Its almost as if some folks are hoping that we loose. The Iraqi people have had enough of the insurgency and are helping the Iraqi/American forces by giving us info on where the bad guys actually are. More and more of the “insurgency” is being exported into Iraq from regimes that have no interested in a stable Iraq or a Democratic Middle East.

Are you saying that there were no reasons to go to War in Iraq? OR that you just don’t like the reason that got us into it? Don’t give me the bull shit about their being other dictators /despots who also deserve removal, because when we get to them you will still be bitchin’ about that too.

I would hope that Bush had plans to invade before 9/11 as IRAQ was a FUCK HOLE before, and can only get better. I am just kind of pissed that Bush 1 didn’t have the mandate to do it the first time, and that BC didn’t have the balls to do it OR to nab OBL when he had the chance.

I’ll make this prediction now as I am batting 1000 with predictions on this blog (like when I said J Kerry was going to LOOOOOSE months before the election), we are going to kick al Queada’s ass in Iraq, and develop thriving Democracies in the Middle East within 15 years.

Sure, we don’t know what will happen in 15 years but we also know what hasn’t happened in the last 15 years either. A policy of status quo did not put a man on the moon or topple the Soviet Union. To do great things you have to think boldly and commit yourself to accomplishing what you set out to do, and we have a president that is not afraid to do either.

back to the trenches

When we lose in Iraq, thousands of U.S. servicemen dead and billions wasted, terrorism and anti-Americanism growing thorughout the world, are you going to admit that it was a bad policy and that Bush is to blame, or are neocons just going to blame the failure on the liberals at home who didn’t support the war, just like Vietnam?

We don’t know how the world is going to look in 15 years, or what major events may take place in that time period to influence that outcome. What we do know is this: Bush plotted this war before 9/11, his administration manipulated intelligence, bullied opposing viewpoints and lied to the American people to manufacture a consensus, and they’ve has made economic ‘reform’ in Iraq a priority even over protecting our own troops, much less the actual welfare of the Iraqi people. Whatever the outcome, the legacy is damning. If I believed in Hell, I’d pray to God that there was special place there for Bush, Cheney and the whole lot of tem.

If (or dare I say ‘when’?) we suffer another major attack by terrorists trained and bloodied in Iraq, and if (when?) we wish our military was ready to fight a necessary war somewhere else in the world but can’t because we’re tied down in Iraq, I wonder if the neocons will see the connection.

Probably not. After all, by his own admission, Bush can’t remember a single mistake from his first term.

Believe.

There has obviously been a lot of hand wringing over the invasion of Iraq. Regardless of the reason for going to war, I believe that it was the right thing to do.

As I have said before, I would rather have al Qaeda fighting our professional army in Iraq than attacking our soft targets in the US.

It seems like al Qaeda has taken George Bush’s bait and has chosen to make their Last Stand in Iraq. While we are now fighting a better trained and equipped insurgency, they (al Qaeda) they are losing the battle of “hearts and minds” as they are blowing up scores of innocent Iraqis in their wake.

The Iraqi people (except in the extreme Sunni areas) are finally understanding that al Qaeda/insurgency are not going rebuild power stations and water treatment plants, build new schools or allow free thought and speech.

I have heard mixed reactions from the returning members of the 1^st Infantry Division members here in Germany on their return. It mostly depends on where they were located in Iraq that has determined their outlook. Those in the south and north seem to be optimistic about Iraq, those in the Sunni areas would just as soon deplete our stocks of daisy cutters and MOABs on the Freakin’ Place

WHEN we win in Iraq ( I say when because even the goofy left like Joe Biden admit whe have to win there) its going to be a large serving of Crow for some people.

Democracy is spreading around the world. Even the darkest of places are seeing a glimmer of light. Much like Regan got the lion share of the credit for the collaspe of the Soviet Union, in 15 years time, who will get it for peace and democracy in the Middle East?

Amazing things are happening there now. Some are baby steps, but some are huge strides as well. Saudi Arabia has had elections for some of its councils, Syria is removing troops from Lebanon, Jordan has held historic elections, Kuwait has a directly elected assembly, Egypt is moving towards reforms, Israel is in the process of withdrawal from Gaza and there seems to be a shaky truce that is still holding.

What of substance was done in the Previous Administrations 8 years of influence? That was a boom and bust economic ride where the veneer of ‘we care’ was covering over the building up of “the US is exploiting us” and the creation and plottings of al Qaeda.

EDIT: I am sorry that I forgot that the previous administration was responsible for Somalia and Kosovo. I applaud Bill C for smaking down the Serbian despot dictator (who was not as bad as Saddam and had no WMD). Europe did not have the balls to take him on and left it up to us.

So while some of us may deride the current President as a ‘liar’ and that he is ‘ruining our military’ (what, that huge social welfare system is actually fighting a war?), History is going to be painting a drastically different picture.

Back to the trenches

Bill recoiled from a flash of white flesh through the kitchen window. He didn’t see whatever it was. He put down the dishes and turned off the light to get a better look. Illuminated by starlight, he saw someone in the garden. He put on a coat, got the shotgun, and went to investigate. He pushed through the overgrown plants to get to the center clearing. Sitting on a bench was Ethel. She looked exactly as she did when he’d buried her five years before.

“You don’t prune the roses,” she sighed. “You never were a gardener.”

Ah, I see. Our Maximum Leader’s last post was very educational for me, and I’m sure a good number of other minions would agree. I didn’t understand the historical context of the ongoing argument between him and the Minister of Agriculture. Now I do, and I have a new conclusion:

It’s obvious that the Maximum Leder is afraid of the homosexual attraction he has for Smallholder.

It all makes a lot more sense now. Thank you. I’ll leave you two to sort it out.

Believe.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader will take a moment to respond to the M of P on the recent homosexuality post. Okay, two posts<a>.

First, your Maximum Leader saw the article which sparked the discussion. He read this article of the Reuters news wire: Sweat scent study suggests gay men’s brains differ. He was just being snarky to the Smallholder for not posting the link.

To bring the M of P (and any new readers we might have) up to speed on the ongoing discussion of homosexuality that the Smallholder and your Maximum Leader have going on. Allow him to summarize.

Smallholder: Discrimination against homosexuals is bad.
Maximum Leader: Okay.

Smallholder: Aren’t you going to do anything about it?
Maximum Leader: No.
Smallholder: It’s because you think homosexuality is wrong isn’t it?
Maximum Leader: More or less. There are other more pressing issues before us. And it is a state matter.
Smallholder: If you could prove that homosexuality wasn’t a choice but was a genetic disposition, it wouldn’t be wrong would it? Then you’d have to change your position.
Maximum Leader: Well, you’d have to really prove it. Actually show a scientifically provable correlation.

Smallholder: Here is a study (Cites study.)
Maximum Leader: The study doesn’t prove a connection but says one is suggested by the evidence.
Smallholder: Relativity is just a theory but you accept it don’t you?
Maximum Leader: Sure, insomuch as I care. Physicists are still working on it. As for homosexuality, I am uncomfortable limiting the free will choices of men.
Smallholder: Here is another study. (Cites study.)
Maximum Leader: Like the other one it suggests relationships. Hey? If you could prove a direct connection between some socially harmful activity caused by someone’s genes could we hold it against them? Since they really couldn’t help themselves?

Smallholder: You just like to plug your ears and sing “la-la-la” when confronted by overwhelming scientific evidence that opposes your position…
Maximum Leader: Hey… Where is the provable evidence?
Smallholder: You see! There you go again! “la-la-la-la”

And so it goes. Around and around in circles.

Actually this recent go round was actually quite educational for your Maximum Leader. He learned a lot more about the XYY Syndome than he knew before. He is still trying to plough through a PDF he found. It is a little technical, but it seems to show that the correlation between XYY Syndrome and criminal behaviour isn’t as strong as it was once represented to be.

Your Maximum Leader’s position on homosexuality hasn’t really changed much at all actually. He thinks it is wrong to discriminate against homosexuals. He doesn’t really care if States allow domestic partnerships of some sort; but he doesn’t want it to be called “marriage” - which he believes to be a religious institution. He also thinks that “the state” shouldn’t intrude so much in people’s private lives. (ie: the US or a State government shouldn’t care who the beneficiary of a life insurance policy is if I, the purchaser of the policy, rightfully designates someone as the beneficiary.)

And to be perfectly frank, your Maximum Leader also believes that there are more pressing issues that directly impact all Americans (gay or not) that should be the immediate focus of government.

Carry on.

I don’t mind being one of the girls, but I am definitely going to be a lesbian.

Did I already link us to Sadie’s posting on oral sex?

Yeah, I know I did, but it’s worth posting again. And speaking of ‘Saved By the Bell,’ her current posting has a nice reference to Ms. Elizabeth Berkley and, um, strip clubs.

I’m not quite sure why I’m wasting my time over here instead.

Believe.

Gay Men Respond Differently to Pheromones

Incidentally, Maximum Leader, concerning your counterpoint: you can’t clump a genetic predisposition towards homosexuality in the same category of discussion as a genetic predisposition to commit crimes against fellow members of society. To even associate homosexuality with criminal behavior just makes you look silly.

Believe.

I’m paying the Alternative Minimum Tax, and it’s not because of capital gains: it’s because my home owner, rental property, and various work-related deductions are dropping my taxable income too far below my gross income.

Oh wait, I’m also rich. I forgot. Never mind.

Believe.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader will put on his teacher hat and direct this lesson towards his Economically challenged Minister of Agriculture.

In his post of earlier, the Smallholder claimed that the article from the Washington Post cited by your Maximum Leader states that taxes were increased on some households; and thus your Maximum Leader’s assertion concerning being on the Right side of the Laffer Curve in incorrect. To be precise the Smallholder wrote:

“April, however, turned out to be a far better month than anticipated. Taxpayers were confronted with unexpected tax bills, many from capital gains and the alternative minimum tax, a parallel income tax system designed to hit the rich but that is increasingly pinching the middle class.

Huh.

So, in actuality, taxes were increased on some households.

And revenue went up.

Huh is right Smallholder. You obviously didn’t understand what you just quoted.

Okay. Let’s take this slowly for our agrarian bretheren. Tax rates did not change. According to the article, people were confronted by unexpected tax bills because they were richer than they were the year before. By being richer than they were last year they fall prey to the Alternative Minimum Tax. Once again: the tax rates have remained unchanged. No one had their tax rates raised. They had more income/money to tax and thus owed more.

So let us review:

In order for there to be more tax revenue to the government, personal incomes must increase. In order for personal incomes to increase people have to have good paying jobs. In order to have a good paying job, your nation has to have a healthy economy. In order to have a healthy economy, you can’t tax people back to the stone age. In order to not tax people back to the stone age, you have to keep tax rates well below the confiscatory level.

The whole premise behind Supply-Side Economics is that if you cut tax rates you encourage economic growth. By encouraging growth you stimulate job creation and personal wealth. When you have more wealthy people, you have higher tax revenue from a lower tax rate.

So the aricle your Maximum Leader quoted does support the basic Supply-Side idea.

Furthermore take a look at that line from the article that Smallholder so nicely quoted: “Taxpayers were confronted with unexpected tax bills, many from capital gains and the alternative minimum tax, a parallel income tax system designed to hit the rich but that is increasingly pinching the middle class.” The Alternative Minimum Tax is increasingly pinching the middle class - although it was designed to pinch the rich. Middle class people paying capital gains taxes? Humm… What could this mean? It means that the middle class is wealthier and more savvy when it comes to investing than it was. Thus they are richer and owe more taxes - without tax rates increasing. (Something you’d think the “organic” collectivist Smallholder would like.)

By the way… A post for another time might be how Congress will have to examine the Alternative Minimum Tax and Capital Gains Taxes before they do serious economic damage to the middle class.

Now loyal minions, your Maximum Leader would gladly admit when he is wrong. But in this case, as with so many others, he is not wrong; but the poor Smallholder (who is still smarting from Sadie’s spurning) is wrong.

Carry on.

Sadie, around whose adoration this blog revolves*, once said that a certain pair of bloggers reminded her of the Crane Brothers. Alas and alack, like the tease she is, she never did fill us in on who was who.

But Sadie has also recently made reference to the great classic TV Show “Saved By the Bell.”

I think “Saved By the Bell” is an interesting analogy to the Minister of Naked Villainy.

I’m the popular, witty, handsome, entirely ungreasy Zack.

The Foreign Minister is the athletic Slater.

The Maximum Leader is Screech, whose pathetic attempts at woo-pitching are a source of great amusement.

And The Minister of Propaganda? He’s one of those whiney girls. I don’t know which. Pick one.

Admit it: You love it when we get catty.

* To all of you English-major types out there who object to the construction of this sentence, I have this to say: Your petty grammar fascism is nonsense, up with which, I will not put.

Some might accuse me of harboring secret grudges against the Minister of Propaganda and the Maximum Leader.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I have nothing but the highest regard for Mike and Rob.

I don’t know how any unbiased observer could even start to think that I found my colleagues to be lacking in any way.

The Minister of Propaganda had perjured himself before Judge Sadie, accusing your manly Smallholder of secret metrosexual tendencies. For the record, my favorite Star Wars action figure was Snaggletooth.

I too have testimony to offer. If Rob’s confession here is not enough to convince prosecuters to launch a case, I will offer my own eyewitness testimony to the Minister of Propaganda’s crime spree.

I just hope I don’t get indicted as a co-conspirator.

Honest, your honor, I just introduced Rob to those girls. I had no idea that they would go break the law.

I was using a shovel
The M L brought in the back hoe!

Back to my trench

In our continuing effort to cure the Maximum Leader of his magical thinking about the origin of homosexuality, there is an article in the Post today about the new research showing that gay men’s brains have different chemical proccesses than straight men’s brains.

Of course, our magically-thinking friends will just claim that those guys just “choose” to have different brain chemistry.

The deviants.

Opress them!

(In the name of God, of course)

UPDATE FROM YOUR MAXIMUM LEADER: Nice of you to post a link. Do you think your Maximum Leader will just take your word for it?

Here is the question. If genetic disposition (having one or more “bad genes”) can be shown to directly correlate to behaviour and one cannot act against their genetic disposition; then what is the role of society in punishing people who commit crimes and can be shown to have “bad genes” which are the root cause of the behaviour?