Skip to main content


Showing posts from March, 2007

The Draft : Defining a moral war

In case anyone didn't realize it, I'm a girl. This means that when I turned 18 I didn't have to go get a selective service form from the post office and send it in. Several years later I joined the military anyway, so my being excused from selective service is sort of moot. As this conflict goes on I've noticed odd things about how people talk about "the draft". There are those who promote a draft in the hopes of raising anti-war sentiment. We've seen several examples of that which include actual suggestions of putting a bill through congress to scare e-mails sent to college students before the last presidential election. I like this from Cox and Forkum . But there have been others, people who's comments I've read, who think there should be a draft even while they support the war. (Or at least mostly support the war.) Some few of them argue that we really need more people. But others seem to be arguing for the principle of the thing.

The perfect moral example

I'm not as contemplative as neo-neocon in her post, The ivory tower: Clean hands and leading by example. And I'm in an ornery mood so when someone said they used to look up to us, I said this: Never believe someone who says they used to look up to the United States. It’s a sure tip-off that they’re trying to sell you something, namely, their approval. What coin for that approval (an approval the US has never had before in our history) why, the coin for that approval is to tolerate violence and evil. You want to know what American principles are? Read some Westerns. Violent literature filled with violent men. What virtues? Honesty. Bravery. Individuals standing for what is right even when it means facing their sure death. Defending the weak. Pulling your own weight and prefering not to accept help on the one hand, offering help, even to the point of self-sacrifice on the other. Bullies are reviled. Personal responsibility for deafeating them, lauded. Leaving others in the way of

I'm a denier

I used to be a skeptic, but I've given up that comfortable ambiguity to embrace the big "D" without apology. If you haven't yet, check out this documentary. Update: Basically the same information , but including this gem... What is really being said here is, "We believe in the IPCC and anybody else who supports Global Warming. We believe it so much that we refuse to listen to anybody who says otherwise." The only difference between this and Jim and Tammy Baker on the old PTL Club is that nobody says "Jesus." Mr. Card is also a bit more specific about the manipulated computer models that had been mentioned in the documentary. What were those bad numbers Mann plugged in to get his fake results? Modern bristlecone pine tree-ring data in which recent tree rings showed the widths that would normally mean unusually warm weather. However, these trees were located near temperature recording stations that showed lower than usual temperatures. So instead o

I haven't seen it yet, but I have opinions anyhow...

So there! I'm talking about 300 of course. I hope this means that studios will start to make good movies again. Art for the sake of art rather than art for the sake of a message. There's no message folks. Not a pro-war one. Not an anti-war one. Bush is not involved in any fashion whatsoever. No message. Get it through your heads. But art. Likely very much so from what I've seen. If when I see it I repent of that opinion, I'll let you know. So... why do I call a bloodfest art? I didn't realize at first that this movie is made by the same person who made Sin City. Sin City was art. Very strange. Very visceral. And when people were talking about 300 being a graphic novel, even without knowing, I thought of Sin City. Graphic novels are incredibly sophisticated visual art. I'm sure the CGI contributes to the unreality of 300, but in the trailers, clips and stills, there is a sense of detatchment and interpretation. The sepia tones an