, but I can honestly say that now I no longer have them. Was I still procrastinating? Yes, because all the figures I needed were on my final pay voucher of 2005 so I finally bit the bullet and did my stupid taxes (and called work Monday morning to humbly request a replacement T-4.)

Then I noticed this weird smudge on a wall. You know what happens when you wash a smallish section of a wall, right? Right.

If anyone next to you has just fallen off their chair you are undoubtably sitting beside someone who knows me and how much I hate housework. It was all very well and good when the kids were little (and, come to think of it, spending most of my time trying to up clean the dirt they and the dog brought in from outside) but that was the in the pre-Internet era as well as those days when all history ended and life is much more exciting now - and considerably more dangerous.

Solutions seem harder to come by now (maybe because the Cold War strategy was conceived before I was even born.) Except for Iraq: that one is as simple as A-B-C. We keep faith with the people of Iraq. We don't flinch. We stick it out.

Iran, though, is hard. Those who discount the messages coming out of Iran as simple rhetoric simply haven't been paying attention. Bin Laden used to be dismissed too, until we learned to our shock that he meant business.

We can't go back to 1979 (which is why a long vacation would look good on President Carter right now) and have to deal with what is happening today. The U.N. will likely be useless - will there likely be a new Oil-for-Food program for Iran after sanctions prove to be a burden on the Iranian people? Puh-leeze.

And then there are those voices that are carefully implying that if we abandon Israel we'll end the "root causes" that caused Sept. 11 and the threat from Iran. But let's get serious: the root cause of barbarism is, you know, barbarism, and even the barbarians didn't occupy Rome until the Romans had lost the will to fight -- most clearly evidenced in that they had sub-contracted their fighting out to others.

Come to think of it, one of Bin Laden's grievances was on behalf of dead infants in Iraq which he attributed to the sanctions. Has he lifted the jihad now that the sanctions have been lifted? Or directed one to Saddam for diverting money from health care for his own personal gain? Of course not. There will always be grievances because there will always be those who will justify unbelievable acts of savagery for their own ends. But do we have to play along?

I would be willing to go on a bit of faith that the cartoon controversy was viewed by many national leaders as a skirmish and the feckless response was simply a feint, but something very precious was seen to be surrendered: the right to be irreverent, and without irreverence we lose our joy. No South Park? No Simpson's? Or, and this is really scary, no Monty Python?

Those who take themselves too seriously run the risk of ulcers and migraines, but I doubt waiting for the dour mullahs to develop life-style health problems is a useful strategy.

So the spectre of nuclear weapons in Iran - a country that has absolutely neither reverence for international relations much less a sense of humour - continues to pose a problem that challenges us all. I do feel certain we need to come up with a strategy that differs from those employed in both Afghanistan and Iraq and the best one I've heard thus far is to give more tangible support to the pro-democracy forces within Iran. It's a long shot, and I guess that even though I never would have characterized myself as a gambler I do remain, at heart, a liberal (in the classic sense) and I'm willing to gamble on my belief that the yearning for freedom remains the most compelling urge in the history of humanity.

Relying on the choice less hopeful is straight out of Tolkien - the quest to destroy the ring was one such choice, and Arvedui's claim of the kingship in Gondor was another. [That's an admittedly obscure reference; my fellow explorers in the the History of Middle Earth will undoubtably recognize it and others can find it in the Appendix of Return of the King where Earnil's ascension to the throne is discussed.]

Oh well, I'll do the stupid windows and curtains over the weekend but place the responsibility on Mark to remember to buy window cleaner. That might work, but I know I'll have to keep reminding him. And if it rains, maybe he'll have to cancel practice and then can help me take the curtains down!

Yeah, sometimes team work means cursing obstinate household fixtures together.

Posted by: Debbye at 05:41 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1471 words, total size 8 kb.

June 15 - Sorry for the lapse in posting. As many of you know, I work in retail. Christmas and Father's Day are real challenges and remind me how very much I adore male shoppers.

Men* are terrific shoppers. They come, they see, they buy.

Oh, there's the occasional dithering over ties, but generally they are in Hunting Mode: moving silently and unobtrusively through the terrain seeking their prey and, upon bagging it, exiting the bush.

Christmas and Mother's Day finds men - and their progeny - in perfumes and household wares. They acquire items like Calvin Klein's CK Summer One 2005 and toaster-ovens - already boxed - and depart. It takes 30 minutes tops.

When the more adventurous traverse women's wear, they too are in Hunting Mode: move a few steps, pause and observe. Repeat until they see something they really like, ask for help, and tell the associate that the intended recipient is "about your size." (Although there are those who are better prepared because they checked the woman's closet and noted what size is on the majority of her clothes; that seems to be a learned trait, though.)

Christmas and Father's Day heralds the arrival of female shoppers - and their progeny - in droves to Men's Wear. I predict the vast majority of Toronto fathers will receive a dress shirt and a tie for Father's Day.

Women do not merely feel the fabric, check the size, and make their purchases. Nooo, they behave as though they are in Women's Wear, and must touch, feel and examine every single item in sight - not because they are considering a purchase, but because it is their imperative. They are neither silent nor unobtrusive.

Needless to say, I bless them all because with every purchase they ensure my continued employment, but anyone who believes women are inherently neater and tidier than men has never worked in retail.

*Some male shoppers - the teenage variety - aren't strictly speaking shoppers: they are there to check out female shoppers of the teenage variety. They too are in Hunting Mode but their tactics are different.

Posted by: Debbye at 01:25 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 363 words, total size 2 kb.

May 27 - The 60's produced a lot of people who still hold to the values expressed by JFK, Dr. King, Malcolm X and RFK, and George Bush is also a product of the 60's. He expressed those ideals in his Whitehall Speech which spelt out the cause for freedom as our priority in U.S. foreign policy - and wasn't that the primary banner under which we marched in the 60's? I could understand dismissing the speech as mere words but we are actively in the field, fighting and dying to give life to those ideals, and our country was finally putting its money where its mouth was.

One would think that political activists from the 60's would feel some satisfaction that the major impetus for our activism - that the U.S. was supporting vicious dictators as part of the Cold War - had finally been addressed. So why are so many of them on the other side?

Keith Thompson's column in the SF Chronicle was noted by Instapundit (among many others) because he spells out unequivocally how the left abandoned liberalism. I can well imagine how the column was received in San Fransisco, though, and it probably started with the phrase "Yes, but."

Maz2 sent me a link to Thompson's website (Thompson at Large) and I noted in the interview on the main page that he expressed his admiration for Robert F. Kennedy. (Thompson also writes the blog Sane Nation.)

Invoking RFK sure brings back a lot of memories. People who make blanket assumptions about baby boomers do so in a vacuum. Maybe some day I'll write the definitive essay on how my generation was affected by events which culminated in 1968 and were I to really try and write it the thesis would probably be based on this hypothesis:

Baby-boomer Democrats are idealists who were mugged in 1968.

Maybe you had to be there to get that, but I'll just try to condense and say that politically aware people were hit with a bombardment of events in 1968 and those who look back on it as their heyday probably forgot that actually, it was a year of intense pain, struggle and loss (I sort of covered some of the events here in my early and thus raw blogging days.)

One unchallenged assumption we made back then was that those brave and courageous enough to stand up to U.S. foreign policy were liberations fighters. We were wrong. Different people probably have individual moments when that assumption proved disasterous, but for me it was probably the scenes of Vietnamese frantically trying to get out of Vietnam when the U.S. withdrew from Saigon - why were all these people trying to get away? they were free now! - and then the embassy takeover in Tehran forced me to reconsider my automatic support of the anti-Shah forces in Iran (because Khoumeini's supporters were, you know, progressive) and, although it took awhile and required kicking some very bad habits, I gradually figured out that being pro-democracy rarely equated anti-American. This new awareness wasn't based on fear but on guilt: I had blindly supported all things progressive and thus supported groups and causes that were as destructive and murderous as I imagined U.S. foreign policy to be.

A realization like that can really knock the wind out of you. Just think "Pol Pot" and imagine the shock when ugly reality intrudes on your complacent support for progressivism.

There are a lot of people who haven't moved beyond their 60's views, and that's their right, but I do find it disturbing that they so little resemble the people we were back then. We may have been dumb, but we also had a lot of love for and eagerly embraced the world and the future. Our belief system was as far away from cynical sophistication as you can possibly get - in fact, we avoided cynical and sophisticated people because they were, like, plastic, you know? Never trust anyone over 30 because they were all sell-outs who had been co-opted by the establishment and lived in the suburbs with houses made of ticky-tacky.

We despised liberals above all because they were phony, which proves that we were right about some things. We also despised the establishment, and the problem with today's liberals is that when they became the establishment, they became what they once opposed.

Yes, I'm going somewhere. I think that maybe you have to be humble enough to admit that the extravagances of one's youth were what they were, and they require neither stubborn defense nor apology but just a little honesty to ascertain what was good and should be preserved and, maybe, even a chance to feel good because even if there were some mistakes there were also some right calls, like supporting the Czechs, the civil rights movements, an end to apartheid, hating hypocrisy and understanding that freedom was worth fighting for even if we misread what actually were freedom, or liberation, movements.

Thompson obliquely addresses this:

Back to your question: Have I moved right? What today is called liberalism is almost unrecognizable from the liberalism of the late 1960s. This is not to be nostalgic about the past — it's a question of being accurate. In his 1966 Cape Town speech, Bobby Kennedy declared himself unwaveringly opposed to communism because it exalts the state over the individual and over the family. He said the best way to oppose communism is to enlarge individual human freedom.

Unfortunately for the old guard, the onrush of events these past few years has produced a lot of people, and especially young folks, who stop, reflect and wonder if they took the red pill or the blue pill. Once you have arrived to a frame of mind to pose the question you already know the answer, so do you do?

One answer lies in a new political undercurrent these days composed of people calling themselves South Park Conservatives and Thompson supplies one definition:

... South Park Conservatives, which describes young Americans who believe in a kick-ass foreign policy, and who mock the compulsory compassion of the P.C. culture. Interestingly, they don't necessarily sign on to every line in the GOP platform.

That's a decent plan for Americans, but what about Canadians? and, more of concern these days, what about the Conservative Party of Canada? I dislike the saying that a conservative is a liberal who got mugged because it is not only dismissive but also implies that conservatives are shallow: someone who will dump their moral principles wholesale after a traumatic event couldn't have held those values very dear. But liberals have become like a friend who keeps suggesting we go out for a latte even though she knows I take my coffee black - she employs the popular word but doesn't really think about what it means.

Thomspon again:

The left/right divide is not what it used to be — that's my point. At the end of the day, I care less about the map than the territory, less about labels than issues.

The Meatriarchy (who is back from vacation) has an apropos post about a pending CBC interview with Trey Parker and Matt Stone and his own thoughts on the misuse of the term conservative.

The CBC Meets South Park may sound like a Monty Python skit, but that's been done. It was an internet thread titled Monty Python Meets the Borg, and the South Park-esque offering was Oh my God, they've assimilated Kenny. The bastards!

I sincerely doubt the CBC can assimilate South Park or even grasp what the movement is all about, but I do hope Canada is ready for the kind of alternative conservatism the South Park types offer: smaller government, de-centralization, truer respect for the individual and above all, replacing mindless prattle in correct-speak PC. It would also be nice to embrace the very liberal notion that we shouldn't be afraid to abandon programs that don't work - despite our investment of both years and money - and try some new solutions that actually might work.

There's a lot of unmarked territory out there, and the Conservatives should be the ones surveying and staking some out.

The innate inertia of Liberals is probably why I kind of share the South Park view of politics:

I hate conservatives, but I f***ing hate liberals.

May 29 - 02:42 - Many posts (like this one) reveal their intent after they have been written. It seems I still don't get why more of my former associates don't support Operation Iraqi Freedom.

I was shocked (in the true sense of the word) when Gulf War I didn't finish the job and get rid of Saddam. I felt a bit guilty so kept abreast of events (and massacres) in Iraq over the years and was on board for regime change long before 2000 elections.

I make no pretense at consistency! I fully recognize that the optimism of the 60's was counterweighed by our real fear of seeing the planet consumed in a nuclear holocaust and maybe our optimism was a defiant response to that fear.

But I never meant the post to be nuanced, and apologize for any pain inadvertant nuance may have caused readers.

I lean towards a libertarianism-with-a-safety-net preference and believe in the tenet That which is not expressly forbidden is thereby allowed (which has gotten me into some interesting exchanges during my years in Canada) and it's a hard-wired thing much like inherent rights and distrusting government.

But my invitation for Canadians to dispense with the old labels and scout the territory was genuine. Labels are human inventions and thus liable to change.

Today's musing were brought to you by the cliche Fortune favours the bold.

Posted by: Debbye at 12:04 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 1775 words, total size 11 kb.

May 7 - Wonderful post from Stuff I Think You Should Know that connects the the war on terror in chilling, close-to-home terms:

And now, for today's Random Thought (TM)
Israel has been a nation for 57 years now. In that time they have suffered through three all-out invasions. At least three times they have been in a life-or-death struggle for independence. In between, there have been smaller conflicts, and of course, nearly continuous terrorist strikes.

[...]

... how about this. The terror bombings we see daily on TV [in Iraq], here at home. Not just one isolated (horrible, yes- massive, yes- four planes, yes- but still just one) incident. Bombings every day. Your local police department, blown up. Your grocery store, blown up. The train you take to get to work, blown up. The car in front of you on the highway, blown up.

D'ya think maybe then we'd get the hint?

People think the War on Terror started for America on September 11. Well, it started for the Israelis the day they became a country- and it hasn't stopped yet.

1. Iraq was a strong supporter of anti-Israeli terror. Saddam Hussein provided a financial incentive to successful suicide bombers by gifting their families with US $ 25,000 - the money for which, if it needs to be pointed out, came from his ill-gotten gains from the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program.

The corruption of the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program demonized the USA because billions of people held us responsible for deaths attributed to the sanctions, and the corruption of that same program financed murderous terrorism against Israeli citizens. Those who want to believe the U.N. can be reformed must first figure out how the U.N. can wash the blood from its hands.

On September 11 the bond between Israelis and us was strengthened rather than weakened - after all, how many of us chose to view Israelis as role models that day? To draw from their example by forcing ourselves to carry on with our lives despite the burning in our hearts?

Of course, when all the "root causes" were explored, one, pragmatic solution was clearly stated: if we withdrew our support for Israel, we would be in less peril. The cowardly nature of appeasement was thus fully exposed and the offer rejected.

Our reaction to Sept. 11 was decisive yet humane. Although our past half-hearted resignation to those evil things we called the Taliban, Yassar Arafat and Saddam Hussein reproached our consciences, we gave each of them one last chance to behave honourably - and we even told them it was their last chance. That generosity was rebuffed because they had foolishly failed to learn something every school kid knows: the difference between someone who is beside themselves with frustration and someone who is calm with white hot anger.

Thinking Americans, however, also understood one simple fact: the events of September 11 liberated us because our minds were no longer clouded by those Wormtongue-like whisperers of appeasement and self-hatred. The skies of New York may have been darkened with smoke and ash but we knew the sun still shone overhead and, with a staunch great-heartedness that would have gladdened Tolkien, Great Britain and Australia stood tall and proud as true friends and allies.

2. Iraq was a haven for terrorists fleeing from, among others, us. We knew, for example, that Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, Abdul Rahman Yasin and Abu Musab Zarqawi had received sanctuary in Iraq (some may remember that Zarqawi was prominently mentioned during Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation to the U.N. in February, 2003.)

When President Bush declared war on terror, he reminded us that we are a patient people. It's one of those things that the media and the rest of the world largely dismissed as rhetoric, but Americans understood fully what he meant and a confirmation of a kind was the instantaneous name recognition of Abu Abbas when his capture in Iraq was announced. The names Leon Klinghoffer and Achille Lauro were burned in our collective memory just as surely as Lockerbie and the Munich Olympics.

You see, one of the qualities of patience is that you need not talk incessantly about a certain category of things because with patience comes another admirable trait: perseverance. So we accept that there will be delays, setbacks, detours and that the kids in the back seat will ask "are we there yet?" every 5 minutes - yet we keep the destination in sharp focus, scout and search for the best routes and finally reach journey's end because we actually know the difference between the trip and the destination.

We've endured much death and bloodshed, but there have also been triumphs, the most celebrated ones being the purple forefingers of January, the rising up of the people of Lebanon and the dominating theme of freedom during the president's Inaugural Address. Less well-recognized but just as important have been the debates and squabbling on the new Iraqi council - none of which ended in arrests, gunshots, or the imposition of martial law.

Israel is still standing and the Taliban, Yassar Arafat and Saddam Hussein aren't.

No, we aren't "there" yet but so long as we check our maps, oil and tires regularly we will arrive - tired, disheveled and in need of a hot shower - but we will arrive.

Because we must.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:43 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 980 words, total size 6 kb.

Mar. 28 - Hello everyone! We spent a fairly intensive family-filled weekend. Mark's brother came down from Sault Ste. Marie to attend a bridge tournament here and we managed to catch up on family news and solve most of the world's problems (funny how much of that goes on in living rooms!)

I always have mixed feelings on holidays. There's the ubiquitous nostalgia for the days when we'd hide the eggs anticipating the fun as the kids would uncover them in the most unlikely places (although the dog beat them all on that score!) but those memories contrast sharply with the living reality of seeing competent, adult children who managed to turn out alright despite our fumbling, learn-it-as-you-go approach to child-raising. Raising children is a humbling experience, and even though one does everything one can to protect them from every conceivable danger and to teach them right from wrong, there is simply no certainty and far too often unpredictable luck saves, teaches, and/or hurts them.

The news over the weekend seemed dominated with issues of life and death, and in two of the instances the parents have been at the forefront. It was sobering, to say the least.

Terri Schiavo and the determination of her parents to save her continued to figure prominently in the news, and I think one aspect of her case that younger reporters don't understand is the horror of losing a child. I keep hearing interviews with people referring to making similar decisions on behalf of their parents or with others who believe the case has become personal because we might each be a Terri, but but that completely misses the point.

What would we do were one of our children in Terri's state? One thing I never envisioned would be that I might have to talk to my kids about what they would want us to do should they be in such a condition and it's not a conversation I am looking forward to. (We chose to avoid it at Eastertime. It seemed wrong to have such a conversation while we were celebrating the triumph of life over death.)

We know that we will eventually have to say goodbye to our parents or that we could be struck down and left half-way between life and death, but what parent really expects to bury their child? There's a good reason we have the phrase "a parent's worst nightmare" and it's because such thoughts rarely intrude in our waking moments (in large part because we hastily push them aside - who could abide such thoughts without going mad?) The struggle around Terri Schiavo has a specific personal content for those of us with adult children and raises questions that are not easily answered.

When do we really give up guardianship over our children? Does marriage supercede parental care? I've tried to avoid attacking Michael Schiavo because I can't see into his heart and it is quite possible that he believes he is following Terri's wishes, but I don't understand why he has failed to authorize medical procedures that have been developed over the past fifteen years or aggressive therapy techniques that could have improved her condition. Most parents would pursue any and all courses that might restore, even partially, their child.

It is so easy to assume that we would not want to live in such and such a condition, but humans have a stubborn tendency to fight to live despite terrible pain and our instinct for surivival is not a thing stemming from our heads but from our hearts, and that instinct for survival includes the lengths to which we will go to save our children.

The Constitutional issues this case has stirred are not easily resolved, but there seems a clear antagonism between the executive and legislative branches - federal and state - and the judiciary which exceeds the definitions of federal and state jurisdictions. I tend to refrain from hoping that Gov. Jeb Bush will violate the law, which he would be doing should he defy the courts, but that's reflective mostly of a reluctance to see a publicly elected official put himself above the legally installed judiciary and the implications of such an act.

Yet the governor of a state can legally intervene to stop a legally ordered execution of a prisoner on death row. It doesn't make sense to allow the power to grant life in that instance but not in Terri's.

The intransigence of the courts may be the ultimate root story here. The federal court chose a narrow interpretation of "Terri's Law" which went contrary to the intent of the legislation, and that may well cause more people to question if the judiciary is tipping the balance implicit in the Constitutional separation of powers rather than maintaining it. This case may well begin a series of legislative initiatives to restrain courts which have tended increasingly to make laws rather than interpret them. It will certainly lend flavour in confirmation hearings for judicial appointments where the philosophies of strict interpretation of the Constitution and laws is counterposed to those who believe the Constitution is a "living document."

Far less easily addressed are the questions which must be raised on behalf of those parents who were forced to endure the worst of a parent's worst nightmare during Easter week. There is simply no comment that I, or anyone, can make that could adequately address the hell they went through and the grief of the outcomes much less reflect on what those young girls suffered, so there's been mostly focus on the more clinical analysis of how laws and the courts serve to protect our children from predators.

Most people understand that we must protect those who cannot defend themselves, and the growing anger at the failure of the legal system to keep faith with those who believe in that principle are combining to challenge what is seen as a "soft" approach to pedophiles and other sex offenders who, in accordance with one of our most basic principles, are released after serving their time without being branded or otherwise marked to warn of the danger they may represent because they served their time and have been released with the injunction not to break the law again.

Two, basic legal precepts are in stark contrast, and there needs to be some way found to reconcile them. We believe that those who serve their time should be regarded as rehabilitated and given a chance to begin new lives, and we believe that our children must be protected from predators who defy rehabilitation.

The other big story this weekend, the failing health of John Paul II, represents a different kind of contrast to the first two stories. This man, who led the Catholic Church during a tumultous period which saw the fall of the Berlin Wall, the struggle against Islamofascism and the child abuse scandals, might be said to have fulfilled his destiny. He will leave this world with a legacy that historians will eventually define, but I suspect that one part of that legacy must be the extent to which it inspired and provoked people much as the struggle for Terri Schiavo has.

It is appropriate, although harsh, that the Easter weekend was the backdrop for vast issues concerning the meaning of life, crime and punishment, and death with dignity. We rarely resolve such issues until major controversies force us to confront the fact that they are indeed issues in need of resolution, and the matter of whether those issues are to be resolved with or despite the courts is not the least of the matter.

Mar. 29 - 11:36: Bill of Strong World provided a link in an earlier comment to an essay by Alan Keyes, Why Jeb Bush has the power to act now, which goes into more detail (and better) than I did on the options available to the executive and legislative branches when the judiciary exceeds its authority.

Darned good article. I don't agree with Mr. Keyes's call to action only because I don't think the American people are yet persuaded that the judiciary needs to be restrained and they would view vigorous executive action to defy a court ruling with alarm (yet another downside of the failure to teach the Constitution and civics in schools is the total ignorance of Americans about the workings of their own branches of government, but that's a rant for another time.)

What I do see is that relatively mild surprise has been generated by some of the recent, more questionable rulings which has yet to cascade into the kind of public outrage the legislative and executive branches feel they must have before they actually confront the judiciary. (Or I could be wrong, and Jeb Bush will ignore the court ruling, take guardianship of Terri Schiavo, and appoint an independent advocate on her behalf.) I think it more likely that we may see a series of legislative initiatives that will indirectly confront the courts and gain public support by putting a spotlight on questionable rulings.

I'm sure I'm not the only person who noted that the Supreme Court ducked the Pledge of Allegiance issue on a loophole!

12:01 - Hmm, FoxNews is reporting that Rev. Jesse Jackson is visiting Terri Schiavo's hospice, praying with Schlinder supporters, and strongly criticizing the court rulings ordering Terri's death. He's isn't always an accurate weather vane, but his position will put the liberal media in a bit of a quandary as he is generally regarded as a leader of the national African-American community.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:44 PM | Comments (30) | Add Comment
Post contains 1608 words, total size 10 kb.

Mar. 24 - The Supreme Court has declined to hear the Schiavo case, and Florida Gov. Bush filed a motion to take custody of her which has been denied (14:08.)

Someone (sorry, I don't remember who) speculated that the Schiavo case was another Gary Condit non-scandal which consumed the media waves despite the lack of substance. I don't agree. As a nation we've been through so much sacrifice, heroism, death, loss and recovery these past 4 years and in some respects we are now looking at if (or how much) these momentuous events have changed us.

Follow the "continued" link below if you want to read more, or skip it if you're tired of the subject. It's exhausting, and should be. We've been through two wars, are holding our collective breaths over Lebanon and Krygyzstan (and now Estonia) and once again need to define who and what we are.

I need to sleep or I'll be a total wreck tonight, so I'm signing off (unless I can't sleep. Sigh.)

By the way, there is a somewhat atypical Ann Coulter column, Starved for justice, up at Townhall.com, and she makes a suggestion that is very appealing:

Democrats have called out armed federal agents in order to: 1) prevent black children from attending a public school in Little Rock, Ark. (National Guard), 2) investigate an alleged violation of federal gun laws in Waco, Texas (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms), and 3) deport a small boy to Cuba (Immigration and Naturalization Service).

So how about a Republican governor sending in the National Guard to stop an innocent American woman from being starved to death in Florida?

[...]

In two of the three cases mentioned above, the Democrats' use of force was in direct contravention of court rulings.

Posted by: Debbye at 01:07 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 915 words, total size 6 kb.

Mar. 14 - I am one of those who never expected Brian Nichols would be taken alive. But reading this account from Ashley Smith, Faith Helped Courthouse Shootings Hostage, I am reminded that I am one of those really Sophisticated People who overlooks the power of simple faith:

Although she knew about the courthouse shootings, Smith said, "It wasn't until after he took his hat off that I knew it was him ... I just thought it was a random mugger or something." Over the course of the night, Nichols untied Smith, and some of the fear lessened as they talked. Nichols told Smith he felt like "he was already dead," but Smith urged him to consider the fact that he was still alive a "miracle."

"You're here in my apartment for some reason," she told him, saying he might be destined to be caught and to spread the word of God to fellow prisoners. She told him his escape from authorities had been a "miracle."

[...]

... Gwinnett County Police Officer Darren Moloney [said] "It was an absolutely best-case scenario that happened, a complete opposite of what you expected to happen. We were prepared for the worst and got the best."

Discussions about the role of religion in the USA are often leveled as accusations, but I think one fact that cannot be discounted is that the horrific events of Sept. 11 found many of us groping for God and finding Him, even after ignoring him for decades.

I'm not trying to preach here, but just sharing a story that has moved me at the deepest levels of my consciousness. It may seem paradoxical, but the movie Dogma had much the same effect on me as I am someone who has been estranged from religion and church because the trappings and pretensions reeked of hypocrisy.

I believe that our renewed value in faith is why we can pursue the war on terror without diminishing the worth of Muslims faithful to the words of their God, and why President Bush is genuinely outraged that al Qaeda and the like have hijacked that religion.

I know many will disagree with my assessment, but maybe they don't understand the degree of humility that religion brings into our lives, and that humility often brings profound respect for other people of other faiths.

Tell the truth, Moms and Dads: when you see how young girls are dressing, don't you wish for more modesty? I'm not saying head-to-toe covering, but maybe you'd like to see daughters with just a little more covering?

A Hindi co-worker recently told me the background story of Diwali. I wouldn't dare try to relate it here as my memory would be necessarily faulty, but the themes that struck me most forcibly were those of honour, duty, and love and I was reminded that, truly, some things are universal.

It's a beautiful story, and I'll try to track down a credible account on google later.

I have to go to work - I overslept a lot this day but after working six nights straight I'd say I was entitled! So long. Mar. 15 - Too bad I can't count - I'd only worked five nights straights and Monday was the sixth.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:25 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 558 words, total size 3 kb.

Jan. 31 - Greetings to anyone who is still checking this blog to see if I've got any new ramblings besides my folks!

The Washington Times headline says it best: Joy explodes across Iraq. And I think a lot of us shared in that joy.

I watched the coverage of the Iraq elections from 2 a.m. Sunday morning until 6 p.m. Sunday evening -- I just couldn't turn FoxNews (heh!) off. Although I wanted to post I was just too overcome by my feelings of humility and thanksgiving. I feel so privileged to be a witness to the courage and determination of the Iraqi people, and more than a little embarrassed because I noted that they were voting in numbers that rival our percentages in tranquil times and I really don't know how we might perform if faced with similar threats of mayhem from people who have a track record of carrying out those threats.

I guess the Iraqi people didn't get that memo about the incompatibility of civil liberties, democracy, Arabs, tribal cultures and Islam, because they certainly exercised their franchise without noticing that it isn't supposed to be in their cultural makeup.

Among those celebrating -- and rightfully so -- are the members of the Iraq Naitonal Guard and Army. I guess they did get the memo about having confidence because they did a spectacular job and are the heroes of Iraq. I was saddened by the reports of those who lost their lives proving themselves to be be true human shields.

I can't even imagine how gratified the men and women of the armed forces serving in Iraq (and those who served and have returned stateside) must feel today. I guess it's at minimum a tangible reassurance that we are on the right path and at maximum that the sacrifices have not been in vain, and perhaps more that any debt the Iraqis may owe us has been paid in full.

Quick detour: I stumbled across FoxNews on Rogers Cable up here in mid-December (which proves that channel surfing is good!) and, although I really, really miss the faint tone of disapproval that permeates far too many CNN reports, I think I'll stick with Fox as my major TV news source for all things American and Iraqi.

I do miss another thing about CNN: I used to yell out some fairly brilliant and insightful things during their news broadcasts because their analysis was so superficial, but Fox seems to have all the context bases covered and I am thus defused. I guess the result is a calmer Debbye, but never fear: the Rant Factor has not left the household because Mark is a dedicated O'Reilly Factor fan. He doesn't miss a single night and when I hear him yell Because they're a bunch of snively whiney rat bastards I know that a) O'Reilly is reporting on something a liberal said and, b) it's past eight and I have to get up to go to work.

I am extremely comfortable with this role reversal. Let someone else get steamed about the John Kerrys and Ted Kennedys (Mark made some really terrific shots about Teddy's wanting to cut and run from Iraq - the mildest was Yeah, Ted, stick with what you know best.

Okay, I lied. I shot out of my chair yesterday when I heard John Kerry's (I won't even use the title of Senator this day) comments on the wonderful election turnout in Iraq. He would have conceded to international opinion and postponed (read cancelled) those elections, and I'm not up on my Dante but I'm pretty sure one of those circles of hell is his destination. Isn't the presidential campaign over? Can't Kerry finally shut up? Americans have been happy to ignore him for over 30 years. Can't we return to normalcy?

The same nagging about the need to bring the international community together? On exactly what basis would he have us come together anyway?

When it came time to be counted, Americans remember who came forward and who lagged in the rear, and we may be a forgiving nation but we aren't a forgetful nation. We are already brought together on those things in which they are willing to participate, i.e., protecting their nations from internal threats, and thus apprehending those in their nations who may pose a threat to our and other nations, and those efforts are appreciated but not misinterpreted -- they are only capable of taking a short view of history, and we need to take a long view. Let's not mistake enlightenment for anaemia and just agree to accept the help from each nation in accorance with what they are willing to offer.

Taking the fight to the enemy takes a special kind of steel, and we thankfully have real allies who can see the danger of mistaking the Ardennes Forest for the trees.

Okay, cheap shot aside, the international community does seem to be brought together somewhat in their reaction to yesterday's elections. Jacques Freakin' Chirac was more upbeat than John Kerry, for crying out loud. This day it's Kerry and Kennedy who are out of step if only because others are realists and cannot deny the immense and irrevocable nature of yesterday's vote in Iraq.

I was further incensed that Kerry should make his comments on the very day that our staunchest allies suffered severe and painful losses. An Australian serving with the RAF, Flt-Lt Paul Pardoel and up to ten British airmen were killed when the Hercules C-130 came down in Iraq, yet he couldn't stop fretting about disapproval from those who oppose us long enough to acknowledge the loss, express his condolences and thank our allies for their sacrifice. What a graceless man.

Sigh. It's becoming very hard for me to keep in mind how totally we defied expectations after Sept. 11. (Maybe because it's been over 3 years and they should have figured it out by now.) Those who don't know us might be forgiven for having assumed that we would react as they would: become consumed with negativity and turn that into cynical passivity, or turn into murderous mobs intent on extracting revenge on the innocent and guilty alike. Instead we looked at those oft-recited root causes and recognized that maybe we could realistically address one of them and chose to take an enormous gamble and offer the twin values of tolerance and government by consent of the governed (necessarily twinned because you can't have one without the other.)

We've stated our aims countless times, and shown the truth of our words by our deeds. Stop looking for what isn't there and deal with what is visible. Maybe then we can talk and the international community can be brought together by a new practice: honesty.

Yesterday's elections were only the first step (like you haven't read and heard that elsewhere!) but that is hardly the point. What is significant is that the first step was taken, and I heartily wish the Iraqis and all those who yearn for freedom to take heart and keep their eyes on the prize. The socialists have one thing right: you have nothing to lose but your chains.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:07 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 1205 words, total size 7 kb.

1 Good post.

Posted by: Dex at January 31, 2005 12:23 PM (kO17P)

2 Between you and http://cbftw.blogspot.com/ patiently checking for new posts. Happy New Year & good luck & best wishes until your schedule improves...

Posted by: Sine Nomine at January 31, 2005 03:14 PM (VPR/2)

3 Yay! Debbye's posting and is in top form!

Posted by: Tuning Spork at February 01, 2005 09:39 PM (Wr4AR)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Jan. 31 - I wish I was independently wealthy. (Sure, like none of you ever wished that!)

Work continues full steam ahead. I feel foolish complaining about the schedule I'm working (primarily because the alternative is dreary) but the downtime and recovery time I thought I'd have after the holiday shoppers finally stayed home isn't happening.

I'm working every other night, i.e., Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday nights. It's a pace that provides little of anything resembling "down time" for me but makes perfect sense for the company and, as there are some organizational changes taking place there and the inevitable difficulties that accompany any transition, I'm actually pleased with the way things are progressing.

I'm also mentally prepared for setbacks and compromises, because that's the way the universe likes to keep us on our toes.

The downside is that when I'm not working I'm trying to get to sleep but only achieve snatches of sleep between long waking periods during which I try to get back to sleep.

And the less said about the weather the better. It's January. I can deal with it, but I don't have to like it.

This pace should continue until mid-February and then there should be a resumption of consective nights with consecutive nights off (note plural) and that in turn should translate into a (fairly) normal life. Uh huh.

Posted by: Debbye at 06:33 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 1 kb.

Nov. 22 - Holland is not a 60-year-old story anymore about Canadian soldiers and liberation from the Nazis.

These opening words of today's Ezra Levant column (Militant Islam rising) makes clear that we need to comprehend that the elegant, tolerant Europe we envision no longer exists but has become one that faces challenges that their leaders and media have been too slow to grasp:

For a generation, the public square in Western civilization has been systematically voided of any Judeo-Christian moral content. And into that void has come a competing set of moral values: Militant Islam.

Nature and politics abhors a vacuum. For a generation, Europe -- and Canada -- has been told that nothing is right or wrong, there ought not to be Judeo-Christian morality in public life, and that the philosophical compatibility and integration of immigrants is not important. That may have worked before; but it does not work in the era of Osama bin Laden and al Jazeera. These are not people coming to join things.

Ghost of a Flea provides a link to the Theodore Dalrymple article Why Theo Van Gogh Was Murdered which argues that

more likely it resulted from his workÂ’s exposure of a very raw nerve of Muslim identity in Western Europe: the abuse of women. This abuse is now essential for people of Muslim descent for maintaining any sense of separate cultural identity in the homogenizing solution of modern mass society.

[...]

The abuse of women has often, if not always, appealed to men, because it gives them a sense of power, however humiliated they may feel in other spheres of their life. And the oppression of women by Muslim men in Western Europe gives those men at the same time a sexual partner, a domestic servant, and a gratifying sense of power, while allowing them also to live an otherwise westernized life. For the men, it is convenient; interestingly, but perhaps not surprisingly, almost the only openly hostile expressions toward Islam from British-born Muslims that I hear come from young women, some of whom loathe it passionately because they blame it for their servitude.

Ayyan Hirsi Ali is an outspoken (and fearless) women from Somalia who is a member of the Dutch Parliament but who is also under 24-hour guard due to the death threats she has received in tolerant Holland.

A Canadian Muslim woman, Irshad Manji, authored an article that is on the UPI page about Van Gogh's murder Challenging Islam is Risky which she points out that risky though it may be, at least raising questions in Western society doesn't involve incurring the wrath of the state:

... If Muslims in the West dare to ask questions about our holy book, and if we care to denounce human rights violations being committed under the banner of that book, we need not worry about being raped, flogged, stoned or executed by the state for doing so. What in God's name are Muslims in the West doing with our freedoms?

I know what many young Muslim would like us to be doing -- thinking critically about ourselves and not solely about Washington. Indeed, a huge motivation for having written my book came from young Muslims on American and Canadian campuses. Even before 9/11, I spoke at universities about the virtues of diversity, including diversity of opinion. After many of these speeches, young Muslims emerged from the audiences, gathered at the side of stage, chatted excitedly among themselves, and then walked over to me.

"Irshad," I would hear, "we need voices such as yours to help us open up this religion of our because if it doesn't open up, we're leaving it."

They're on the front lines in the battle for the soul of Islam. Whatever the risks to my own safety, I won't turn my back on them -- or on the gift of freedom bestowed by my society.

The founding ideal of the modern feminist movement in the '70s was to proclaim that we had the right to determine the course of our lives, but if we don't affirm that those rights extend to our Muslim sisters then we have betrayed that ideal and stand exposed as selfish hypocrites.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:55 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 861 words, total size 6 kb.

Oct. 28 - Okay, I had some dinner (it's a shift work thing) and have had time to try to let this thing settle. The fact remains that the IAEA inspectors cannot have inspected the explosives if the bunkers were sealed, so the repeated assertions that they "inspected the explosives" is simply untrue - the inspectors merely looked at the seals.

I'm willing to attribute the inaccurate assertions of "inspected the explosives" to careless wording by the New York Times and other news media, but if the ABC story that the bunkers were readily accessible without breaking the seals holds up and we remember the NY Sun article stating that the IAEA refused to destroy the explosives despite the urging of the inspectors, some of the statements in that NY Sun article suddenly seem more than speculative:

On Monday, a spokesman for the American mission at the United Nations questioned the timing of the release of the material on the part of Mr. ElBaradei. Rick Grenell told the Sun's Benny Avni the "timing seems puzzling."

After a behind-the-scenes battle inside the State Department this summer, the Bush administration opted to reject Mr. ElBaradei's bid for a third term as director general of the atomic energy agency.

At the time, Washington was collecting intelligence - disputed by some agencies - that Mr. ElBaradei was providing advice to Iran on how to avoid sanction from his organization for its previously undisclosed uranium enrichment programs.

Mr. al-Baradei has publicly urged the Iranians to heed an earlier pledge to suspend enrichment, but he has also opposed America's policy of taking Iranian violations to the U.N. Security Council. Mr. al-Baradei has announced he will nonetheless seek a third term. Nominations for the director general position close on December 31. [Emphasis added.]

Suddenly Hans Blix is no longer merely irritating and Mohammed El Baradei is no longer merely pompous. They are two incredibly powerful men who literally had the world in their care and dropped the ball. The question is if it was due to negligence or corruption.

The case for war has suddenly, in retrospect, been altered. (No, I don't think the president lied, but I've always assumed that the government concealed information - not out of malevolence toward the American people but because that is the nature of being at war.)

Many of us who supported the war had some lingering hope for the inspection process but recognized that regime change, which is to say removing Saddam and his psychotic sons, was the only right thing to do. But now we are faced with the fact that Iran and N. Korea have or are close to having nuclear capability and it was done on the El Baradei's watch.

The mood of the American electorate as both El Baradei and Benon Sevan are revealed to be incompetent at best or corrupt at worst will not bode well for the U.N. The one poll that hasn't been conducted lately is to assess the confidence of Americans in the U.N., but the most recent ones had indicated growing disillusion with that organization, and that will be a consideration when voters cast their ballot for "American unilateralism with staunch and valiant allies" or "global test."

Five.More.Days. Judging by the past four days, it will be longer than a lifetime.

Posted by: Debbye at 12:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 653 words, total size 4 kb.

Oct. 23 - You know what's good about working the midnight shift? Not a damned thing. Well, the steady paycheck is a good thing, but trying to figure out what day it is and attempting to be, you know, sharp and focused are frustrating especially when I'm trying to write insightfull stuff.

I've determined that the source of my problem is that I stopped taking my multi-vitamin pills. I remembered reading that the red dye on the shell could cause insomnia, and I realized that my problems with getting sleep were probably due to that factor (I dismissed the foolish notion that the coffee I imbibe during the night might be contributing to the problem.)

Anyway, what is evening to you is morning to me, but at least we both know it's finally Saturday. (That last sentence is not intended for any Australian readers, who know that it's morning but also believe it's Sunday. Oh well, at least we can all agree on something.)

Another cause for lamentation is that I finally had to wear woolly gloves this morning. That acceptance of the approach of winter preceeds the next one, which will be to wear a neckscarf and then, alas, the winter boots that will replace my dearly beloved and incredibly comfortable running shoes. The tocque will be my final concession, and I won't wear one unless it's 20 below with 80 kph winds.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:44 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 238 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Not the woolly gloves!

Posted by: Flea at October 23, 2004 09:27 PM (SAwQd)

2 Yes, alas. The woolly gloves. Sheesh, it's only October!

Posted by: Debbye at October 23, 2004 09:54 PM (j3B5T)

3 There's one thing worse than working 12 midnight to 8 a.m., and that's 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. Talk about not knowing what day it is! And the worst part of that shift in a hospital ER was trying to do the charges on a patient who came in on one side of midnight and was released on the other. What a headache!

Posted by: Timbre at October 23, 2004 11:57 PM (uuKy2)

4 Hi Timbre - We seem to be almost on the same miserable schedule. I work from 10-6. I call it midnights because I shudder to call it by the more generic "graveyard shift." But I'd imagine the work life in an ER is much more hectic than mine!

Posted by: Debbye at October 25, 2004 12:35 AM (X2KiA)

5 No, Debbye, you have the difficult schedule. I was speaking of my hospital work in years gone by: 1979-1990. Presently I work 4 ten-hour days, rotating between 6 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. and 10:30 a.m. - 9 p.m.

Posted by: Timbre at October 25, 2004 10:46 PM (nt6ZO)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Oct. 21 - Opinion Journal argues that there has been substantial progress in Iraq, citing in particular in the latest offensive in Fallujah.

At the heart of this - and any - progress lies the single most important component: the will and determination of the Iraqi people:

Which brings us to another point that deserves more attention: the courage of the Iraqis. Young men continue to line up by the thousands outside the police and National Guard recruiting stations that have so often been targets of terrorist attack. On Tuesday a mortar struck the ING headquarters in Mushahidah, killing four. But recruit Qusay Hassan was quoted saying, "If I don't join the army, who is going to defend the country from the terrorists?"

Or the U.N., which arrogantly failed to acknowledge the dangers and, rather than admit to and rectify its error, fled?

Or maybe Western liberals, who should be thrilled at the blossoming of freedom in Iraq but who cannot abide the notion that the USA has done something right, thereby allowing their hatred for America overshadow their oft-proclaimed love for their fellow men and women?

The contempt I feel for those who would diminish people like Qusay Hassan cannot find words. We are witnessing mighty deeds and heroes from which songs are made, and even as I rejoice that there is still such in this world I am pained to see a portion of our civilization, aided and abetted by main stream media, try so hard to prove itself frivolous.

When our children and grandchildren ask about "our day," it won't be curiousity about Michael Jackson, Teresa Heinz-Kerry or even the curse of the Bambino: it will be about the struggle of freedom vs. tyranny in the Mid-east. However shall we answer them?

Posted by: Debbye at 07:40 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 344 words, total size 2 kb.

Oct. 17 - History buffs alert, courtesy of Ghost of a Flea, an article in FrontPage Magaine, John Quincy Adams Knew Jihad by Andrew G. Bostom, has caused me to consider that there was an additional level to the invocation of the tradition of the Barbary Pirates which I cited near the end of this post.

I am a great many years away from practicing scholarship and my tools are rusty, so I don't feel competent to analyze the article properly but there are some intriguing notions put forth that cause me to wonder to what extent the historical record as taught in schools and universities has been revised following the collapse of the Ottomon Empire.

This was a monumental surprise: John Quincey Adams wrote

... The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force. Of Mahometan good faith, we have had memorable examples ourselves. When our gallant [Stephen] Decatur ... had chastised the pirate of Algiers, till he was ready to renounce his claim of tribute from the United States, he signed a treaty to that effect: but the treaty was drawn up in the Arabic language, as well as in our own; and our negotiators, unacquainted with the language of the Koran, signed the copies of the treaty, in both languages, not imagining that there was any difference between them. Within a year the Dey demands, under penalty of the renewal of the war, an indemnity in money for the frigate taken by Decatur; our Consul demands the foundation of this pretension; and the Arabic copy of the treaty, signed by himself is produced, with an article stipulating the indemnity, foisted into it, in direct opposition to the treaty as it had been concluded. The arrival of Chauncey, with a squadron before Algiers, silenced the fraudulent claim of the Dey, and he signed a new treaty in which it was abandoned; but he disdained to conceal his intentions; my power, said he, has been wrested from my hands; draw ye the treaty at your pleasure, and I will sign it; but beware of the moment, when I shall recover my power, for with that moment, your treaty shall be waste paper. He avowed what they always practised, and would without scruple have practised himself. Such is the spirit, which governs the hearts of men, to whom treachery and violence are taught as principles of religion.” [p. 274-275]

“Had it been possible for a sincere and honest peace to be maintained between the Osmanli and his christian neighbors, then would have been the time to establish it in good faith. But the treaty was no sooner made than broken. It never was carried into effect by the Turkish government.” [p. 276] (bolding added)

The above quote would indicate that, had we known our own history better, we might have been better prepared to confront this double-dealing, but it is perhaps our curse to try to turn the vanquished into friends and we do this by down-playing past betrayals.

One of the accomplishments of the Bush Administration must be that the true nature of Yassar Arafat and the Palestinian Authority has been exposed, that we and the European Union are demanding fiscal accountability from them.

Back to John Quincy Adams, the Barbary Pirates and US neutrality: read the article. More than once.

Posted by: Debbye at 01:47 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 694 words, total size 4 kb.

Oct. 13 - Another Mass grave unearthed in Iraq:

Many of the bodies found at the site near al-Hatra are believed to be the bodies of Kurdish women and children thought slaughtered by the Saddam Hussein regime.

There has been so much focus on the failure to find stockpiles of WMD that it has been easy to forget that there were also human rights requirements included in the flouted U.N. resolutions that formed the cause for resumption of hostilities against Iraq.

After Saddam fled Baghdad, TV crews filmed people digging and clawing through tunnels in the hopes of finding loved one who had been arrested and never heard from again. Our forces found mass graves filled with those who had been hastily killed within two weeks of the opening assault in Operation Iraqi Freedom. I still can't forget images of those people who, when mass graves were found, dug with their bare hands in hopes of finding an identity card, bit of clothing or other trace indicating they had finally located the remains of a loved one.

There were many reasons to support this war, but the decision to leave Saddam in power after 1991 still forms the bedrock for those reasons and I remain proud that we rectified that error even as we grieve those who have been lost in this endeavour.

The president's answer during the last debate about mistakes he may have made was the only possible one: history will determine what was a mistake and what was not.

Responsible leaders make decisions every day knowing that they cannot forsee all possible outcomes and knowing that, in the end, they can only judge themselves as to whether they did their best to do what was right with the information available at the time. History not only has the advantage of hindsight but also the advantage of not bearing the burdens of the decision makers it presumes to judge.

One thing history may judge is the degree to which the stated intention to force a regime change in Iraq kept many countries from joining the Coalition and, for those who bewail the lack of France, Germany, Russia (and Canada,) it would do well to consider if the war would have been worth the cost had the butcher Saddam and his psychotic, homicidal sons remained in power.

I think not.

The highlighted section from this passage in President Bush's speech to the Joint Houses of Congress on Sept. 21, 2001, was prescient of today's state of affairs:

... Freedom and fear are at war. The advance of human freedom -- the great achievement of our time, and the great hope of every time -- now depends on us. Our nation -- this generation -- will lift a dark threat of violence from our people and our future. We will rally the world to this cause by our efforts, by our courage. We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail. (Emphasis added)

I hate the fact that we had to sacrifice coalition and Iraqi lives in this endeavour. I would have much preferred that we could have gathered together with some of Saddam's friends, family and associates, had a barbeque at one of his palaces, and then confronted him with his failings in some kind of intervention and through those means have persuaded him to change his killin' ways.

But that wouldn't have been reality, it would have been a dream sequence on "Friends."

So we sacrificed blood and treasure, a neat little phrase that obscures the painful truth that we sacrificed the futures of some fine men and women - American, Iraqi, British, Polish, Ukranian, Bulgarian, Italian, Spanish and others, and, although no Australians have been lost, they too were willing to die.

There are lessons in our own past that point to how we can redeem the blood debt we owe to the fallen. In the immortal words of President Abraham Lincoln:

It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.

"Earn this."

This post at Tim Blair's site and especially the commenters' discussion about the historical evaluation of Neville Chamberlain's appeasement policies is very thought-provoking.

Posted by: Debbye at 05:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 822 words, total size 5 kb.

Oct. 12 - One of the biggest lies being promoted by Sen. Kerry is that we were loved before 2000. Its corollary, that we had lots of support after Sept. 11, is equally false. [Commenter Paul points out that Kerry hasn't said we were universally loved which caused me to stop, think and realize that he is indeed correct. I got carried away with my own hyperbole.]

The issue is actually incredibly simple. Which is the better representation of a person's views: the one they say to your face, or the one they say behind your back? (If you need help with that one, stop reading right now because you're too nuanced and I'm probably going to piss you off.)

I received an email from a Canadian who moved to the UK in 1993. He made some extremely pertinent observations from the perspective of a Canadian who was often mistaken for an American. When he would identify himself as a Canadian, sometimes the assumption would be made that he hated Americans too and he would hear what he described as some pretty vile comments. Both he and I heard things that most Americans never heard before Operation Iraqi Freedom (remember that people up here assume I'm a Canadian until I set them straight.) In retrospect, I should have spoken out about it, but back then I didn't recognize the danger it represented so shrugged it off. After all, we were strong and could afford to be tolerant.

My kids have also heard far too many expressions of anti-Americanism up in this bastion of tolerance and diversity, and much of it came from teachers and university professors.

But this nonsense that we were universally loved before GWB became president and before Operation Iraqi Freedom is so false and so dangerous that it must be confronted.

I was not blogging (hadn't even hear of blogs) on Sept. 11, but does anyone else remember a women's forum held in Toronto within a week of Sept. 11 in which a speaker supported the attacks and everyone in the room applauded her? Does anyone else remember Judy Rebick's column on the main CBC web page which applauded the death and destruction of the attacks as America's due desserts? That freaking column stayed up for over six months after the attacks, and I was genuinely shocked at the large number of posts supporting her position.

What I remember as well about those days is how quickly the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, and the TV news media used a lot of ink and air time to recount the errors of US foreign policy and express their hope that the American government would recognize its errors and rectify their approach to the world and the Mid-east (I had never read the Toronto Sun at that point, snob that I was, and am beholden to the person who showed me an editorial supporting the USA.)

Here in Canada, the war in Afghanistan was opposed bitterly by most of the media until Canadian troops were committed, and then they abruptly made an about face. (Principles are such fleeting concepts ...)

Do not tell waste your time lecturing Americans abroad about the sympathy we had after Sept. 11. It stemmed from two entirely different sources: our real friends were genuinely shocked and horrified, and our unfriends were delighted that we had been brought down a peg and irritated when, unchastised, we vowed to fight back. These sentiments were expressed to me until I set them straight as to my nationality. (In retrospect, I should have punched them in the jaw. Oh well.)

The grief was also caused by the large numbers of citizens from countries other than the USA who died in the attacks, including 25 Canadians.

On the first anniversary of Sept 11, the Canadian Prime Minister, then Jean Chretien, expressed his view that the USA had brought the attacks on itself.

I was here. I am a witness. Far too many Canadians hated us before Sept. 11, before NAFTA, and before Ronald Reagan. Even the rescue of American Embassy workers in Tehran is said to have been arranged by the CIA, and although the Canadian government did help, it was begrudgingly done.

Where is Amb. Ken Taylor today?

Have people actually forgotten the image of the "Ugly American" and how typical American tourists were portrayed as unmannered, wore loud shirts, couldn't speak the language but expected everyone to speak English, and complained when they couldn't find a McDonald's near by?

CanCon: Americans who supposedly came to Toronto in August with their skis and ask "Where's the snow?" and presumably thought everyone here lived in igloos (maybe that's why the tourist trade is suffering - an igloo shortage.)

I've lived here for 30 years and gritted my teeth for far too many of them, so don't waste my time with re-written history.

Of course there were Canadians who were genuinely friendly to the USA. Of course we aren't hated by everyone in every country, but the unfortunate fact is that we make far too many of the social democracies look bad because we are a thriving, active and industrious people who exude confidence and determination.

But made no mistake: the elites in Canada and Europe hate us virulently, and their media reflect that hatred. They always have and always will. They hide it when they want something, and bring it out, fully formed, when we're down.

And why? Because our standard of living and way of life shame them. Our technological advances, the fact that Americans are actually happy gives lie to all their deconstructionism and nihilism and what really angers them is that we don't care. That stubborn Yankee independence stands between them and world domination, and they don't like it.

And we have the finest military in the world. And make no mistake: we've used a lot of tax dollars for that military and thus have sacrificed to have it.

Thank about it. When a country's social democratic programs are bankrupting it, they resent countries that manage to thrive without a huge civil service to oversee those mountains of regulations that stifle economic growth and keep people on the dole. When a country has been paying off terrorists, it makes them look bad when another country chooses to fight back. When a country has pandered to its citizens' notions of entitlement, it's hard for them to persuade their citizens that those policies are not self-sustaining but so long as there is the possibility of channeling resentment away from the failures that produced it and towards a people, like us, that are flourishing because we renounced socialism, they have gained one more term to rule.

And make no mistake about Canada: the Liberal Party rules Canada, and are even referred to openly as the Ruling Party, whereas in the United States, we refer only to that party which holds a majority because the basis of our political tradition is the underlying principle that ultimate power rests with We, the People.

The dislike of Americans has been around ever since our country was conceived. Only 20 years ago, President Reagan was reviled and considered a threat to world peace. Have people actually forgotten that, after the Lockerbie bombing, only the British PM would allow us to fly over her air space when we retaliated against Libya (and forgotten the heat Dame Thatcher took for that in the British House of Commons?) [Commenter Jeff corrects me in that the strike against Libya was in retaliation for the disco bombing in Germany, and a quick Google confirmed that he is right.]

If we want the tired Old Europeans to love us again, it won't happen because they have never loved us. Now, we could be deemed more acceptable if we sink to their level, but at what cost? The cost of our ideals? Our individuality? Our self-esteem? Our beliefs in justice? Our prosperity?

Canadians have been arrested and tortured abroad and left to languish while the Canadian government applies "soft" diplomacy. Zahra Kazemi died in Iran, and Bill Sampson, who holds dual citizenship with the UK and Canada, was released by the Saudis due to American intervention as a favour to the UK. He now makes his home in the UK in recognition of the country which continued to fight for him (and which isn't Canada.)

Is that what Americans want? It would make some Canadians feel better about their own feckless foreign policy, but, again, at what cost?

It's all very nice for Sen. Kerry to promise to form a coalition, but when has he ever done so? He was in the Senate for 20 years and never once put together a coalition of his colleagues to get legislation he proposed passed.

He claims he joined others to get legislation passed. When you think about it, that's a very big danger sign.

Kerry is a joiner, not a leader. He is truly "unfit to command" not only because of his behaviour in the 70's but because of his failure in the Senate.

I was an anti-war activist in the 60's and 70's, and even I didn't believe his claims about US soldiers all being war criminals as he testified. Like many other of my generation, I knew men who were serving and had served in Vietnam. They were decent, honourable men (although they were boys when they left) and one effect of Kerry's testimony was that my opposition to the war was actually shaken, not strengthened. I knew he was exaggerating, but I was too damned stupid (and young) to recognize the full calumny of his testimony.

Note to Swift Boat Vets: Keep. It. Up.

Sen. Kerry talks about how our allies picked up a portion of the bill for Gulf War I. How much of the bill for the Kosovo campaigns have they picked up? (We're still in Kosovo, if you need a quagmire to oppose.) How about Macedonia, Liberia and Haiti (Parts 1 and 2)? How much of the bill for Somalia have they picked up?

Exactly what country pays the largest portion to maintain the U.N.? (and now that the UN Oil-for-Food program is defunct, they'll need more cash!)

The sad reality is that, should the U.N. decide to pick up the bill for Iraq, we would still have to give it to the U.N. in order for them to pay it back to the USA (less the fees the U.N. will charge as the middle-man.)

[I realize that all the pundits said "Irony was Dead" after Sept. 11, it's in the same file as the harsh Afghan winters, the cruelly hot Iraq summers, the thousands of US casualties we would sustain fighting house to house to take Baghdad, the fierce Arab street, the humanitarian crisis that would be created in Iraq, ad infinitum. Yes, it's a big file.]

Who pays to station troops in South Korea, and Germany? The Germans and South Koreans hate us but don't want us to leave because our troops represent income in the former case and the front line of defense in the latter. (By a strange coincidence, Sen. Kerry wants us to stay in Germany too. He hasn't offered a sound, military reason why we should stay, though.)

Of course, bashing the Germans is almost unkind. I wondered what those Germans who carried Bush=Hitler signs thought as openly neo-Nazis were elected to the German Parliament. They were so self-righteous that they failed to see the fascist danger in their own backyard.

What did Instapundit Glenn Reynolds say? Something like fascism is always supposed to be hovering over America, but it always lands in Europe.

Anti-Americanism serves a lot of purposes, not the least of which is to divert citizens from observing the actions of their own governments. But the places that matter, as in being on the front lines, like Australia, Malaysia and Indonesia, are electing leaders who are committed to fighting terrorism. What does that tell us?

More CanCon: did anyone else feel a moment of recognition when President Bush described national health care as "rationed" health care? It sent a chilll down my back.

Back to the two-faced bastards our good allies.

We may never really know the content of the conversation when Chirac flew to meet with Presdident Bush shortly after Sept. 11, but I do remember that shortly afterwards, President Bush invoked the tradition of the Barbary Pirates in describing how we would fight back. I don't know if others got the point but I certainly did: we were not going to pay tribute, despite the best advice of our European friends, any more today than we did back in the early 1800's when they gave the same advice. (Yes, I know what the historical record actually says about us negotiating a better deal with the Pirates. So does the President; hence the word "tradition." Heck, I don't even know if Lt. Stephen Decatur really pulled out a pistol at the last moment and shot a cutlass-waving pirate to avoid being skewered. But I want to think he did, and it added some delicious flavour when I lived in Decatur county back in Georgia.)

Students of American history will also recall the infamous "XYZ Affair", which gave birth to the meme "Millions for defense, not one cent for tribute."

It is probable that few people outside the USA even know about those confrontations of our early years as a nation (I'm not touching the sad fact that probably a lot of Americans lack "historical perspective" as do much the MSM - main stream media, Dad) but I for one got the President's point loudly and clearly.

Bottom Line: We stood up to the the tribute-demanding pirates and didn't take the advice of European leaders back then. We had some colourful naval skirmishes. It is even credited with improving our Navy.

That's the tradition President Bush invoked, and those of us alert enough to make the connection understood immediately our strategy in the war on terror.

It wouldn't be over in a day. We would have to find them, harry them and keep them guessing as to where we would strike at them next. And it would take years, if not decades, to finish the job. And our European allies would think we were foolish to fight when we could just pay up and carry on about our business.

And you know what? We succeeded. The reign of the Barbary Pirates ended. We fought them all the way to the shores of Tripoli, folks. And where are they today? Languishing in the dust bin of history and of interest only to weird history lovers like me. Until now.

The history of the USA, from our first vow of "No taxation without representation" to today's dilemma of paying ransom is laden with examples of refusal to bribe our way out of difficulties. (Don't bother to point out times that we have violated that tenet; the point is what we've striven to achieve; whenever anyone reaches for the stars they often fall short but hey! try again. It doesn't hurt half as much as putting your tail between your legs and accepting defeat.)

I woke up this morning with two phrases running through my head. The first was a recollection when I first heard the "Yes, but" conditional sentence. It was "I'm not a racist, but ..." back in the early 60's. Funny how I had forgotten that. It was rightfully reviled back then by liberals. Today, that formulation is on most liberals' lips.

The other was something from a (good grief) Space: Above and Beyond episode:

Mean as hell
All the time
Rough and ready
In the mud
Never quit
Ever faithful
Semper fi!

The terrorist attacks and the passengers and crew of Flight 93 taught us that we are all on the front line of this war, and we'd better think more like Marines than flower children. It may not be nice, but it is reality.

This rant has been brought to you coutesey of my BALLOT ARRIVING IN TODAY'S MAIL and I'm off to send it back, properly marked with a vote for our Cowboy President and our Kick-Ass Vice-President.

I voted for Nader in 2000 (it was a protest vote) and, in a strange way, my vote today is also a protest vote. I'm protesting stupidity, cynicism, cowardice, avarice, lies, delusions, hypocrisy, and most of all, appeasers of fascism.

Ain't life grand?

20:06: Holy cow, it seems I'm not the only ex-pat speaking up. After reading this account by playwright Carol Gould of her life in England(via Daimnation,) I'm ashamed that I let comparatively mild events in Toronto get to me.

Also, I should hasten to add that, as I live in Toronto, my face-to-face experiences and encounters with strident anti-Americanism are limited to Toronto. But as governments interact with governments, not people, the Canadian government is what the American government has to work with and the actions of the government of Canada hardly stands up in comparison to that of Australia, another Commonwealth nation.

Posted by: Debbye at 01:39 PM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 2736 words, total size 17 kb.

Oct. 9 - First, an apology. I was originally AWOL due to a (slight) computer problem and sudden increase in work-related demands, but once the temporary problems ceased I found I had been overrun by a Demon Within - the snarly, slobbering, fanged and clawed variety.

Okay, that's overstating things a lot. The simpler explanation is that I was writing a post which was angry in a mean-spiriteded way but my attempts to edit it only made it worse and revealed some things inside that I needed to confront.

I was full of anger, spite and a near vicious attitude toward my fellow Torontonians, and it all came to head at work over coffee, or rather the lack of coffee. It's one of those small, inconsequential kerfuffles that would ordinarily be shrugged off but it became a source of fury for me, and because I knew I was over-reacting I also knew I needed to look within. What I found was a big hole where tolerance and understanding once dwelt.

It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that I take a certain amount of heat from co-workers because I am an American. The movie Farenheit 911 gave Bush haters some talking points (let's move quickly past the mentality of those who take their cues from Michael Moore!) and as I actually have a vote in the upcoming election and they don't, it infuriates them that I support the President.

So what does that have to do with coffee? Well, my co-workers want someone to organize and run a coffee pool, and for some reason She who is a Warmonger was also the only person they could think of to organize and run one. Simple persuasion didn't work, so they employed Shameless Flattery.

I know I'm overreaching, but that state of affairs in coffee does seem to have a certain parallel with the state of the world and what the international community expects from the USA.

Is Canada one of the 'allies' Kerry thinks he can bring on board? America, trust me when I say that you are better off without them so long as the mentality that rules Toronto also controls Parliament.

One of the questions in last night's debate was about the experiences of Americans abroad. Anyone who believes that President Bush's policies provoked anti-Americanism is living in a state of denial as to how deep anti-American sentiments ran long before the 2000 elections and September 11.

Vicious attacks on the USA and Americans were written even as the dust was still settling over the hole in Manhatten, and they ranged from "blood is on America's hands so payback is good" to "maybe this will cause Americans to reconsider their place in the world" (which was evidenced in the US press as "why do they hate us" columns and editorials.)

So I'm still trying to get the Demon of Resentment under control and I don't want to inflict that kind of negativity on anyone (or do I just want to keep it hidden from everyone?) but maybe the rest of the world needs to know that we Americans sometimes make up for our lack of nuance by keeping our mouths shut but that silence is not to be mistaken for compliance or acceptance of their judgement but rather a willingness to bide our time, have our election, and proceed from there.

Mark November 2 on your calendars. I predict that Americans will speak very loudly that day, and the world should indeed worry about the re-election of President Bush because he may be above settling old scores but I'm not guaranteeing that the rest of us can live up to his example.

I owe personal apologies to those who emailed me and to whom I haven't responded. It was hard to compose letters when I couldn't compose myself, but I am dedicating Thanksgiving Day to wading through the spam in my Inbox and responding.

I know I owe a more profound and lengthy apology for my unexplained absence (a simple post that I was taking a break should have been made) but it's taken nearly three days to get this out and I have to face the fact that I'm unlikely to be happy with the lengthier apology but writing one will only allow me to procrastinate posting a mea culpa.

And the Coffee Issue? I solved it in a good ol' American way: I bought a thermos and bring my own coffee to work.

Speaking of work, I'm on an afternoon shift and have to go. More later.

Update Oct. 10 - 15:57 Thank you all for your support and encouragement. As I said, I have to battle a mean-spiritedness that is creeping into me and try to remain focused on the issues.

On or around Sept. 12, 2001, it occurred to me that part of the reason the USA is subject to so many misconceptions and slanders might in part be due to the fact that many of us who live abroad have tended to shrug our shoulders rather than respond to the attacks both in the media and from people with whom we interact.

Americans who live in Canada can "pass" for Canadian, and thus hear more slurs on our country than US citizens in other countries who would often be immediately indentifiable by their accents. My usual response in the past was to inform them that I was an American, and the usual response of an attacker would be to change the subject (which meant dropping the attack.) I now wonder if I should have pressed a counter-attack (in a very polite way, of course) which would have provided more talking points post Sept. 11.

I have questioned wearers of Kerry buttons as to whether they are American citizens, and haven't encountered one who is.

But I wear my Bush-Cheney button proudly, and when confronted, I say brightly "I'm an American citizen" confident that this announcement explains everything. It does take people aback! They haven't quite figured out the implications of a Bush victory, especially the impact on an American electorate that will finally leave hanging chad memories in the past and stride forward with a firm mandate for the President.

Expect lots of wailing as ex-pats who waited for the last minute find themselves unable to vote (these wankers think the Pentagon should assist them? The connection with the US for private citzens abroad is through the State Department, which could provide new fodder for the ineptitude of that department but certainly doesn't reflect on the President.) Expect impatience and dismissal from those of us who maintained our status on the Voter's List.

Those who didn't value their voting rights sufficiently to maintain them may find they have temporarily lost them. Talk about your Basic Life Lessons ... Mom and Dad are proven right yet again.

Note to Tim G.: Good on you! I'd love to see a tally of ex-pat voters but I think we'll be grouped with military personnel as absentee ballots and, as I can't imagine being in finer company, I'll willingly forgo the chance to counter Democrat whines that President Bush has made the world more "uncomfortable" for Americans and be content with victory.

Posted by: Debbye at 09:47 AM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 1212 words, total size 7 kb.

1 Welcome Back, Debbye! We missed you, especially those of us who share your 'transplanted' predicament. :-)

Posted by: Austin at October 09, 2004 11:36 AM (MC14X)

2 Welcome back. I just sent in my ballot - in support of the entire Republican ticket. I too can hardly find a Bush supporter at work. Even my American neighbor is brainwashed. Overcoming the liberal media is difficult for most people. Too few read blogs.

Posted by: Tim G. at October 09, 2004 05:24 PM (6JOPU)

3 Yay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I came here with the intent of searching through your archives again for clues about what your American hometown is so's I could expand my search for you. I checked the Toronto Sun's obituaries of the days following you sudden absence. At first it could have been just a 'puter glitch. But a week went by, then a month. After a while I honestly thought you were dead, and I wanted to try to find out how just so's the Munuvians who were worrying about your sudden lack of posting could at least have some measure of closure. I feel like Chief Brody seeing Matt Hooper surface at the end of JAWS. We have strange demons within. But, I think that what yours may be is actually not a demon, but a virtue: plain ol' common civility. Maybe I'm mistaken but it sounds to me that the prob is that you find it difficult to put up with the brash and petty hostility of T.O. America-haters. That's understandable; I'd hate it, too. But if they want you to run the office pool then they're not shutting you out completely. Maybe you can soften their outlook; but it wont be through debate. Nope. Just be respected by them for one reason -- as you clearly are. Debate politics if you want to, but don't sink to their level of course. Whenever I find myself in a debate with a barking moonbat (as opposed to a "rational" moonbat) I just say, with a chuckle, "You're not really in a debating mood. Maybe we should talk about this later." It usually gets me out of there and, hopefully, makes them think about how they're treating me just for disagreeing. Chin up! And welcome back!

Posted by: Tuning Spork at October 09, 2004 07:46 PM (QzJ0r)

4 Very glad to see you back. I have number of thing such as you described as unpublished drafts. And also a number of filler posts on standby. Sometimes I find it helps to write out a horrific rant, edit it to perfection and delete it.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at October 09, 2004 08:54 PM (U3CvV)

5 Welcome back!!! Sometimes it's best to just walk away for a bit. You were missed, even by some of us who didn't send email.

Posted by: Ted at October 09, 2004 09:53 PM (ZjSa7)

6 Debbye!!!!!! Yay!

Posted by: Pixy Misa at October 09, 2004 10:26 PM (+S1Ft)

7 Welcome back, Debbye... good to "see" you again!

Posted by: Madfish Willie at October 09, 2004 11:04 PM (iCGe/)

8 Hooray!! What a pleasant surprise. Welcome back!!

Posted by: mikem at October 10, 2004 04:24 PM (EzNXf)

9 I received, marked, and returned my absentee ballot last week for Bush/Cheney (that's the only race I can vote for, though), so add me to your tally of Americans living uncomfortably abroad. ;-)

Posted by: Austin at October 10, 2004 04:56 PM (idy1o)

10 Missed you and I'm glad you're back!

Posted by: marybeth at October 10, 2004 05:14 PM (8bCu3)

11 Lord, I've never been so happy to see a post! I was worried about you, girlfriend!

Posted by: Ith at October 10, 2004 05:21 PM (J19VG)

12 Christ, I was really beginning to think that something nasty might have happened to you. Welcome back, luv, you've been sorely missed.

Posted by: Paul Jané at October 11, 2004 01:01 AM (Ps6cF)

13 Missed you like crazy!! Truly mean had me worried about ya!

Posted by: Dex at October 11, 2004 01:25 AM (gOtVe)

14 Debbye, Hello! Hello! Those above have already said it . . .

Posted by: Robert at October 11, 2004 04:27 AM (rQeze)

15 Welcome back, Debbye. And by all means, continue to beat up on Canadian politicians and media. If you don't, I'll have to do it, and it's a never-ending task.

Posted by: gnotalex at October 11, 2004 02:52 PM (joY+o)

16 Deb- Welcome back!! I know exactly what you mean by the creeping mean spiritedness. I work in Chicago for a municiple agency that is rabidly Dem. I have to learn to throttle back. I recognized it when one of my fellow employee's started talking about Kerry and how he is the next messiah and the lines from Shakespear's Coriolanus went through my head: You common cry of curs whose breath I hate, Who reek 'o the rotten fens, Who's love I prize as the carcasses of dead unburied men that do corrupt my air I banish you!! I'm getting better at handling these situations but it is tough...

Posted by: Rich Cook at October 11, 2004 05:05 PM (Km34P)

17 Debbye, it's SO good to read yout thoughts again! I had resigned myself to thinking you were gone-- in what sense, I had no idea. You have made my 2004 much brighter! (Maybe you should switch to Half-Caf!)......

Posted by: Timbre at October 12, 2004 12:04 AM (nO30W)

18 I was worried but then I remembered this. Yes, Zathros remember. Zathros stop worrying. *** In June 2258, the Grey Council summoned Delenn to meet with them. They offered her the position of leader of the Grey Council, a post that had been vacant since Dukhat died. Delenn refused the position, believing that she had a destiny to help fulfill the prophecy that Humans and Minbari would work together. She acquired one of the triluminaries and returned to Babylon 5 where she began constructing a chrysalis device. The next month, Mr. Morden visited Delenn to ask her, "What do you want?" This alerted her to the return of the Shadows. She continued building her chrysalis device for several months until December when she sent Lennier to confirm her suspicions with Ambassador Kosh. Lennier asked, "Have the Shadows returned to Z'ha'dum?" Kosh replied, "Yes." Delenn realized that the time of the next Shadow War that had been foretold by Valen was upon them. She felt it was her duty to help fulfill prophecy by building a bridge between the Minbari and the Humans so that they could work together to defeat the Shadows. She used the triluminary to activate the device she had built, and it entombed her in a chrysalis. *** Welcome back.

Posted by: Flea at October 12, 2004 12:00 PM (jTd4T)

19 Welcome back! I'd just discovered your blog and had been reading for a couple of weeks when you vanished. Having lived in Canada for a number of years I'm familiar with your experience as you describe it. My own experience led to my feeling frustrated by the ignorance, much of it willful, around me. Eventually I understood that much of the bitterness about the US in Canada had more to do with the elusiveness of 'Canadian Identity' and an enormous underlying anger in most of Canada at what holds the country together. Blaming the US for pretty-much everything seemed to me unhealthy and a laughably easy way out. However it's human and therefore understandable. Knowing this made things a lot easier for me. Not worth the grief. Their disease, not mine. I still argued, but not viscerally any more. Again, glad you're back and looking forward. Nex

Posted by: Alan at October 12, 2004 09:43 PM (F6vzi)

20 Welcome back! Like many who've posted congrats before me, I was saddened when it appeared that you'd given up blogging. Your page had become a daily read. Keep up the good work!! Don't let Toronto get you down - it's a weird town, even by Canadian standards. I lived there for a couple of years and I know what the people there can be like. It's by no means representative of the Canadian people.

Posted by: Martin at October 12, 2004 10:55 PM (bvK+g)

21 Welcome back! I, too, was worried for you. I'm a Yank in Ottawa, and have dealt with the same things you describe for decades. One of the details which bothers me is that I sometimes find myself having to defend certain US policies which I might not actually agree with. (I'm glad, though, that I can support most of Bush's policies from the get-go.) Rather than discussing the policies, my experience is that many Canadians seem to attack the States as a country first, and talk about ideas only as an afterthought. I find the need to step back and be glad that I'm not in charge of the politics, and not let any of the 'stupidity' around me get to me.

Posted by: Paul at October 13, 2004 11:29 PM (FHiJd)

22 Hey Deb, welcome back! I sorta suspected it was a matter of backing off to gain perspective, but yeah, we got a little worried at the complete lack of info on the page; hell, Steve Den Beste at least documented his reasons for hiatus (and got even more crap directed his way by people who felt he *owed* it to them/us to continue posting). I only invoke SDB because I originally found your link through USS Clueless and had to suffer through two of my favourite sites going inactive. I missed your voice and am glad you're back. Thanks to Michael and Anthony at Canadian Headhunter for the heads up regarding your return.

Posted by: John H at October 14, 2004 12:37 AM (Z6f/b)

23 Welcome back! I liked this entry so much I'm going to post the entire thing at my blog....

Posted by: Roundhead at October 14, 2004 09:38 AM (fOyx5)

24 Hey, welcome back. And I mean that in the most sincere way. Like many others, I was getting worried about what had become of you. Hang in there. This presidential election must be a particularly bad time for Americans in Canada, at least for Bush supporters. As a Canadian whose immunity to the anti-American virus remains intact, I sometimes feel like those folks in Dawn of the Dead, trying to keep my wits about me in a sea of zombies. Blogs like yours help.

Posted by: keith at October 14, 2004 10:59 AM (xfdnu)

25 My sincere apologies to you all. I feel even more guilty now than when I finally resurfaced, and I'm really sorry for causing so much worry. I really let you all down by letting myself be distracted by the small sh*t instead of keeping my eyes on the end zone. I just finished writing "I won't dwell on the little stuff" 500 times on the blackboard ... I trust the lesson will stick.

Posted by: Debbye at October 17, 2004 07:32 PM (YN7Kb)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The first official flag of the 13 united States of America

July 4 - It has become depressingly commonplace to assign strictly mercenary motives to the struggle for independence from Mother England, and thus to shrug off any reverence we may accord those who signed the Declaration of Independence. But that casual dismissal is often self-serving: after all, it is easier to disrespect occurrences and events that have strictly pecuniary motives, (e.g., it's all about the oil!,) than to to disrespect those same things when they are driven by ideals, optimism, and confidence in ourselves and our fellow man (a free and properous Iraq.)

I've come to believe that people's theories often say more about them than about those theories which are supposed to explain historical events. That's a relativist theory of another sort, but a much more uncomfortable one due to the degree of self-honesty it demands.

It's not my purpose to argue those points today. I can only account for my beliefs, my viewpoints, and my opinions, and at the risk of sounding incredibly arrogant, I don't have to justify them to anyone especially today.

Reverence for stability didn't gain independence. Reverence for stability didn't cause us to wonder what was over the next mountain, build the Erie Canal, or send us to Alaska and the moon. Something else did, something that combines curiosity with audacity and faith in our ability to find ways and means to our goals.

I've posted the text of the Declaration in the post below, and I just want to quote the closing passage:

... we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Had they been captured or the revolution failed, they would have been disgraced and stripped of their honor as traitors; their property would have been confiscated; and they would have been hung like dogs.

As far as I'm concerned, no one has the right to sneer at those men unless they themselves face the same risks for making similar declarations, and nobody, and I mean nobody, living in the USA faces similar punishment. There are, however, many living in the USA today who left their native lands because they faced such punishment, and we've welcomed them in part out of respect for our forefathers.

I used the word audacity earlier. I love that word: it's impish, irreverent, and conveys all that is best and dearest about human beings. It forms the American character, and has led to our greatest triumphs and most humiliating defeats. But part of an individual's character is revealed by which of the two frame their actions and part of our struggle today is the degree to which we remain audacious.

My answer is pretty clear. I won't apologize for anything any more than any other country need apologize, and if we've made mistakes (and I know we have) it is part of the human condition to err. What I don't accept is that it is part of the human condition to stay in those moments of failure; it is rather our obligation to continue to stride forward with renewed purpose and determination.

Including those endowments names in the Declaration, I hold some other truths to be self-evident:

Your rights end where the other fellow's nose begins;

All everybody wants is some elbow room;

Mr. Colt made all men equal;

Rude people fight indoors and polite people step outside;

If I don't wanna see Farenheit 911, I don't gotta; and

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it (but don't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, incite to riot, or argue balls and strikes 'cuz the First Amendment won't save your ass from being tossed.)

We are regarded by many of our friends as simplistic, rustic, arrogant, overly religious mongrels.

Granted, our friends have some valid points. We haven't mastered the art of nuance, tending more to say what we mean and mean what we say. I guess we would get along better if we obscured phrased our words so as to render them devoid of any real meaning, but that offends our notion of honesty so we're stuck with being honest.

We understand complicated theories and arguments all right, but we also know when arguments and theories are made unnecessarily complicated and can smell out a rat or a pompous ass.

We really do try to be cynical, worldly and sophisticated, but our innate cheerfulness and optimism keep bubbling up despite ourselves because we've learned that hard work brings its own rewards and that, if you fail, you can pull up your socks and try again.

The biggest sin is self-pity. Just stop whining and get on with the work at hand. If, however, you choose to laugh at your pratfall, I'll cheer you up by telling you about my own most embarrassing moments. That's what friends are for.

We just can't help remembering that there is a benevolent deity up there. We implore His guidance every 7th inning, we offer up an involuntary prayer for the safety of a missing child, we thank Him for small and large events, and we affirm that our flag, currency and Supreme Court are connected to Him in mysterious ways.

Many of us are not that many generations away from rural areas. We could try harder to develop a better sense of self-entitlement, but that conflicts with our rustic notions of an honest day's work for an honest dollar. (We also believe that some money is "dirty.")

We're rather proud of the fact that we've managed to cobble together a nation of people who have ideas in common rather than bloodlines, so I guess that does make us mongrels.

But again, we are close enough to our rural roots to recognize that in-breeding makes for poor stock.

Someday, we may be more philosophical when our elected or appointed officials are caught with their hands in the till, but we are still so immature as to demand accountability for our tax dollars because we went to a lot of trouble to put checks in place to keep those people honest.

That's another problem too: we just can't seem to forget that every penny some call the government's money came out of our pockets. In fact, we still think of it as our money and demand that it be spent with care. (Don't blame our leaders for that; they have tried really hard to convince us that our money belongs to them, but we're a little bull-headed on some things.)

We really don't like government in any way, shape or form, and a standing joke remains some suit walking up and saying I'm from the government and I'm here to help you. We are extremely critical of our own government but try keep our criticisms of other nation's governments to ourselves because it's the polite thing to do. When we do began to openly criticize them, we're sending a signal that many fail to catch.

We refuse to assign our futures to an elite - in fact, we get downright hostile to the very notion of an elite - but we have genuine affection for the selfsame British Royal Family that we waged a war of independence to be free of. (I think they're a little fond of us, too.)

We cherish our wild and colorful cowboy past. We are incredibly sentimental. Our national heritage includes a cracked bell, and we literally had to drain a swamp to build our capitol city.

We know Charleton Heston didn't part the Red Sea, but we secretly suspect that if God wanted anyone to do it today, He'd first offer the job to Chuck.

Our cultural identity is littered with phrases like WE, the People, You and what army, It's Miller time, A/OK, Buffy and Angel 4ever, Scotty beam me up, In God we trust; everyone bring cash, and you can pry this gun from my cold, dead hands.

We've added to these phrases over the years, most recently including Let's roll and bring it on. (Even the allowed and disallowed uses of the F-word are finally being codified, due in large part to the efforts of V-P Cheney and Charles Krauthammer. Stay tuned as this vital issue continues to be debated.)

The word "submission" isn't in our emotional vocabulary, but we not only understand the concept of payback, we even issue upgrades. (At the time of this writing, there are contradictory reports about Marine Corporal Hassoun, but I continue to pray for him.)

So Happy Birthday, America, and thank you for your gifts of freedom, optimism, and self-confidence. May God bless and watch over the brave men and women who guard the walls, and make us worthy of their sacrifices.

(An excellent July 4th prayer is by Dr. Sensing here, by the way.)

I also want to send my most amiable regards this day to our fine friends and allies in Mother England's other wayward child, Australia, as they celebrate Reserve Forces Day there (link via the esteemed Reverend Pixy.)

Updated to recommend some wonderful posts:

Michele's stands tall and true for liberty everywhere, and most especially in Iran this week.

Aaron tells what happened to those signatories of the Declaration of Independence - some of them did fall into British hands, and others were wounded or killed during the war. Read it. more...

Posted by: Debbye at 06:44 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 1754 words, total size 11 kb.