Funny how life works . . .

. . . Ol' Brad Pitt has a movie coming out. I viewed a brief commercial as the family made an outing to see "Wolverine" tonight. It seems that Mr. Jolie is heading up an OSS outfit to drop into occupied France, bent on "harassing" the enemy . . . although he puts it a bit more visceral, or "Hollywood" then that. And the first name that echoed in my head was a certain "Robert", and reading on Titus's Ocean Springs front porch his dutiful exploits that would make even James Bond blush (& he didn't think much of the French I might add - that always made me laugh).

Then we get home & my youngest explains to me his favorite book in my personal library: "BATTLEFIELDS AND CAMPAIGNS", a review of the major battles in human history from Alexander to Napoleon to Barbarossa to Swartzkopff (sp?). And then ... just then, a thin green booklet falls from the inside cover of this mammoth book. Its' title: "The Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage." And along with noticing the name of a striking young usher on the inside cover, I noticed the date ... May 31st 2008, 2pm. So, let me be the first to say to you & your better half Titus: Happy 1 Year Anniversary. And along with your marriage I'll note it's the week we all last shared a pint. I'll let you decide which has more significance ...

hehe .... tell her I'm KIDDING ...

... sort of.

A new beginning...

I liked Ryan's post... maudlin as it was.

I will say this, though, in regards to my own irregular Bund habits: There is a price to be paid for straying from your established grounds. While I find that the visits I make to other boards are interesting, and allow me to keep in practice when things are slow here... the level of debate and discussion is far too erratic and juvenile for my tastes. To put it in terms that only Jambo and I would appreciate... I couldn't go back to the days of Wealthwood Park. I just don't have it in me anymore.

I am convinced that here, at the Bund, we share a common ideology and only differ in how we see establishing that ideology in practical terms and means. Ryan holds the "ideal" of Reagan as the example of his vision for America, and stands at one end of our own, very small, political spectrum, while I see myself as standing at the other end looking for the practical, implementable "actuality" of any Presidential example we could care to examine.

In the past, I have always fought the urge to label myself a conservative, but if terms like "liberal" or "progressive" mean an automatic association with the likes of Obama/Reid/Pelosi, then call me a "conservative" all day long... please. I've already stated my inability to vote with my established Party candidates, so I suppose that an eventual "card change" is inevitable, too.

Sometimes the choir NEEDS to be preached to.

Hmmm . . .

I just spent the last several minutes catching up on every post since my last, which was in March - yes, I skipped an entire month. Now, I'm not one that's ever been "addicted" to any substance, never even tried drugs, not even once, though I will admit to consuming amounts of alcohol on occasion sufficient to make an alcoholic blush, let alone a penny. However, I must imagine that intellectually the "detox" of withdrawing from the Bund and having only coworkers et al with whom I discussed religion, politics, history and the world at large is similar to say, a crystal Meth addict being put into a sober tank - lots of sweating at first, followed by screaming. Some sleep deprivation leading into full on insomnia. Some hallucinations (or so I thought, it turns out Obama is indeed president & his policies are really being enacted), only ending in a realization 180 degrees from any recovered addict - I NEED THIS STUFF TO BE HEALTHY!

We all understand the obvious here - there is so little posting because there is so little disagreement on how unbelievably bereft of history, sound financial/military policy and just plain common sense this administration is. However, as my title eludes to from time to time, in a world where President Barak H. Obama enjoys a 60% approval rating by explaining that America got it wrong the first 233 years, I NEED to check in for confirmation that I'm not the only sane man in the room. It matters little to me whether we all agree on every subject and every issue from now until the 2nd Coming (at which time we can have our final argument and clear up this pesky "God's true Church on earth" issue), because the quality of insight, reassurance and original perspective on any given issue here is worth its weight in Obama era gold. Where else am I going to be pleasantly surprised about a damned fine parallel between Queen Elizabeth and Ronald Reagan (oh, sorry is that not what you meant? A political "savior" riding in on a white horse and restoring the traditional grandeur and pride of a great nation? That's what I got out of it ... hehe)?

So, my absence is an action I intend not to repeat. As for Titus, like a supple Siren temptress the other posting boards promised him a bounty of ripe conversation, and to tickle the fancy of his ever pleasure. Yet he found her, in the end, to be a home-wrecking Jezebel, heavy on the eye make-up, incapable of sustaining more thoughts then orgasms, and so he is back, rededicated to his one true intellectual love promising to never stray into ill advised adulteress arms again. And while Jambo's posts have been no more frequent then Titus, at least he returns my deluge of text messages . . ."ahem."

Now, for my contribution to our much needed sanctum of reason and perspective, our "Bund Batcave", I offer this:

What concerns me most about our president is how much he loves this country. Surprised to hear that are you? I thought so. But lets peel an inch or so deeper. My meaning is his love for what this country "should be." What it is "capable of being." It is my serious contention that when he speaks of "delivering on America's great promise", he means to tell us all that the original ideals of liberty laid down by the Founding Fathers were never realized, only discussed, espoused, pondered, but never delivered. When he talks in terms of "we tried it their way", most pundits, being the historically devoid, blow dried, hair dyed, milk toast, thought Jacobins they are, nod along assuming he means to say "we tried it Bush's way." I tend to take people at their word, what they do say, not what they "meant." "Their way" is to mean the previous 233 years of American exceptionalism that he finds somehow, unacceptable, insufficient. In that time span this one country of ours has been the engine that caused more ingenuity, prosperity and liberty then arguably the 5000 years prior to its existence. In that time man has gone from a primary mode of transportation of ox & cart to propelling himself onto the moon. The cause of advancement in medicine, science, war making and defense, financial prosperity, all spearheaded (not necessarily invented) within our shores. But most importantly, at the heart of it all, we have engaged in the greatest experiment in liberty the world has ever seen. And Mr. Obama seems to think those two events are mutually exclusive. As if the unprecedented prosperity in every field imaginable was somehow spurred on by accident or by happenstance rather then the greatest unleashing of human potential, via our Constitution, history has ever witnessed. I find this curious in the extreme. And in trying to correct what he sees as a failed experiment he has displayed monumental hubris to quite literally believe that one can "wipe out" ever instance of poverty ... indeed every instance of necessity of every kind. And frightening for any aware American is knowing that the dust heap of history is stacked high with nation states that believed that such a "guarantee" was the inherent entitlement of her peoples. The heirs of a nation whose unprecedented prosperity was built by embracing the sanctity of the rugged individual, private property rights, and the acknowledgement of God's role in our society, are wildly cheering on a man for rejecting these very principles and advertising collectivism as our future, and I am struck dumbfounded at that reality.

Any man with a child needs to take a walk with his children. But a very specific walk . . . one through a military graveyard. Walk along the headstones, read a name or two out loud to your offspring. Don't say much more then that as you stroll, let them absorb the magnitude of the sacrifice all around them. Then at the end tell them. Tell them that great nations can fall if good men do not stand up to defend them ... to lead them. Make sure they understand how unique a moment in time America is. That we can fade away. And whether it's in their daily life or on a grand scale they have a duty, not an entitlement, to America.


"Though, when a people shall have become incapable of governing themselves and fit for a master, it is of little consequence from what quarter he comes."

-George Washington, Letter to Lafayette, 1788

What a difference a year can make, huh?

April, 2008... I remember it like it was yesterday!

We had our biggest month ever here on the bund, with 109 posts covering every topic under the sun. Religion, politics, morals, ethics, even a little sports...

And now?

The last day of the month, and we have a total of 11 posts.

Welcome to a post-Obama Bund, America...

Mean and vindictive

Well I am reading here that B. Hussein Obama realeased secret documents to the public about the treatment of terrorists and interrogation techniques used by the CIA under the Bush administration.

What is the point? Why would you do that? This guy is going out of his way to make people look bad even if the end result is not bad at all. I'm just so confused, I thought the POTUS was supposed to look out for our best interest?

Oh ya, this bullshit about veterans being possible right wing extremists. WTF is that woman thinking? One asshole blows up a building years ago and we are all domestic terrorists now. She needs to be fired!!!

just my 2 cents

A father's pride...

So it's spring break here in Southern Mississippi and I've got the kids the first half of this week. Yesterday was bad weather and lots of time at various stores getting this and that. Today was supposed to be a beach day but instead everyone voted on going to Mobile, AL and visit the USS Alabama, BB60, and the USS Drum, WWII submarine.

Driving the hour down I-10 conversation drifted a little to the rescue of the captain of the Mersk (sp) Alabama and the pirates. My oldest, from the backseat, immediately says, "What's going to happen when we shut down Gitmo if we're having this kind of trouble now?"

Later, same child points to the A-4 in the Aircraft Pavillion and says, "Wow, Dad! That's John McCain's plane!"

In Turret Two there's a big dent in the floor from where a 2700 lbs shell slipped off the track and fell. My oldest points to the middle child and says, "Look at that. How far did it fall to make that dent? A foot maybe, if it were hanging from that track?"

Later she says, "Dad, you know they're shooting a VW Bug a really long way, right?"

My eyes were so full of tears I could barely make it down the ladders!

I will say this in a mild criticism for the Alabama... They've closed off more and more of it. I don't think it's simple construction either... Parts of both ships I remember being able to access are no longer open to the public. It's too bad, really. Hope it's temporary.

An historical perspective...

That is what Obama and the liberal left running Congress are lacking, more than anything else... a lack of historical perspective.

So, I'm reading (re-reading, actually) a book about the reign of Edward VI, and I am amazed at the parallels to today's America. Let me explain...

1547. Henry VIII is dead, and the Crown passes to his only male heir, Edward VI... who was only 10 years old at the time. Henry's will stipulates that Edward will have a "council" if sixteen of the most powerful men in the kingdom until he is 18. England is very nearly broke after the spending-spree that Henry had embarked upon after his separation from the Church in Rome, and Edward and his advisers need to drum up some money. So, they finish the job Henry started by seizing all the remaining monastic properties that haven't been seized by his father. This seizure constituted a net gain of nearly 30% of ALL non-Crown lands suddenly becoming the King's personal property (and thus, the property of the State).

But not two years later, England was broke again... after burning through all the land, wealth and produce gained from the monasteries. So, what do they do? They more than DOUBLE the amount of coin minted in the country. The English "silver penny" was the hallmark of western European currency prior to this, and had been since 980... but Edward didn't have any more silver. So, to fix that, he decided to add red copper to the coins... some mints using as much as 55% copper in their mix. This devalued the currency so badly that the phrase "a penny so cheap it blushes" is still understood today to mean "debased coin". Edward doubled the amount of pennies in circulation in only two years... but it took four to six times as many pennies to buy what Henry's pennies had bought only three years before.

It wasn't long before England was back to broke. Now, Edward and his cronies decided to "cut costs" and reduce the size of government... but cutting the military. Especially the Navy that his father had spent millions of pounds to build up to one of the most formidable forces on the oceans. The number of functional British naval vessels was reduced by more than 60% in the six years that Edward reigned, and as the military reduced in size, you had more and more unemployed soldiers and sailors, paid off in coin that was very near worthless, with no prospect of civilian employment and no "welfare" to draw on because the monasteries that had provided comfort and succor to the poor, sick and indigent were rotting, broken hulks now sheltering nothing but flocks of sheep.

So, in 1553, when Edward took ill and never recovered, it is little wonder that so much of the country flocked to the banner of Mary, his older half-sister, who promised to return England to Catholicism, strength and prosperity. However, she fought a long and bloody "holy war" against the Protestants that further drove the country into the depths of despair, depression (economic and emotional), and military weakness.

Is everyone with me here? Does everyone see the parallel I am making? Good... let's continue:

Then, Mary grows a tumor in her abdomen roughly the size of a modern basketball and weighing just under 18 lbs, which kills her in the end. England is ravaged by religious hatred, economic failure, military weakness and the threat of foreign invasion... and the Crown passes to the younger daughter of Henry, Elizabeth.

During the long and very fruitful reign of Elizabeth, England finds renewed military prestige, a stable domestic economic policy, and even a degree of religious peace (mainly because she simply outlawed the practice of the Catholic faith). How did she do this?

Until such time as England could replace lost naval ships (at least those belonging to the Crown, or "ships of the line"), she offered "letters of marque" to those men that owned ships and could offer a degree of security to the state through the harassment of Spanish, French and Dutch interests at sea.

She also offered HUGE tracts of land and very lucrative terms to those men that chose to settle in the New World. As long as the Crown received its 3/8ths share of all profits derived from the new "planting" (or the Colony of Virginia), she allowed its leaders and residents to do pretty much as they pleased.

By remaining a "virgin Queen" and not marrying, she was able to bargain from a position of strength and power for very nearly her entire reign, and when the threat of invasion from France was eliminated with the death of Mary (her cousin and the Queen of Scotland AND the wife of the Dauphin de France, and the threat of conquest from Spain eliminated with the defeat of the Spanish Armada... England's military supremacy of the Atlantic and most of Western Europe was unquestioned.

Do you see my point? Of all the failings and mistakes made during the reign of Edward, Elizabeth made them all back through (using modern terms) policies geared to reduce control and regulation of commerce and trade by the Government, re-investing gains and revenue into a strong and very mobile (for the age) military, and a degree of individual freedom and autonomy nearly unheard of in England for the better part of 500 years.

Obama should PAY me for this kind of insight...