Skalduggery

The courage to get it right?

Last year, during black history month, Eric Holder, our first black AG, called us “a nation of cowards” when it comes to discussing race. That was the single phrase seized on by many in the media, on both the right and the left, and it was the phrase used to praise or denigrate Holder’s speech and the current state of racial affairs in the United States. The speech itself was lengthy and only somewhat nuanced, but there was a lot more there than most people were willing to discuss – black or white… or any other color for that matter. Let me use a part of the same sentence where the offending phrase was found: I believe that “in too many ways,” Eric Holder was right. Whether you agree with him or not, I’d urge you to listen to the entire speech in context, or of course, read the text of the speech – much faster results.

Part of his point is that while Americans have moved to the point of working, lunching, and attending functions together, on weekends, we pretty much self segregate… and that isn’t good in his view. I am more sanguine about our progress than Holder, but I do believe he is right about our general unwillingness to discuss racial matters in an open and honest manner. Lots of reasons for that little problem, but I’d like to open up this can of worms… because “in too many ways,” not many people are willing to expose themselves to the consequences Holder so blithely suggests we all should risk.

I had several people at work try to dissuade me from heading in this direction (I often bounce some of my more controversial ideas off of several folks I know), but I thought, “Hey, screw it. This blog has had me on the carpet more than once.” And, as some of you know, I have often argued that courage is a thing to value.

Rather than throw a rant on why I think the AG is full of it, I’ll just throw out a few facts, a few statistical certainties, and wait for the charges to fly. Keep in mind here, that I am NOT offering explanations at this point, nor am I making any allegations or interpretations of the facts I’ll be laying out. I’d really like to hear what you have to say – providing you can keep the conversation civil, accurate to the best of your ability (in other words, be prepared to back it up), and really aimed at affording all of us the opportunity to get a better grasp of the realities involved.

In addition to the Bureau of Justice Statistics site, you can also find some of this information at Heather Mac Donald’s Weekly Standard article, Excusing the Oakland Rioters: Looting is not a form of civil rights protest, and the city of New York’s crime statistics.

• Blacks commit nearly 6,000 murders annually (most of whom are black), and whites & Hispanics commit a little more than 5,300 murders a year (most of whom are white or Hispanic). Whites & Hispanics comprise about 81% of the population, while blacks comprise about 13% of the population. Since the US has just over 300,000,000 people, the math is pretty straight forward. Blacks murder almost 154 people per 100,000 of their own population. Whites & Hispanics murder almost 2.2 people per 100,000. The murder rate for blacks is 70 times higher than the murder rate for whites and Hispanics.
• The 73^rd precinct in New York is mostly black, and “the per capita rate of shootings there is 81 times higher than in the mostly white 68^th precinct…”
• The police stop rate of vehicles in the 73^rd precinct is 15 times higher than in the 68^th precinct.
• In New York City, blacks “commit 80 percent of all shootings, whites 1.4 percent, though blacks are 23 percent of the population, and whites 35 percent.”
• At the beginning of 2009, there were nearly 1800 whites on death row and there were just over 1300 blacks on death row (both the white and black numbers include some Hispanics).
• During 2008, there were 20 white and 17 black people executed.

As I said earlier, at this point I’m not trying to explain these numbers, nor will I offer any interpretations of the meaning in these numbers. I’ve got questions about these and other numbers. Why are these kinds of numbers rarely if ever mentioned when discussing race in America? Especially on the “big three” news stations, PBS, NPR, CNN when their prolific little series on race air on national television? For the elites that are concerned with the brutality of the police and their unnecessary taking of black lives, why are they not equally concerned with the unnecessary taking of black lives in the inner city? Why don’t these victims get the same care and concern from our nation’s elite, the media, and the professoriate? Especially when they are so obviously more numerous?? Why doesn’t the unnecessary taking of white lives by the police rate the same air time and outrage?

Finally, in closing this post, remember, please keep the comments and email civil, and as important, let’s give each other the benefit of the doubt about our honesty and earnestness in seeking out the truth. I’ll be using the replies to guide some of my follow up posts – posts aimed more at our nation’s intellectuals than at everyday Americans.

Cheers – all of you!

I can’t really take credit for this, but I ran across it floating around on Facebook. A great hat tip to Bonnie Pharr and her friend Betty Johnson. My apologies for the small liberties I’ve taken with your wonderful writing – call it poetic license

I do not like this Uncle Sam.
I do not like his health care scam.
I do not like when Congress steals.
I do not like their secret deals.

I do not like this speaker Nan.
I do not like this “YES WE CAN.”
I do not like their spending sprees.
Because I know that nothing’s free.

I do not like their smug replies
When I complain about their lies.
I do not like this kind of hope-
I do not like it NOPE NOPE NOPE!

Short, sweet, and fun. I’ll be back later with something a little more serious…

Cheers!

UPDATE: Hat Tip to Jeff – if you’ve read the comments, you’ll notice an earlier mention of our country’s budget woes. In fact, the worst since WWII! Here’s Jeff’s short hand explanation:

To give you some perspective on this story… this is like a family with an income of $23,800 a year having $130,000 in debt. On top of that, they’re spending $38,800 a year, that’s $15,000 in the hole. Oh yeah, you start paying on another $9,400 for health care next year…

Riots in 1965 and 1992

In the latest Left Exposed, Sonja takes us on a walk down Memory Lane…at least the parts that weren’t destroyed in the fiery wakes of the 1965 & 1992 Los Angeles riots, which destroyed, not just homes and businesses, but the notion that liberal politics could lift black neighborhoods to economic prosperity.  As Sonja poignantly notes, liberalism did just the opposite.

Click the image at right and take a visit through an interesting bit of Sonja’s personal history – and why she’s worried about future possibilities. I’ve written often, and some might say heatedly, about who is actually responsible for the continuing racial divide, i.e., who continues to pick the scabs and fan the flames… Here’s a calm and piercing look at this issue. Take a look at the video and tell me what you think! But please, do it before this video gets shifted to the archives out of the reach of non-subscribers.

A solicited guest column by Jeff Begley:

The Outdated, Outmoded, Old... Oh, never mind!

Revised Constitutional Preamble

The Bill of Wrongs

Amendment 1 – Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.

Congress shall make laws disrespecting established religions, and prohibiting the free exercise thereof in public areas; and abridging the freedom of speech by calling certain speech “hate speech”, and of the press through the hilariously named “fairness doctrine”; but not the right of the people peaceably to assemble for these assemblies will simply be handled through media outlets and labeled violent, racist extremists in order to dismiss them rather than address them.

Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall be infringed.  We will also hedge on the definition of the word militia, ignore the original intent of the founders, and make certain that once liberal hegemony is established it will be impossible to disrupt through force of arms.

Amendment 3 – Quartering of Soldiers.

Soldiers shall, in time of peace-keeping, be figuratively drawn and quartered for any mistakes made in front of a journalist.  We shall also attempt to quarter soldier pay, benefits, and at least put a dent in any honor once felt in serving the nation by claiming people only join as a last resort.

Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable or even reasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause as defined by the current administration, supported by oath or affirmation of a federal judge appointed by a Democratic president, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.  Under no circumstances shall the possibility of the person being an illegal, er, undocumented… um – insufficiently-naturalized citizen be broached.

Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings.

Amendment 5 shall be phased out to make room for the implementation of an adult day-school for the reeducation of those with a diminished capacity to follow laws.  These poor souls simply need dignity and love.  Kumbaya.

Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses.

In all criminal prosecutions, if we must, the accused shall enjoy the right to a supportive and closed trial  so as not to impinge upon their sense of dignity, by an racially diverse jury with as few privileged, bigoted white people on it as possible, of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed unless we want to move it for political posturing.  It should be noted that, as in the case of the 5^th Amendment, trials are to be avoided as much as possible due to self-esteem issues they appear to cause in the accused.

Amendment 7 – Trial by Media in Civil Cases.

In cases where political opponents disagree, no civil discourse shall be initiated.  Instead, agreeable media outlets shall be engaged in order to impugn the character of said opponents in order to dismiss them as some sort of crackpot, whichever is considered the lowliest type at that particular time.  If the term “racist” can be used without fear of reprisal, it shall.

Amendment 8 – Cruel and Unusual Punishment.

Being that punishment is considered mean by those being punished and the term unusual is vague, we shall pretend to rehabilitate those poor, misguided souls who asserted their wills over the wills of others.  Only if a crime personally affects us shall we even consider punishment as an option because, hey, it’s us and not you that are suffering at that point.

Amendment 9 – Construction of Constitution.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall be construed as the absolute limits of rights retained by the people.  If the people need more rights, we will determine what they are and grant them.  Maybe.  Ok, not really.

Amendment 10 – Powers of the States and People.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people… LOL!  Okay, we were really just yanking your chain here.  Gotcha!  Seriously, the central government shall retain all the power.  States are for hillbillies clinging to their bibles and guns.

So, I was watching Bill Whittle and his cronies doing their most recent Trifecta – Regurgitation Radio: Talking Points for the Obama Nation and it described a nauseatingly weird website called My Barack Obama dot Com.  After throwing up a little in my mouth, this song came to mind… Happy Saturday!

The Cult of Personality!

Happy Saturday! Muahahahah.

This post was initially headed in the direction of parsing a little history around the word intellectual. It just didn’t come together as a single post, and I am not great at separating a long post into constituent parts – so the beginning of my posts on men of letters as they were once called, will begin next week. On the other hand, during the course of my research (actually, I was avoiding the work and watching PJTV’s Bill Whittle), I ran across a video by a guy over at PJTV that gave a graduation commencement address that is unlikely to be heard. You might have heard of this guy; his name is Bill Whittle.

My generation was pampered beyond good sense, we were molly coddled and told a pack of lies – all with good intentions – “yes, you’re a special, unique, creative little soul…” and as a consequence, I wonder if we have failed our own children by placing notions of self-esteem above both common sense and reality. Have we done our children a disservice? Bill Whittle’s recent serving of Afterburner: Graduation Nation, really hits the mark. It’s another installment that is worth the ten minutes it takes to watch it, and it strikes at least tangentially on my topic of intellectuals…

Part of what has motivated me to write a series on intellectuals is in response to current “experts,” both within and without our current administration, speaking ex cathedra on matters us common folk simply wouldn’t understand. Online, print, and video articles seem to have taken up this topic with a certain verve. I’ve also just about finished a couple of books that have seriously sparked my interest and curiosity. The first is Intellectuals and the American Presidency: Philosophers, Jesters, and Technicians by Tevi Troy. The second is by an author whom I greatly admire, Thomas Sowell, and his newest book is Intellectuals and Society.

I often find it depressing that many will use “quotable quotes” from books or movies without understanding both the author’s intent and the context of quotation. I have been guilty of this on too many occasions, and I understand the desire. For example, in keeping with the subject on both counts, a common Thomas Jefferson quote used throughout the media from blogs to movies is: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” This is from a letter written to William Smith while Jefferson was in Paris, dated November 13, 1787. A more complete quote that reveals some of the context is illuminating:

What country before ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. Link to the letter

Changes the tenor of the quote just a little bit, hey? I was honored by my oldest daughter when she called one day and said, “Dad, you’ve got to watch The Rock! You’re the Ed Harris character. Get it. Watch it.” So I got it. I watched it. And was flattered beyond measure – and yet hoped that I was more like the Michael Biehn or Sean Connery character. Now I’m not so sure, and I think my daughter had a better insight into her old man than, well, the old man did. Ed Harris uses Jefferson’s line (only a part) in protest of lying and uncaring government. He and Sean Connery’s characters were thinkers, men of letters, intellectuals. Where have our intellectuals gone wrong? As a teaser for what’s to come, I’ll share something out of Thomas Sowell’s preface to his book:

Distinguished professors, gifted poets, and influential journalists summoned their talents to convince all who would listen that modern tyrants were liberators and that their unconscionable crimes were noble, when seen in the proper perspective. Whoever takes it upon himself to write an honest intellectual history of the twentieth-century Europe will need a strong stomach.

But he will need something more. He will need to overcome his disgust long enough to ponder the roots of this strange and puzzling phenomenon. ~Professor M. Lilla, Columbia University, in his book The Reckless Mind: Intellectuals in Politics

Certainly the defense of both Mao and Lenin by our last few crops of intellectuals is confusing… considering that together they have killed their millions, in fact, more than all of America’s war casualties on both sides. A strong stomach indeed.

So family, friends, and readers all, remember, though I gave up religion for lent, I still find wonderful verses in the bible – as I still read it. Remember I Corinthians 9:24-27:

Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

Remember to watch the video! Click a picture or the link at the top of the post.

Tear me up in the comments

Cheers all

Stephen Kruiser gets down and nasty with with current events. He hits all my favorites… Nancy Pelosi, Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman, and sooo much more! Really, take a trip to PJTV and spend 15 minutes watching a decidedly sharp bit of fun with the left. And hey, I always like it when someone else does the work… Click the picture, Click the picture!!

Cheers

Visit PJTV: Why we are all Iron Men

This will of necessity be a short post, but there will be another in short order. Right now, after having mulled through and over the second installment of Iron Man, and after hearing “I’m tired of this liberal agenda” from the speakers in a movie theater, well – I REALLY LIKED IT! Not enough? You’re right of course, but I can’t offer the kind of commentary that PJTV can in this case. Tired of property rights violations by our government? Tired of crony capitalism? Take about 12 minutes out of your day, take a trip over to PJTV… of course they’re stingy capitalists and won’t let you (read “me”) embed their work…

BUT, if “You think Tony Stark is a bad-ass capitalist? Milton Friedman would kick his butt. Bill Whittle tells you why: We Are Iron Men“

-

Bill Whittle doesn’t simply praise the movie and claim Milton Friedman would kick his (Iron Man’s) butt, he reintroduces us to Friedman in a segment from the Phil Donahue show. When it comes to notions of liberty and freedom… well, Milton Friedman often says some fantastic things:

“In a much quoted passage in his inaugural address, President Kennedy said, “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.” It is a striking sign of the temper of our times that the controversy about this passage centered on its origin and not on its content. Neither half of the statement expresses a relation between the citizen and his government that is worthy of the ideals of free men in a free society. The paternalistic “what your country can do for you” implies that government is the patron, the citizen the ward, a view that is at odds with the free man’s belief in his own responsibility for his own destiny. The organismic, “what you can do for your country” implies that government is the master or the deity, the citizen, the servant or the votary. To the free man, the country is the collection of individuals who compose it, not something over and above them. He is proud of a common heritage and loyal to common traditions. But he regards government as a means, an instrumentality, neither a grantor of favors and gifts, nor a master or god to be blindly worshiped and served. He recognizes no national goal except as it is the consensus of the goals that the citizens severally serve. He recognizes no national purpose except as it is the consensus of the purposes for which the citizens severally strive.”  ~Milton Friedman

Believe me, Bill’s video is well worth the 12 minutes of your time… and it’s actually fun to watch too Click the link or click the picture and let me know what you think. Look quick because the video may go to “Subscribers Only” fairly quick.

Cheers All!!

My Nasty Romance - Author's Website

It’s here! The newly published freshman novel by J. Ethan Begley is available at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Lulu – the publisher! In the recent past I sweat my way through a book review of The Gospel of Lazlo to somewhat competent effect and even wider readership – it’s been in the top ten posts for some time now. Take a look at the review, or not, but buy the book – it has the important elements of modern literature… it’s fun and entertaining, screw the deeper meaning, it’ll slap you on the back of the head after you read it =)

From Amazon’s page, here’s a small blurb describing the story:

Apparently the reprinted scrapbook of a possibly disturbed individual, The Gospel of Lazlo tells the tale of Mr. Lazlo Epps, a suicide clean-up worker who takes up residence in a dead man’s townhouse. His “really real” world is soon shredded by a chocolate peddling holy man, a deranged Goth clown, and a would-be penguin terrorist.Stumbling through the wreckage of his life, Lazlo finds himself hounded into a relationship by Sophie Bogota, an enigmatic password psychic, and embroiled in a cultural revolution he cannot personally abide.Lazlo must either find truth within himself or step aside as a fictional messiah pulls back the veil of belief to expose the reality most people fear too much to accept. Decide for yourself whether this fantastical urban fairy tale is real or merely the product of a diseased imagination.

Cheers all,

Enjoy!

One Brick at a Time @ Responsibility

My apologies for not posting regularly these past several weeks, especially since I’d promised to attempt a minimal once a week update. I had considered blowing this whole enterprise off as a wasted or failed effort, but again, reconsidered. As I promised in my last post, I planned to give an account of my absence – I think this will go a bit further than that…

Why this extended absence? Illness, anger, and an unusual despondency are the straightforward explanations. Very nearly two weeks were consumed with a flu that kicked my old tired ass around the work place, home, and… “does it really make sense to disappear on your motorcycle when you have pneumonia?” While my wife is absolutely right to pose the question as though I were a teenager, it is also true that sometimes, that little teenage rebellion might be worthwhile. Little rides like this help me. As I mentioned to an online blogger buddy “I needed some time by myself to recharge, get my shit straight, and screw my head back on.”

While that explains part of my failure to provide regular posts, the other parts are at once more personal and more public. I received a few phone calls and several posts enquiring as to my well being – all much appreciated! So, on the other end of a little despondency, and in response to those initial communications I threw up the last post with every intention of getting right back to business. Here’s where the story gets a little squirrely.

With great thanks to a gift card to The MacStore from my daughter and son-in-law, I purchased a new Mac Book Pro. I’ve often found that the quickest and most direct route to learning something is “total immersion.” I resolved to avoid my desktop until I was reasonably proficient with my new laptop… I’ve answered many emails LATE because I failed to sit down at my desktop and check mail. Though I am getting the hang of my Mac   Poor excuse, but it is the explanation of record. You have my sincerest apologies for not answering emails much sooner.

I ran across several [emails] that both entertained and admonished – which made me rethink continuing this blog. I received several versions of a very similar sentiment: “You said once a week,” “Hey, WTF? Once a month updates??” “Get your lazy ass back to work, and don’t make excuses, POST SOMETHING.” “You need to post something more often than once each month or so…” From a subject line: “I sure hope you are on vacation” Thanks to all of you that wrote or called – even being called a “lazy shit” made me feel special

What does that have to do with the anger and despondency? Daughters and patriots? So here’s the post!

T.A. Barnhart, a contributor at Blue Oregon, wrote an article on July Fourth of last year entitled We are all patriots, not just arrogant generals with big mouths. In it, he castigates General Bednarek for the following statement:

“Honor. Duty. Patriotism,” Bednarek said. “Unfortunately, there’s way too many people in our country who have forgotten it, don’t understand it or never got it.” - Savannah (GA) Morning News

By the nature and tone of Barnhart’s reporting, I suspect he wasn’t there for the whole event. I suspect this because Barnhart doesn’t marshal any other real evidence of Bednarek’s supposed offence, and yet spends a tremendous amount of space attributing various vile character defects to the general for that one statement. He variously calls the general or his words a “fool,” “grotesque, shameful, and unprofessional,” “And stupid.” Read the article, you’ll pick up Barnhart’s “inappropriate, irresponsible and reprehensible” comments about the general.

In addition to the character attacks Barnhart launches without one whit of evidence, he also attributes beliefs to the general that are patently of Barnhart’s own invention.   According to Barnhart the general’s arrogance “is unbecoming of an officer, an American and, above all, a patriot.” First, the notion that the general was directing his comments at Barnhart is an absurdity. It’s common to many people. Imagine a manager, not wishing to call out a few employees, mentions that “everyone needs to do [enter chosen task here] better.” A fair share of employees will immediately take offense even though none was proffered. Second, to throw out a challenge that the general’s words were unbecoming an American and patriot reveal Barnhart to be a hypocrite. How is it that Barnhart is allowed to define patriotism and denies that same right to the general? Simple, Barnhart is a self-righteous, self-aggrandizing, self-centered hypocrite.

I didn’t comment on that post, nor did I comment on his follow up a week later entitled, Fear, anger, and a son too far away that was loaded with more unreasonable vitriol. Except there he does precisely what he accuses but never demonstrates the general of doing. He claims his anger, then accuses the American people (hyperbole or not, this is BS):

I am angry at the American people whose self-centered, piss-ignorant fearfulness (where is our cherished trust in God?) let them approve with hearty cheers and huzzahs the tossing of their children into the maw of war. The steadfast refusal of too many Americans to learn a goddamn thing about the world and people who are neither bad nor wrong but merely “foreign” has resulted in this obscene war and occupation. The blood of all those who’ve died or been torn apart by this war is on the hands of an American populace with no desire to care about the rest of the world unless they can feel all warm and fuzzy via a tax-deductible charity.

Why didn’t I comment on the posts? The reason was simple. His son was in harm’s way and I had two daughters and two sons-in-law in the same sandbox. I understand being angry. In fact, I believe Barnhart is a patriot, just as I believe the general is a patriot. More to the point, I agree with the general, that there are too many today that have “forgotten… don’t understand… or never got…” honor, duty, and patriotism. Witness the past (ENRON et al) and current crop of corporate thieves (pick a bank that passed their risk on to his fellow citizens) who have raped our economy. Moreover, think about the various groups of American citizens saying things like “Goddam America,” etc.

Hmmm. Should I assume Barnhart was addressing me as one of those “self-centered, piss-ignorant” Americans? Perhaps. I didn’t, but perhaps he was referring to people like me. I disagree, strongly, with a great number of things Barnhart writes, but I rarely doubt his love of community, and by extension, his love of country.

I was passionately opposed to the war in Iraq, as was my wife and many of my friends. Many, on the other hand, supported the invasion of Iraq. So why was I angry? Because my president (yes, I say that, even though many on the left wouldn’t call Bush their president) still hasn’t got my kids out of Iraq, and more important, he [the president] just sent one back for another tour of duty. I am angry at my government for not delivering on one of the promises made during a campaign. Moreover, I am angry at writers like T. A. Barnhart who create a clamor out of imagined insults and contribute to the very divisiveness they claim to abhor.

At this point I think it’s worth defining patriot. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first listed meaning of the word is rare or obsolete as a compound “a fellow-countryman, compatriot.” However, the primary meaning with a caveat about usage before the late seventeenth century is:

2.a. One who disinterestedly or self-sacrificingly exerts himself to promote the wellbeing of his country; ‘one whose ruling passion is the love of his country’ (J.); one who maintains and defends his country’s freedom or rights.

In this use, at first, as in French (see Littré), with ‘good’, ‘true’, ‘worthy’, or other commendatory adjective: cf. ‘good citizen’. ‘Patriot’ for ‘good patriot’ is rare before 1680. At that time often applied to one who supported the rights of the country against the King and court.

Why mention the definition? Because of Barnhart’s title “We are all patriots…” This kind of political correctness is a chain and anchor to mediocrity. Let’s not indulge in this kind of nonsense. Here’s a wonderful bit of dialogue from one of my favorite Pixar flicks, The Incredibles that demonstrates the point:

Dash: You always say ‘Do your best’, but you don’t really mean it. Why can’t I do the best that I can do?
Helen: Right now, honey, the world just wants us to fit in, and to fit in, we gotta be like everyone else.
Dash: But Dad always said our powers were nothing to be ashamed of, our powers made us special.
Helen: Everyone’s special, Dash.
Dash: [muttering] Which is another way of saying no one is.

Angry – and maybe a little despondent that I’m not sure I’ll change a thing. Do I take the long view or the short view? Do I stop this silly writing and activism, or keep on going? Like Barnhart’s challenge to the general, I’d match my patriotism against Barnhart’s any time – and probably for similar reasons. I’m an optimistic pessimist – I believe countries, communities, groups, and even individuals are capable of change… whether I believe in it or not.

I stole the above photo from Tom over at Responsibility – click it for a great post. I’m working on my next brick. I said thanks for the encouragement earlier, but it wasn’t specific enough – thanks to Tom, Jeff, Mr. Grim, Tony, Andy, Cindy, Moira, and Billy.

Cheers all!!

Let’s keep marching forward.