Lucky or Skillful?

Fred Thompson's much anticipated launch of his official campaign could not be better timed.

Let us set the scene - The press is focused relentlessly on the Larry Craig gay-sex-solicitation scandal. Viewers, especially Cultural Conservatives, are being turned off from politicians in droves. In comes the lanky southern Thompson, exuding plainspoken, downhome goodness. More importantly, Thompson is seen as an outsider.

Of course Fred Thompson's outsiderness is pure illusion but that doesn't matter. He has slipped in the polls as the press tired of waiting for him to do something - anything. Now he has an angle, a narrative that the media can pick up on. This timing is assuredly coincidental but the campaign should be judged on their ability to exploit MensRoomGate. If they can't catch an obvious bone like this when it is thrown to them, Clinton will have them chained to a tree in the backward before you can say "Y'all come back now, ya hear."

Another one

Well, apparently the Republican party is quite serious about winning California. First they decide to sponsor a proposition that would split California's electoral votes by congressional district rather than the overall vote winner selecting all electoral college delegates. Fair enough. It beats the Texas mid-term gerrymandering plan. Now we can be certain that Phase 2 of the plan is to win more votes in that uber-liberal state by having a series of Republican congressman pretend to be gay! That Karl Rove really is a boy genius!

Let's Compare Vietnam to Iraq...

George Bush's advisers will always win points for audacity. Making the taboo comparison between Vietnam and Iraq turns convention on its head and beats the Democrats on over the noggin with it.

Alright, Mr President, we should stay the course in Iraq just like we should have in Vietnam. Of course, to do this we will need an Army a lot like that which was used in Vietnam. Did I mention that it was an Army of conscripts? Maintaining a force of this size will require a long term commitment to a much larger military and a draft is the only way that is possible in a time of war.

Let's roll.

On Iraq, Viet Nam and Fighting Terrorists

In an August 22 speech, the Historian-in-Chief claimed, among other things, that America’s enemies view American withdrawal at the end of the Viet Nam War as a sign of our inherent weakness. Throw in Beirut or Somalia and Bush is 100% correct. Kudos to his speech writers. Someday a young terrorist may point out to his followers that the US did not have the stamina to complete our mission in Afghanistan before moving on to Iraq.

The conceptual error, or rather the psychological crutch, comes in concluding that Viet Nam was lost because we pulled out. By definition I suppose the war is not lost until you leave the battlefield or are dead. In practice, there comes a moment when one side can no longer achieve victory and the war is, for all intents and purposes, over. This is the point when those living in the Reality-Based community start searching for a way to prevent their retreat from turning into a rout.

The lesson on Viet Nam is that the number of situations in which military might is sufficient is fleetingly small. So Osama Bin Laden thinks that the US is weak because it pulled out of Viet Nam and Mogadishu? Let him! This is a man who believes that he is going to establish a new Caliphate. So let’s allow him the fantasy that America is a pushover. We may be naïve and anti-intellectual but we are also basically resilient and just plain big. Now is the time to prove we are not stupid.

While Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri sit in godforsaken Waziristan, boasting about how they have tricked the West into doing their bidding, we should come to our senses and treat these thugs in a quiet and deliberate way. No B52s. No bounties. There may still be a role for “special” units but the thrust will be - *gasp* - diplomatic and judicial. We have dealt with spies, internal terrorists and organized crime in the past. Many were brought to justice. It’s not sexy and it would be hard work but it can be done (as if fighting a land war in central Asia is a cake walk.) America has never been especially good at human intelligence and we will have a lot to learn. In the end, however, while Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri dream their dreams of the overthrow of apostate Egypt and Saudi Arabia, we will be steadily tightening the noose and dragging them, finally, disgraced and robbed of their mystique, to be judged before the world.

Update 24-Aug-2007: Punched up the ending

Death Penalty For Women Who Get Abortions?

A man does a documentary at a Libertyville, Ill Pro-Life rally in July 2005. He asks the demonstrators whether women who have illegal abortions should go to jail. The people are dumbfounded, as if they had never thought about that before!

This video is hard to find. I found it here by searching for "Libertyville Abortion Demonstration".

A Children's Book?

I have read that the Harry Potter books should only be judged according to the standards of its young audience. Aside from the obvious corollary to this - that adults should be prohibited from reading the books - there are further flaws in the argument.

First, assuming that a twelve year old does not care about poor plotting, absent character development and self-contradictory settings is patronizing and, I believe, a complete dodge. Megan McArdle expresses it better than I do:

"But the best children's fantasy does something else: it gives one the illusion that
the magical world is as consistent and real as one's own world - that it exists,
just barely out of reach."

More important is the question of what our children should be reading. There comes a point where you have to get over the stunning fact that your child is actually reading a book and think about what he or she is actually reading. Twelve year olds love professional wrestling and Bart Siimpson, too, but if you are thrilled that Billy is at least watching TV, you should have your parenting license revoked (yes - I use the v-chip and don't have cable) . A good book exposes a child to systematic thinking, consequences, clear expression of ideas and rhetorical skills. A poor one discourages critical thinking or the awareness of the motivations of others. J K Rowling does not fail utterly in these regard but to say that young adult literature is best judged by young adults is short-sighted in a way that highlights many of the problems in parenting of the last few decades.

*** Harry Potter Spoiled ***

She did it. J K Rowling flubbed the ending. I think part of the problem stems from the fact that after writing a book filled with thrilling adventures and near escapes, it is nearly impossible for the ending to be anything but an anti-climax.

In the case of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, she pulls a couple of fast ones. She inserts two - count 'em, two! - scenes to try and cleanup difficult situations. One addresses the Harry-Voldemort connection by bringing the narrator... I mean Dumbledore... in a dream-sequence/near-death-experience complete with white fluffy clouds. Then she throws in a suffering, injured baby whom we are instructed to ignore. Maybe I am just dense and don't "get" the universal symbolism here.

The second plot device involves Harry's viewing of the late Severus Snape's memories. Ah, Snape! Would you believe the character pivotal to the cliffhanger at the end of the previous book hardly appears in the finale at all? Yes. Instead the reader is force fed some twaddle about how Snape had been protecting Harry all these years because of his life-long love for Harry's mother and the piece of her that lives on in Harry. What?! Where was the ambiguity of Snape's view of Harry in the previous several thousand pages? Snape's distaste for Harry and the traits that Snape believed Harry shared with his father were completely untainted in the rest of the books by Harry's supposedly sharing of "Lily's eyes." There may have been a tidbit thrown in somewhere that I don't remember but the gross arc of Snape's character development made this sudden twist seem arbitrary. It is like introducing an evil twin in the final scene. If you are writing a book driven by discovery of clues, the reader must reach the last page saying, "Of Course! Why didn't I see it all along."

Rowling's failure (along with that of Philip Pullman) has pretty much soured me on writing anything myself. The danger of becoming that which I despise is just too great.

P.S.: Among the many failed Harry Potter predictions posted on the internet these past weeks was mine, predicting that I would not read the damn book. I bought it the first day at 9 am and stayed up 'til 1:30 am last night to finish it. At least the curse is now lifted!

Killing the Messenger?

"Most Americans see President Bush as intransigent on Iraq and prefer that the Democratic-controlled Congress make decisions about a possible withdrawal of U.S. forces, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll."

By Jon Cohen and Dan Balz

Washington Post
Tuesday, July 24, 2007; Page A01 (link)

Does this mean that Americans would accept similar decisions about Iraq if they had been suggested by Russ Feingold? I think they have demonstrated that they can accept some level of casualties higher than what they experienced in Mogadishu. What if Reid and Pelosi announced that they were authorizing funding for a permanent base Iraqi Kurdistan and enough troops to secure the borders and train the Iraqi army for two years. Would they buy it? Wouldthey at least retain I higher confidence level on the matter than Bush is currently managing?

The Inevitable Harry Potter Post

*** Warning - Multiple Possible Spoilers ***

I planned not to read Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. After a few months, I relented and checked out one of the six copies on the library shelf. Not a great book. Just like the others nothing much happens until the last 20 pages. Liked the girl friend bits. Was really annoyed about Snape!!!

Will I read the Deathly Hallows? I don't plan to (see above). If I find out the ending, which seems inevitable, will I even bother to read this one? I have been avoiding most of the hype because I am working on a writing project of my own and don't want to "contaminate" it. That said, Rowling has a lot to pull off here. She has to explain Snape's actions plus Dumbledore's confidence in him. Snape is the most interesting character in the whole book and she could easily screw that up. Let's face it, she is no literary goddess. I draw your attention to the Goblet of Fire. I know she apologized but she is under extreme pressure here, too.

Why am I dwelling on the potential for this to end with a thud? Three words: The Golden Compass. This series started out quite good. I cried when God died (I was mourning my own father's death but still ...) The spectres scared the bejesus out of me - much eerier than the dementers, which weren't too bad themselves. Then in the last book, we learn what the temptation is - teen sex! What? That is it? And then the spectres turn out to be created whenever the s0-called subtle knife is used to cut an opening between dimensions. Give me a freakin' break. It was so lame I simply could not believe it.

So, since Rowling's first six efforts have produced many ups and downs (maybe she should take out the bad stuff and just write shorter books - heehee) I approach the seventh, pivotal work with much trepidation.

Just so you know

Comedy is hard

Now that Army War Games have determined that a likely outcome of America's withdrawal from Iraq will be Iran being sucked into the Iraqi quagmire, I have to draw attention to my previous attempt at humor. Damn it! How can you be witty and funny when reality comes along and steals your idea? Sincerest form of flattery my a**!