I failed to mention two anniversaries this week, two events that mean a great deal to me.
First was the Apollo XI mission. Over recent years, I have developed an awe with the engineering feat that was the space program. I love imagining the what-ifs and the science problems and the minutae. And I can't put into words the profound sense of Americanness I feel when I think about it, despite the fact that I too experience "contradiction in the conservative soul." Nevertheless, it makes me feel alive, and confident in my fellow man.
Second was the anniversary of Willis Carrier's invention of the air conditioner, an invention that put food on my table and a roof over my head for the first 18 years of my life. And one for which I am sure my husband is eternally grateful right about now.
If the federal government is going to pay for my thrills, why shouldn't it pay for everyone else's?
Space is not my thrill, so I don't feel his "contradiction in the conservative soul". But I might feel it if there were some massive government-run language documentation program. Learning about obscure languages is my equivalent of learning about whatever's on the Moon. Nonetheless, I cannot evade his question. I cannot rationalize a program just because it benefits me personally. Conservatives are accused of being selfish, but they shouldn't be selfish.
I vaguely recall Ayn Rand or some other Objectivist writing about how the space program was wonderful, though it would've been nice if it were private. But this excerpt of an Ayn Rand article I rediscovered has no such caveat. Rand herself was there:
I found myself waving to the rocket involuntarily, I heard people
applauding and joined them, grasping our common motive; it was
impossible to watch passively, one had to express, by some physical
action, a feeling that was not triumph, but more: the feeling that that
white object’s unobstructed streak of motion was the only thing that
mattered in the universe.
What we had seen, in naked essentials—but in reality, not in a work of art—was the concretized abstraction of man's greatness.
One knew that this
spectacle was not the product of inanimate nature, like some aurora
borealis, or of chance, or of luck, that it was unmistakably human—with
“human,†for once, meaning grandeur—that a purpose and a long,
sustained, disciplined effort had gone to achieve this series of
moments, and that man was succeeding, succeeding, succeeding! ...
That we had seen a demonstration of man at his best, no one could
doubt—this was the cause of the event’s attraction and of the stunned
numbed state in which it left us. And no one could doubt that we had
seen an achievement of man in his capacity as a rational being—an
achievement of reason, of logic, of mathematics, of total dedication to
the absolutism of reality.
Frustration is the leitmotif in the lives of most men, particularly
today—the frustration of inarticulate desires, with no knowledge of the
means to achieve them. In the sight and hearing of a crumbling world, Apollo 11
enacted the story of an audacious purpose, its execution, its triumph,
and the means that achieved it—the story and the demonstration of man’s
highest potential.
Why hasn't the space program advanced much since then? Could W. Robinson Mason's question be the answer?
This should indicate how much quality Democrats really think they're going to offer us peons:
On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a
two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would require
all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new government-run health
plan. Yet all Democrats -- with the exceptions of acting chairman Chris
Dodd, Barbara Mikulski and Ted Kennedy via proxy -- voted nay.
In other words, Sherrod Brown and Sheldon Whitehouse won't
themselves join a plan that "will offer benefits that are as good as
those available through private insurance plans -- or better," as the
Ohio and Rhode Island liberals put it in a recent op-ed. And even a
self-described socialist like Vermont's Bernie Sanders, who supports a
government-only system, wouldn't sign himself up.
I think Congress should be required to use the public system that they created. And I'm on board with Instapundit's idea of requiring Congress to always pay the highest marginal tax rate as well.
1
Sherrod Brown turns my stomach. I wonder when the citizens in my state will wise up--it's doubtful it will ever happen given the 'quality' of our educational system we have. But, it is quite telling how they are handling all that, isn't it??
Posted by: Guard Wife at July 20, 2009 09:26 AM (qk9Ip)
2
I agree with you 100%. The old "Do as I say, not do as I do" should definitely not apply here. This makes me even angrier over the health care issue.
Posted by: Nancy Dunn at July 20, 2009 12:44 PM (0DENp)
Ever since we started trying for a baby, I have tried to figure out what I think we should do about our guns and teaching our child gun safety. So I read the post Guns, sons & the good old days of parenting and its comments with interest. I think I agree with many commenters that it comes down to respect: children need to learn respect for the power of guns and respect for the authority of adults.
I also found a clip at Gateway Pundit about a car dealership that's giving away AK-47s with truck purchases. Can you hear the condescending sneering from the reporter? I love how she says that people might be offended to hear the dealership equate God and guns. Really? Which people exactly? The gun people or the God people? I generally find those two groups overlap. Especially the ones who are looking to buy a truck in small-town Missouri.
Ah, liberal condescension...make sure to ask him if he thinks Jesus would approve of AK-47s (I literally rolled my eyes as I typed that, heh.)
Both Hubs and I grew up in a house where guns were the norm. He learned how to use guns safely. My sister and I knew where the guns were, knew we were never to touch them and knew if we did, we'd suffer some pretty serious consequences. We never, ever did. In fact, my sister is a state trooper and while in the academy she perspired through a bullet-proof vest while learning to take her gun apart and put it back together because we NEVER touched them. Ever.
When the parents respect the power and rules regarding firearms, it sets a good example for children. It's the same with driving, drinking and other things.
We never even pointed toy guns at anything--the rule at our house, "never point a firearm at anything you don't want to kill." Good enough.
Posted by: Guard Wife at July 19, 2009 08:56 AM (M+hWl)
I just got my first call from the husband, ten minutes long with only a slight delay. He is at his final destination and doing well: his living conditions sound great, there's a good gym, and he sounded really good. I'm glad.
When he said goodbye, he said, "I love you. Take care of John Elway."
CaliValleyGirl asked me last night if our baby has a nickname. I said no, that I'm just here by myself with no one to discuss the baby with, but I guess it does now...
He seemed excited about the John Elway baby. He has never been optimistic about a pregnancy before, so I find it sweet.
I hope I don't break his heart.
Tim commented that probabilities are moot, that I'm 100% pregnant now and that's all that matters. I still only feel 50% pregnant. I will be waiting for the other shoe to drop for a long time.
Posted by: deskmerc at July 18, 2009 12:41 PM (3rYlD)
2
well, to add to your aura, a few months ago I was in Centennial, CO at breakfast with two of my sisters... John Elway and his girlfriend (or maybe the 2nd Mrs?) sat down 2 tables away and were nice enough to stop and chat with us and other patrons on their way out... He is still handsome and fit & nice... so Elway sounds as good a baby name as any!
Could be worse. He could have picked Icky Woods. Of course by the time this baby is born, he'll be doin' the Icky Shuffle in your belly, so maybe that's not such a bad idea.
LOL
A good friend of mine has been trying for a baby for about 12 years now. She got pregnant a few times, but no baby. She just gave birth to twins about two weeks ago. The entire pregnancy was wrought with fear, but SUCCESS!!! I'm wishing the same for you, Sarah. SUCCESS!!!
Posted by: AFSister at July 20, 2009 03:17 PM (2Nifp)
After seven years of refinement, the policy seems so buoyed by
illusions, caulked in ambiguous language and encrusted with moral
claims, analogies and political theories that it can seem futile to
present an alternative. It is particularly difficult to argue not for a
total withdrawal but for a more cautious approach. The best Afghan
policy would be to reduce the number of foreign troops from the current
level of 90,000 to far fewer – perhaps 20,000. In that case, two
distinct objectives would remain for the international community:
development and counter-terrorism. Neither would amount to the building
of an Afghan state. If the West believed it essential to exclude
al-Qaida from Afghanistan, then they could do it with special forces.
(They have done it successfully since 2001 and could continue
indefinitely, though the result has only been to move bin Laden across
the border.) At the same time the West should provide generous
development assistance – not only to keep consent for the
counter-terrorism operations, but as an end in itself.
A
reduction in troop numbers and a turn away from state-building should
not mean total withdrawal: good projects could continue to be
undertaken in electricity, water, irrigation, health, education,
agriculture, rural development and in other areas favoured by
development agencies. We should not control and cannot predict the
future of Afghanistan. It may in the future become more violent, or
find a decentralised equilibrium or a new national unity, but if its
communities continue to want to work with us, we can, over 30 years,
encourage the more positive trends in Afghan society and help to
contain the more negative.
1
I have only skimmed the article, so my comments will focus on the excerpt.
I prefer Stewart's policy to what we have now. However, I have one major objection to it. He wrote,
But the intervention in Afghanistan was a response to 9/11, sanctioned
by international law and a broad coalition; the objectives were those
of self-defence and altruism.
His proposal revolves around those two objectives. While I am all for the first objective, I have doubts about the second.
I am puzzled by conservatives who are all for spending US tax money on
good projects [that] could continue to be
undertaken in electricity, water, irrigation, health, education,
agriculture, rural development and in other areas favoured by
development agencies
in Afghanistan but not on similarly altruistic projects in the US. Why should Afghans get US-funded 'free' health care while Americans don't?
I am not arguing for 'free' government health care in the US. Please note the scare quotes. My point is: if conservatives expect Americans to fend for themselves, why do they expect Americans to fund crutches for Afghans for years? Conservatives are always saying how welfare fosters dependence. Is that only true in America? Are we not fostering milllions of foreign dependents?
Tonight President Bush explained how he plans to get our troops out of Iraq. "Our strategy can be summed
up this way," he said. "As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down."
I've heard politicians say this sort of thing before. But the
politicians were liberals, and the downtrodden people they talked about
were needy Americans. As these folks learned to support themselves,
government would no longer need to support them, the liberals promised.
As the poor stood up, we would stand down.
For 40 years, the
central argument of the Republican Party—George W. Bush's party—was
that liberals had it backward: If you prop people up, they'll never
stand up, and you'll never stand down. You have to let go. As you stand
down, they'll stand up.placeAd2(commercialNode,'midarticleflex',false,'') Which
brings us to the occupation of Iraq. In blood and money, it's fast
becoming the most expensive welfare program in the history of the
world. Like other welfare programs, it was a good idea when it started. [Saletan would say that; he is a liberal.]
Like other welfare programs, it has begun to overtax the treasury and
the public. Like other welfare programs, it warps the behavior of its
beneficiaries. But in one respect, it's unique. It's the one welfare program conservatives can't criticize or even recognize, because they're the ones running it.
If I were a poor American, I might wonder, why should I vote for McCain and let Iraqis and Afghans benefit from American tax dollars when I, an American, should be receiving government assistance? Why should I vote for McCain, who wants the US to spend a zillion years helping foreigners in the Middle East? Why shouldn't I vote for Obama, who will help me, an American?
Is it any wonder such people are pro-Democrat and anti-war?
What have government programs done for them? I need not describe what our inner cities are like.
Why are government programs abroad better? Because they are run by our military good guys, not them - not Leftist social worker bad guys?
Around 2005, someone asked, if America can't even make Washington, DC a decent city, how could it possibly build a new Iraq (and, I would add, Afghanistan)?
Altruism may even conflict with the first objective of self-defense. Dependents are not necessarily grateful. Ask the North Koreans of 2009 how grateful they are for their 1930s Japanese trains and 1930s Japanese medical equipment. Dependents resent their position and a few Afghan dependents may turn to terrorism.
Speaking of terrorists, how much of a threat do the Taliban pose to us at present? It's often been said that we fight them over there to keep us safe over here. What if we just prevent them from coming here? What if our immigration policy screened out jihadists? If the Taliban are so dangerous, why can't we minimize contact with them and their country? Why do our doors have to stay wide open?
Suppose Stewart's nightmare scenario came true:
Even if – as seems most unlikely – the Taliban were to take the
capital, it is not clear how much of a threat this would pose to US or
European national security.
If we disagreed with Stewart and regarded the takeover as a threat to national security, wouldn't it be cheaper to briefly invade, destroy the Taliban, and leave? (I am recycling Sha'i ben-Tekoa's proposal for US policy in Iraq.)
When someone goes berserk in a poor American neighborhood, the police come, neutralize the threat, and leave. The police do not stay for eight years and double as social workers wrestling with 'root causes'. If the American police doesn't build neighborhoods for poor Americans - and if America is the world's policeman - why does Officer America have to build Afghanistan?
Unfortunately, Stewart's proposal is going to be more popular than mine. His altruism appeals to both Leftists and Rightists who dream of helping the Third World. (The real conflict between them is whether the poor in the West should receive government assistance.) My proposal is too mean. Lock our doors and let the Afghans deal with their own problems? Not likely.
So I fear we'll continue to stay the course in Afghanistan and Iraq while real threats go unchecked in Iran and North Korea. Which is a greater danger to the US, the Taliban or nukes?
Posted by: Amritas at July 17, 2009 08:27 PM (h9KHg)
2
You wrote this in another post, but I thought my comment would be more relevant here:
how casually an Afghan man says he would divorce his wife and choose another if she couldn't bear children.
I think you understand why I get nauseated by the thought of Americans fighting for Afghans.
I should point out we are the aliens from Planet America to them. Should the twain ever meet?
Conservatives revere America's early leaders. What if the Barbary Wars
had been more like today's altruistic wars? What if Jefferson had decided to occupy
and help North Africa?
Detroit’s public schools are on the verge of bankruptcy, reports the Wall Street Journal ... Of those who start ninth grade, only a quarter claim a diploma four years late ...
Detroit would be the first major urban district to go bankrupt, but it probably won’t be the last.
Is it because the former are distant abstractions for those on the homefront, whereas the latter are all too familiar and depressing? Have we given up on our fellow Americans in favor of an "irresistible illusion" in the Middle East?
Posted by: Amritas at July 22, 2009 12:57 PM (+nV09)
1
Two years ago I liked watching and listening to Glenn Beck but I thought he was way out there crazy. Now I think he is one of the few who gets it and did a long time ago. Monday night we attended a 912 project meeting here in our town. Next time we are going to help them start a blog, not enough organization going on yet. People can keep in touch and comment on a blog. HNN really gave up on a great guy, I bet his program had better ratings than anything they had then or have now.
Posted by: Ruth H at July 15, 2009 09:07 PM (BkiKe)
2
It's clips like that one that make me very worried for his safety... and sad that we don't get FNC (and that I spend so much time on political stuff that I don't have all the time to catch up with his tv show!) I have to settle for my insider-enhanced radio privileges, LOL...
But he's right, and the more people who realize it, the more hope we have to root out the corruption... thanks for posting such a great clip!!!
Posted by: Krista at July 16, 2009 03:21 PM (sUTgZ)
I mean, do I have to do any more other than quote the first line of that article? Probably not, but here goes.
These are grown men and women whose only control over their own lives is the few minutes' enjoyment they might get from a cigarette. How dare you even consider taking that away from them? My own husband, decidedly not a smoker, enjoys a cigar or two downrange. It's stress relief. It's camaraderie. It's the one thing they have. You took their beer and now you want to take their smokes too? Are you insane?
I don't care if it's bad for you; free adults get to make choices that are bad for them. Period.
Repealing cigarettes would clear out the Army faster than repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell.
America can be disarmed literally -- by cutting our weapons systems and
our defensive capabilities -- as Mr. Obama has agreed to do.
She asked,
Does he really believe that the North Koreans and the Iranians are
simply waiting for America to cut funds for missile defense and reduce
our strategic nuclear stockpile before they halt their weapons programs?
We believe that. North Korean and Iran are only trying to defend themselves from an eeevil empire still full of Republicans. Sarah Palin may soon be out of office, but other enemies of the peOple are still clinging onto their thrones, perpetuating imperialist conflict in the Middle East against peaceful jihadis.
The war will only end when there are no more warriors. We will disarm them slowly. The list of haram items will continue to expand. Alcohol. Tobacco. Firearms. Meat. Bacon. Especially bacon.
"World's worst idea"? We're just getting started.
These are grown men and women whose only control over their own lives
is the few minutes' enjoyment they might get from a cigarette.
That's a few minutes too many. They should be under gOvernment control 24/7.
I don't care if it's bad for you; free adults get to make choices that are bad for them.
There are no free adults, only persyns free to obey the orders of their Great Leaders for their own gOOd.
Posted by: kevin at July 15, 2009 06:50 PM (h9KHg)
Just as a "Pentagon-commissioned report urges the Defense Department to ban smoking in the military", a Pentagram-commissioned report urges a ban on personnel in the military. All bases should be converted into welcoming areas for the jihadis who have sacrificed so much in the name of submission. (Free-dumb is soooo overrated.) An open borders policy and generous handOuts will insure that more of them will enrich our natiOn's diversity.
We realize that tax revenues are not infinite, and we must use them wisely. So instead of wasting "more than $800
million a year in lost productivity and health care expenses" due to "smoking and tobacco-related illnesses" among people who sacrifice everything for America, we should spend the money on peOple who really need it, like undocumented immigrants who showed up yesterday.
Mao ... was a gourmet, and had his favourite foods shipped in from all over the country ... A special fish from Wuhan that he liked had to be couriered alive 1,000 kilometres in a plastic bag filled with water and kept oxygenated ...
This farm was specially set up to grow rice for Mao, as the water there was supposed to be the very best. In the olden days the spring had supplied drinking water for the imperial courts. Now it fed Mao's rice paddies. The vegetables Mao liked, as well as poultry and milk, were produced in another special farm called Jushan.
- Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, Mao: The Unknown Story, pp. 331-332
[Chinese p]eople were told to eat "food substitutes." One wa a green roelike substance called chlorella ... After Chou En-lai tasted and approved this disgusting stuff, it soon provided a high proportion of the urban population's protein.
- Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, Mao: The Unknown Story, p. 437
Ordinary people must renounce all pleasure if they intend to be virtuOus.
"Look at any great system of ethics, from the Orient up. Didn't they all
preach the sacrifice of personal joy? Under all the complications of
verbiage, haven't they all had a single leitmotif: sacrifice,
renunciation, self-denial? Haven't you been able to catch their theme
song — 'Give up, give up, give up, give up'? Look at the moral
atmosphere of today. Everything enjoyable from cigarettes to sex to
ambition to the profit motive, is considered depraved or sinful ... We've tied happiness to guilt ... Throw your first-born into a sacrificial furnace — lie on a
bed of nails — go into the desert to mortify the flesh — don't dance —
don't go to the movies on Sunday — don't try to get rich — don't smoke
— don't drink. It's all the same line. The great line. Fools think that
taboos of this nature are just nonsense. Something left over,
old-fashioned. But there's always a purpose in nonsense. Don't bother
to examine a folly — ask yourself only what it accomplishes. Every
system of ethics that preached sacrifice grew into a world power and
ruled millions of men. Of course, you must dress it up. You must tell
people that they'll achieve a superior kind of happiness by giving up
everything that makes them happy. You don't have to be too clear about
it. Use big vague words. 'Universal Harmony' — 'Eternal Spirit' —
‘Divine Purpose' — 'Nirvana' — 'Paradise' — 'Racial Supremacy' — 'The
Dictatorship of the Proletariat.' "
- Ellsworth Toohey in Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead (emphasis ours)
And now ... 'hope and change'!
Posted by: kevin at July 15, 2009 07:28 PM (h9KHg)
3Think about all the second-hand smoke blowing from Iraq into Iran!
Now do you understand why Iran must arm itself against fuming infidels? Particularly infidels that - gasp - eat bacon instead of yummy algae:
Science News Letter praised the optimistic results [of chlorella experiments] in an article
entitled "Algae to Feed the Starving." John Burlew, the reported editor
of Carnegie Institute stated, "the algae culture may fill a very real
need," which Science News Letter turned into "future
populations of the world will be kept from starving by the production
of improved or educated algae related to the green scum on ponds" ... Science Digest also reported, "common pond scum would soon become the world's most important agricultural crop."
Ever wanted to eat what grows in your aquariums? You'll soon have the privilege. If it was good enough for Chou En-lai, surely it's good enough for you, cOmrades.
Posted by: kevin at July 15, 2009 08:12 PM (h9KHg)
4
My brother in law has a good theory. He says people were much nicer when most of them smoked. Nicotine is a great relaxer and is known to relieve stress. I never smoked but I used to watch a lady at work who would take out her cigarette, light up, take a deep drag and sigh mightily. She was really relaxing and I envied her ability to do that.
Posted by: Ruth H at July 15, 2009 09:10 PM (KLwh4)
5
Booo! to the Nannystate. I love how people are always ready to make restrictions just based on one study. Since when does one study dictate changes in federal policies that then revoke rights of citizens who sacrifice their lives to defend our constitution (the very document that provides them with these freedoms in the first place)??? I swear decisions are made by people who just read Cliff Notes in English class vs. the actual novels.
The federal government is acting more like not an ostrich with its head stuck in the sand but one with its head stuck up its own a$$. It's reminding me of the South Park where the liberals who drive hybrids are so smug in their "ideas" as being the right ones that they smell their own farts. Maybe that's why liberals in Congress always have that weird look on their face. I figured it was the botox but, eh, a fart could be the "green" way to kiss away those laugh lines or stress lines from not doing their jobs.
Let those who sacrifice the most enjoy their smokes. As long as their not blowing one directly in my face I could care less.
Posted by: BigD78 at July 15, 2009 10:14 PM (/iKMZ)
6
Having sent any number of large boxes of great cigars to Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the many, many cartons of cigarettes (and being a reformed smoker myself), I cannot begin to count the number of thank you emails & letters I have received on account... and how happy it made me to have these men recount the fun and affirmation they enjoyed in the countless "smoke & joke"s my gifts provided.
If they're looking to enforce or institute a useful rule, maybe they can make them all wear clean underwear... oh wait -- we have to get them to give up "commando" first BBBWWWAAAHHHAHHHAA
7
Read a memoir by a guy who was a steelworker in the 1920s, later a
steel executive. He said that when prohibition came along and the guys
couldn't get their beer anymore, it was very painful...that if you work
next to a furnace all day long, water just doesn't cut it for
refreshment after the end of your shift. Of course, the church ladies
and various politicians who were the forces behind prohibition had
mostly never even seen a steel mill, let alone worked in one.
And that's the nature of centralized political decision-making...your
life is controlled by people who know nothing at all about you and the
nature of your problems and opportunities.
Posted by: david foster at July 16, 2009 02:12 PM (uWlpq)
8
No kidding.
It is so incredibly frustrating to me that the government feels like it needs to protect me from myself to this degree--and that so many people are okay with it!
PLEASE, MONTY HALL, LET ME SWITCH FROM GOAT TO BABY
Last week, I got obsessed with probability problems. Since my likelihood of having a successful pregnancy is 50/50, it mirrors coin toss statistics. I originally wrote that I had a 6.25% chance of a fourth miscarriage, but I kept thinking about the problem and realized that was too simplistic. That assumed that I had four chances to get pregnant and struck out on all four. But that wasn't the case: in fact, I had 22 chances to get pregnant, got pregnant on four of them, and flipped tails on the first three.
One of my good friends is a statistician, so I contacted her and asked her a coin toss problem: Let's say you flip a coin 22 times and mark down whether each flip is heads or tails. What is the probability that I could choose four random flips -- say numbers 8, 13, 19, 22 (the months I got pregnant) -- and have them all be tails?
My gut feeling was right that the probability was even lower than it would've been with just four coin tosses (though I know enough about stats to know my gut isn't always right; otherwise, we'd all get goats.)
Anyway, I've been obsessing about this for a while. I would start to feel confident that surely I wouldn't get so unlucky again, but then I would reign myself back in. When it happens to someone theoretical, it's a statistic; when it happens to you, it's a tragedy.
In the car on the way there today, I was certain I would get bad news. I was a wreck. I had to share another ultrasound room, which nearly sent me into a rage until I realized the other girl was only there to check her follicles. Luckily this time, it seemed that the hospital staff actually knew who I was and knew to tread lightly. They were all nice and at least acted like they had read my chart five seconds before coming in the room. They were sorry my husband was gone and expressed hope that this time would work out better than the others.
And it appears that, for now, Schroedinger's cat is alive.
Luckily, their sympathy extended to extra medical attention too: I get to have weekly ultrasounds. I go back next Wednesday morning to see if the baby is still alive then too. If it's still alive in two weeks, that will be the furthest I've ever progressed. I won't begin to feel relaxed at all until then, but for now, I'll take whatever good news I can get.
You know I'm around no matter what. And, God love ya, you knew better than to ask this girl about math. Watched me struggle one too many times to figure out a decent tip, eh?
Lurve you!
Posted by: Guard Wife at July 15, 2009 11:29 AM (M+hWl)
2
So excited for good news! And that I thought to check your site!
Posted by: Wifeunit at July 15, 2009 12:11 PM (+2Ggg)
3
You were right the first time. That is, the chance of getting four tails in a row is 1/16, or 6.25%. The other flips, that you don't look at, don't matter, just like the ones that have already passed don't matter. The chance of getting tails next time is 50%, just like every other time, no matter what you flipped in the past.
Posted by: David Boxenhorn at July 15, 2009 12:26 PM (AZIQI)
4
All those deep statistical thoughts are giving me bad college flashbacks! I am relieved for you (at least until next week). Thank goodness the medical people finally have their act together over there.
Posted by: dutchgirl at July 15, 2009 12:45 PM (hLAkQ)
5
Yes, David, but it's not four flips in a row. Because you have to consider the fact that I put out one egg every month, but I don't get pregnant every month.
There are two things at work here: the probability of GETTING pregnant and the probability of STAYING pregnant.
Yes, my odds of getting pregnant in any individual month remain the same as any other human female: 1 in 4. I have roughly borne that out with my 4 pregnancies in 22 ovulations.
Once I am pregnant, the odds of staying that way are the 50/50.
I'm considering "eggs" as flips, not "pregnancies." Each egg is a coin toss. Each pregnancy is more complicated than that. And the flips that you don't look at DO matter if the question you're asking is "what are the odds I still haven't had a healthy baby after 22 ovulations?" instead of "what are the odds I'll keep this baby I am carrying right now?"
I know each successive egg has no bearing on the next, just like coins don't, but cumulatively, I should've theoretically put out 11 good eggs over these past 2 years, but none of those managed to fertilize. So it's more than just four flips, cumulatively. It's 22 flips.
As my stats friend said, picture this:
Let's say you have these two different sequences of 22 coin tosses (keeping with your example of T on the 8th, 13th, 19th, and 22nd tosses):
1) H T H T H T H T H T H T T H H T H T T H H T
2) H H H H H H H H T H H H T H H H H H T H H T
The probability of randomly selecting 4 tails out of these two sequences is different.
Even though both scenarios could be what has happened to me over the past 2 years, I should theoretically be closer to the first. (Setting aside the fact that we have no way of knowing if my eggs are evenly distributed at all, that is to say that 25% are normal, 25% are balanced, 25% are unbalanced 7, and 25% are unbalanced 22. It should work out in theory over 100,000 eggs, but who's to say that it really does?)
I am no math expert, but I respectfully think you're wrong. I think it's more complicated than just four chances...
Posted by: Sarah at July 15, 2009 01:03 PM (TWet1)
6
I read this post very slowly, fearing what was at the end. The graphic at the beginning asks, no, shouts the question, So which is it?
I saw the problem the way David did, assuming that past outcomes had no effect on future ones. However, at the moment, I think it's more complicated than that. What's the chance of you being pregnant in any given month? I'm no statistician, but I doubt it's just 50% - or that it's even calculable. The probability of your current situation involves that figure, whatever it is, as well as the 50/50 per pregnancy.
Thank you for reprinting the details of how your friend got the answer instead of simply giving us the answer. I may use (x choose y) methodology for my own coin toss problems in the future.
I am impressed by your mental versatility which is evident even from the last few posts. Politics, poetry, statistics ... what don't you do?
Posted by: Amritas at July 15, 2009 01:07 PM (+nV09)
7
The math threw me, bring the statistician to the gulch..just saying.
Prayers continue, and all of that.
I keep thinking and praying for each of you....
I know you want to move forward, and I know you want future, and i know you want to start walking forward..
8
Sorry, Sarah, I misunderstood your question. I thought it was "what is the chance of getting tails four times in a row [assuming that you flip the coin four times]".
I don't understand what your question actually is, though. Now it seems to me like it's "what is the chance of getting tails four times in a row when I try to flip 22 times, and the chance of successfully flipping is 1/4"? But that question really doesn't make sense to me because it seems like the interesting question would be "what is the chance of getting all tails when I try to flip 22 times, and the chance of successfully flipping is 1/4".
Posted by: David Boxenhorn at July 15, 2009 02:31 PM (AZIQI)
9
First, *whew*. I am glad today's news was not bad. I won't say 'good' simply because it has not allowed you to relax. I will continue to pray and look forward to next Wednesday. I'm quite familiar with waiting/living in limbo and I know how exhausting and frustrating it can be. My prayers are for peace and strength (in addition to an incredibly boring and textbook-perfect pregnancy) for you and dh.
Second, you are right...there are two variables at work in this situation. Getting pregnant and staying pregnant. And, while your previous pregnancies have no true bearing (in a statistical sense) on your current pregnancy (or any subsequent pregnancies), they do establish a (really crappy) pattern.
For simplicity's sake, I'd round to the middle and say 5%. Which is better than 0% (for the 'glass is half full' population here) but truly sucks monkey balls (for those with a more practical outlook on life...some might call us cynical) when all you really want is a baby.
Sorry to ramble - I've been working in my Calculus study guide and my brain is stuck on numbers. I'm praying hard and looking forward to hopeful news next Wednesday. (I may be in a cynical mood these days but I'm still an optimist at heart).
Posted by: HomefrontSix at July 15, 2009 02:32 PM (7Qxzl)
10
David -- Now I am the confused one! I doubt that I got 22 tails, meaning 22 bad eggs in a row. I am guessing that somewhere interspersed in there were good eggs. I'm making this up, but like potentially in January 2009, I had a good egg, but I just didn't happen to get pregnant that month. The next month in Feb, I got pregnant, but that was a bad egg month.
I am assuming that I have had somewhere around 11 good eggs over the past 22 months, and just lamenting the fact that out of those 11 good ones, I never managed to get pregnant during those months. I always got pregnant during bad egg months. The probability of *that* seems to be 4.5%, and it gnawed at me for a week.
Anyway, you're right in the sense that none of this matters anymore and I'd just like to concentrate on the 50% chance I currently have!
Posted by: Sarah at July 15, 2009 02:42 PM (TWet1)
11
My eyes glaze over at statistics because when it comes to flesh and blood sometimes they just don't matter. And because I just don't often pay attention to them. One of my earliest favorite books was, and still remains, "How to Lie with Statistics." That has nothing to do with your statistics but to my attitude to most of them. If I can't do the figures I just leave it to someone I trust, as you did. I guess when it comes to this type thing I take the most optimistic part I can find and go with that one. That's right, I am a woman and we think with emotions first. Not that we can't logic, but sometimes we just choose not to. Easier that way. I'm waiting for the next week and the week after that, because I am choosing to believe there will be weeks after that. Like I said, it is your turn.
Posted by: Ruth H at July 15, 2009 02:51 PM (4u82p)
12
The question that I stated above as "interesting" translates into, "what is the chance not of getting pregnant with a good egg after 22 tries". The answer I get is 2.2%. Here's my reasoning:
The expected number of coin flips is 5.5 (22/4). The chance of getting all tails is 1/(2 ^ 5.5) = 2.2%. But I think it's wrong since I don't think the chance of getting pregnant is really 1/4.
In any case, you're right: You're past all that now.
Posted by: David Boxenhorn at July 15, 2009 02:52 PM (AZIQI)
13
I'm so happy you got good news. I will continure to pray that the news stays good. I don't know how you do what you do, you're so strong.
14
David -- You're right: the 1 in 4 number only comes from looking at what happened after the fact. I think it comes from a lot of data of many different people, and then the stats are kajiggered. I don't think it necessarily means that every individual woman has a 25% chance each month, because some women are really fertile and others less so...or the same woman with two different men might bring a different result. I think it's a ballpark figure that works across the board, but it's hard to apply that to any given specified month and to say that in Aug 2009, Betty Sue has a 25% chance of getting pregnant. Instead, they say that if you try to have a baby for one year, 80% of women will be successful. But there's a lot of variety in that sample.
Posted by: Sarah at July 15, 2009 03:15 PM (TWet1)
Wait a minute, your prego now, 100%. Yea, yea, I know about the last times, forget that for now (with all due respect), your 100% prego NOW. Screw all that and that mind numbing math, the glass is half full...NOW.
Remember, only Liberals and losers (excuse the redundancy) are pessimistic.
17
Against all odds (and all goofy statistics), life will find a way. I'm still praying for you. Was holding my breath through that whole post, and am so relieved to not see bad news. So here I sit cheering for Schroedinger's cat. . . . yeah
I've been thinking of you almost constantly the last few days. I suspect if all the hope, love and good thoughts I'm sending your way could truly affect fertility, you'd be having octuplets about now...
19
Probability is one thing, but how about actual runs of numbers? Since I have access to some considerable computer power just sitting around (and my minions can do my actual work for me as I play with these numbers) I did a quick 10 simulations with the criteria you hypothesized.
I did 100 sets of flips, with 22 series of "flips" (zeros and ones) and then randomly picked 4 flips out of each set, marked how many were 4 tails in a row, and did this 10 times. The series is as follows:
6, 6, 9, 6, 6, 8, 7, 12, 5, 6
And all of those numbers mean nothing, because that's all they are, numbers. They don't show you any probability about your current "flip". My flips are cold and calculating and strongly dependent on the RAND function of Excel. Your personal flip has the support of a while bunch of people both known and unknown to you, the pinnacle of human medical knowledge and technology, and of course, you and your husband. You can't calculate how those affect your "flip". In other words, we're pulling for you, despite the odds.
Posted by: deskmerc at July 16, 2009 03:00 AM (pYOXQ)
I am too dumb to get the statistics. But I can relate, definitely, to waiting for the other shoe to drop, as so many have after multiple miscarriages.... You're on my mind!
Posted by: Allicadem at July 20, 2009 07:21 PM (nlT4X)
We just did this, just a year ago. So I forgot everything. I forgot to stock up on soap and baby wipes for him. I thought I had already done it. Turns out that was last year.
We just kept remarking that it didn't seem possible to already be saying goodbye again.
My husband was sad today, far sadder than the last two times. I think the last two times, he was overwhelmed with stress: his first time, obviously, it was the first time; the second time because he was deploying on his own and his unit made no preparations for him whatsoever. The plan was to drop him in country and have him hitchhike his own way to his gaining unit. He was a basketcase.
But this time, this time they departed on the dot of when they said they would. He was going with the most squared-away team possible. He had no worries...other than leaving his wife, his maybe-baby, and his pup.
He wanted to mow the back yard before he left. Really, I couldn't have cared less. If it didn't get done, I'd bribe someone else to do it. Not a big deal. But he insisted. He made a huge deal of it. It had to get done, he had to do this for me. It was his husbandly duty.
It was sweet.
He was mushy today. He's rarely mushy.
And watching him say goodbye to the dog was torture. He misses that creature so much when he's gone. I snapped this photo about a month ago of them: him doing push-ups and Charlie thinking it's a game that needs toys.
If I could let him take the dog, I would.
But he may not need that this time. This time he is deploying with friends. If I had to deploy, I'd love to take three of my closest friends with me. It might not be so bad.
I told them all to stay safe...and to try to have a little fun too.
I told him I hope when he comes home, I plunk a baby into his arms. We'll see where we stand on that tomorrow morning.
1
I'm glad he's not going alone this time. The last time sounds like it started horribly:
The plan was to drop him in country and have him hitchhike his own way to his gaining unit.
Did he actually do that!? Yikes!
Good luck tomorrow!
Posted by: Amritas at July 14, 2009 06:44 PM (h9KHg)
2
the real question here: exactly how many times did you make him drop and give you eye candy as he did push ups in his combat sexy shirt?
But in other news: I am hoping tomorrow brings strong hope for baby plunking opportunities this deployment's end. And I really agree that deploying with friends seems so much more appealing and comforting. Not only for them , but also us staying behind.
Posted by: wifeunit at July 14, 2009 07:06 PM (t5K2U)
3
"Deploying with friends" sounds like a "mancation" to those that don't know any better. Here's hoping it is.
About tomorrow...many, many prayers.
Posted by: HomefrontSix at July 14, 2009 07:42 PM (7Qxzl)
4
Just to add a lighter note. Charlie knows that man on floor equals games. Man on floor knows Charlie with toy equals games. I think it is so sweet and cute for both of them. I hope for good news for you tomorrow.
Posted by: Ruth H at July 14, 2009 07:43 PM (KLwh4)
5
"mancation"?! that cracks me up. I'm glad this time things seem to be going according to plan.
Fingers crossed on tomorrow.
Posted by: dutchgirl at July 14, 2009 08:01 PM (hLAkQ)
6
Ah! Crossfit man-pup style! I like it! btw ... total mancation ... that's what is doing right now too! At least we have each other *wink*
Posted by: Darla at July 14, 2009 11:12 PM (LP4DK)
7
the worst part of deployment...and the best part...
to miss a person sooo much.
To know without a doubt this is whom holds your heart...
Now we both have our own combat shirt photos...although, Brian's were not at such a terrific angle as yours are.
You know that I know.
And, if you're ever deployed, I have your back. As it is, I'll have your back here & that will work too.
Posted by: Guard Wife at July 15, 2009 09:59 AM (M+hWl)
10
Keeping my fingers crossed for you on the baby news - yay for a positive ultrasound (and a more attentive hospital staff) thus far.
Although I have no idea what the chance would be, I can't help thinking how funny it would be if my husband ended up meeting your husband in A-stan. I bet they'd get along. My husband will be heading that direction very soon now. Your pic of your hubby with Charlie reminds me very much of my hubby & Daisy (our beagle) playing on the floor in the living room. I will miss that (and I know he will, too) while he is gone. While we were filling out the "just in case" paperwork he kept joking that he wanted to be buried holding Daisy with a big grin on his face, and that he wished he could pack her up and take her with him.
But it is good to see them deploy with friends, especially when those friends are people you know you can trust to do the best they can to do their jobs and keep each other safe. I feel much more comfortable sending my husband away having confidence in his CO, in his fellow officers and soldiers, and in his and their prior experience.
Here's to a safe, productive, & maybe even fun "mancation".
Posted by: Leofwende at July 16, 2009 10:04 AM (28CBm)
AS virtuous men pass mildly
away,
And whisper to their souls to go,
Whilst some of their sad friends do say,
"Now his breath goes," and some say,
"No."
So let us melt, and make no
noise,
No tear-floods, nor sigh-tempests move ;
'Twere profanation of our joys
To tell the laity our love.
Moving of th' earth brings harms and fears ;
Men reckon what it did, and meant
;
But trepidation of the spheres,
Though greater far, is innocent.
Dull sublunary lovers' love
—Whose soul is sense—cannot admit
Of absence, 'cause it doth
remove
The thing which elemented it.
But we by a love so much refined,
That ourselves know not what it is,
Inter-assurèd of the mind,
Care less, eyes, lips and hands to
miss.
Our two souls therefore, which are one,
Though I must go, endure not yet
A breach, but an expansion,
Like gold to aery thinness beat.
If they be two, they are two
so
As stiff twin compasses are two ;
Thy soul, the fix'd foot, makes no show
To move, but doth, if th' other do.
And though it in the centre sit,
Yet, when the other far doth
roam,
It leans, and hearkens after it,
And grows erect, as that comes home.
Such wilt thou be to me, who must,
Like th' other foot, obliquely run ;
Thy firmness makes my circle
just,
And makes me end where I begun.
Posted by: Sarah at
04:54 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 4 kb.
Today feels like this. (Well, except for the dying in the end, heh.) But you keep checking your watch, noting aloud how much time you have left. My husband keeps changing the words to this song and making me laugh.
"Well, we're cursing at Quiznos and I'm mowing the yard, with X more hours to go..."
"You understand that my column was basically a prophesy," I shot back. I had suggested right-leaning ideas weren't welcome on campus and in response the faculty had tied my viewpoints to racism and addressed me with profanity-laced insults.
What's so remarkable is that I hadn't actually advocated Republican ideas or conservative ideas. In fact, I'm not a conservative, nor a Republican. I simply believe in the concept of diversity – a primarily liberal idea – and think that we suffer when we don't include ideas we find unappealing.
1
Yes, it's a problem. Why aren't all of his professors Communists? I expected better from North Berkeley.
Imagine a world where people of all races, genders, and sexual orientations believe in one true ideology and worship one Great Leader. Diversity through conformity!
Posted by: kevin at July 14, 2009 12:39 PM (+nV09)
2
Very interesting read. Thanks for the link!
I clicked through to read his article, and then his original op-ed that had gotten him in trouble at school... and came across this interesting bit:
I want Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Marxists, Independents and anyone with a halfway decent idea that doesn't incorporate hate.
Well, that's the kicker, isn't it? :-)
People can have hate, regardless of their political leanings.
But when it comes to ideology, which seems more "hateful":
a) Regardless of your feelings, you may not violate Person X's rights, nor may you join with others to do so in a collective fashion; or
b) Regardless of your feelings or actions, if you have a material or immaterial advantage over Person X, then Person X may individually or collectively violate your rights to eliminate that inequality
?
(Oh, this is SO getting its own blog post soon...)
Posted by: Krista at July 14, 2009 02:39 PM (sUTgZ)
3
This part: "I want Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Marxists, Independents and anyone with a halfway decent idea that doesn't incorporate hate." should've been in quotes...
Posted by: Krista at July 14, 2009 02:40 PM (sUTgZ)
4
Thanks for finding the original article, Krista. I hope to see your article soon!
And thanks for quoting that key line. I also like what follows:
"I want that [intellectual diversity] more than free football tickets, a new basketball arena or
pretty much anything else a University could offer. In exchange for
paying $20,000 in tuition a year, I think I deserve it."
He's got a proper sense of priority. Academics before sports. And he should be demanding his money's worth.
Why are universities so overwhelmingly Leftist? One answer is that Leftism is obviously small-r right. Here's another:
The truth is that it is very, very hard to get a tenured faculty
position at a university. And the hiring process is unlike anything in a
private business. In most cases, one needs a unanimous vote of the professors
in one’s department to get tenure. This puts a high priority on intangibles
like collegiality, which often translates into sharing the same politics and
ideology. David Boxenhorn commented:
This is a sure-fire way to get uniformity - and mediocrity. The most original
people are almost by definition controversial. (Not necessarily disliked, but
disbelieved.) A system to promote diversity would be designed differently, with
say, professors taking turns on a small tenure committee, or even having
outsiders be in charge. The system described above sounds more like a
self-perpetuating aristocracy or cult than anything else.
Academic freedom is supposedly a big deal, but
universities, at this point in time, have exactly the wrong kind of freedom:
There are no clear rules, instead there is a clear ideology to which you must
conform. So let's try to turn the situation around: What sort of rules should
there be? What should the academic meta-ideology be? Well, I know where to
start: The scientific method. Unfortunately, the scientific method is not easily
applicable to all fields of study, and it is true that in those areas where it
is clearly applicable (physics, for instance) ideology is much less important.
But, in fact, the scientific method (plus some statistics to make up for the
difficulty of doing experiments) can be applied much more widely than it is.
Fashionable fields like Woman's Studies or Black Studies are actually very
amenable to the scientific method, if you are honest. And it's beyond me why
Linguistics isn't a "true science" - you can really do experiments in many
branches of Linguistics almost like you can in Physics. So the first rule of
academia should be: I can say anything I want as long as I can back it up with
the scientific method. I think that will get us far, but what about areas like
Political Science, Literature and History? I don't know, but I'm open to
suggestions!
I am fascinated by the idea of applying the scientific method to identity studies. Why can't the history and current status of women and blacks - or men and whites - be studied scientifically?
Posted by: Amritas at July 14, 2009 03:26 PM (+nV09)
Via Insty, a great PJTV video called Steven Crowder Investigates Why CanadaCare Sucks...Will ObamaCare Be Any Better? It's worth watching the whole thing, but one of the most galling bits was when they go to a free clinic to try to get his cholesterol checked. The nurse says they cannot do that at the free clinic and gives him two options: 1) go to a private clinic and pay $900 for a check-up, or 2) call a family doctor and ask to be put on the two to three year waiting list. "You're young, so you have time; normally you don't have a problem at your age," she said.
And mostly the video just reminded me of military care. We don't have to wait months or years for appointments, but our emergency room and weekend clinic is exactly like this video. Plus we get to share ultrasound rooms!
1
You conservatives puzzle us. On the one hand, you can't wait to burn the planet with your SUVs. On the other hand, you can't wait a mere two or three years for a checkup. What's wrong with you? Why can't you gun-clingers accept your Omega status?
Immediate gratification is only for Alphas like us. When Obama has a paper cut, four doctors appear immediately to insure that the Imperial Finger is not infected by neocon germs that Bushaitan left behind in the (gag) White House. His legacy still haunts the One.
Learn to be patient. Health care is a right, just like food, clothing, and shelter. When the gOvernment takes care of your rights, it cannot drop everything just for you. No, it must cater to everyone within Omerica's borders, every undocumented immigrant who has needs. Eventually, the gOvernment will feed, clothe, and house you if you can wait long enough. Stand in line 16 hours for a bowl of cere-O. Wait 16 weeks for new clOthing. 16 months for a rOOm to rent.
Sharing ultrasound rooms is just the beginning. You have seen the future, and it's free!
It's starting to sound like the professor believes in the medicine
fairy, because I'm quite sure that her brother does indeed pay
indirectly for his medicine. If not, then someone else
is paying for it, and from what she's said I can understand why she'd
be enamoured of that circumstance. However, none of this makes the cost
of providing the medicine go away.
Oh, really? This is the eOn of unicOrns! Yesterday's fantasies will soon become reality. The medicine fairies that have been curing Cubans for decades will finally fly northward to save millions of dying Omericans for free!
In the coming kingdOm, everything will be free except your mind and body. You must only think gOOd thoughts, and you must work to fund others' needs so that they don't have to pay for them. Do your duties, Omegas!
Posted by: kevin at July 14, 2009 01:05 PM (+nV09)
Once again, does Pres Obama really think this is true?
The American and Soviet armies were still massed in Europe, trained and
ready to fight. The ideological trenches of the last century were
roughly in place. Competition in everything from astrophysics to
athletics was treated as a zero-sum game. If one person won, then the
other person had to lose. And then within a few short years, the world
as it was ceased to be. Make no mistake: This change did not come from
any one nation. The Cold War reached a conclusion because of the
actions of many nations over many years, and because the people of
Russia and Eastern Europe stood up and decided that its end would be
peaceful.
1
Oh yes, he does. It's his wOrld you're living in. This planet - every planet - has his shape. O!
Even we object to Obama's attempts at moral equivalence, because it's clear that the Soviet way was superior. Give us the KGB over the FBI any day.
The Soviet "sphere of influence" was delineated by walls and barbed
wire and tanks and secret police to prevent people from escaping.
No, the capitalist imperialists put up the Iron Curtain to keep their oppressed peoples from fleeing to the Red World where they would finally be free to obey Great Leaders. Don't you remember Gorbachev's speech? "Tear this wall down, Mr. Reagan!"
The Gipper embarrassed our natiOn. Fortunately, we're on the Red road to recOvery. As His handler said, "We have the best brand on Earth: the Obama brand."
Posted by: kevin at July 14, 2009 01:20 PM (+nV09)
Over the last several weeks, key committees in the House and the Senate
have made important and unprecedented progress on a plan that will
lower costs, provide better care for patients, and curb the worst
practices of the insurance companies. It's a plan that will not add to
our deficit over the next decade. Let me repeat that: It is a plan
that will not add to our deficit over the next decade — and eventually
will help lower our deficit by slowing the skyrocketing cost of
Medicare and Medicaid.
To which any observer of the passing scene must say: What in the world
is the president talking about? Where is the committee in the House or
Senate that has offered up a bill that will not add to the deficit?
What bill would that be? Even in their own terms, with all the gimmicks
they’ve been able to come up with, the plans the Democrats have
proposed so far are all enormously expensive, and no one has yet
proposed a way to pay for them. So what is the “it†the president has
in mind exactly?
Ah, but don't you know that we'll just plants some of these here magic beans that grow into big tall money trees? Problem solved.
Sorry, the very idea that people think the United States can afford universal health care when it can't even afford existing social programs (ahem, Social Security, Medicare) makes my head explode. Sure "free" health care would be nice. But then, so would free landscaping or free cars. Any chance of lobbying Congress for a new Mercedes?
By the way, I absolutely love your blog. It's on my daily to-read list.
Posted by: Val L. at July 14, 2009 08:36 AM (4iXKP)
2
We are disappointed that our emperOr has not proposed a new pronoun to replace the sexist terms he and she.
Val L., we would have those magic beans today if only that crazy creationist Bushaitan hadn't stopped all genetic engineering research. If Canadians can wait three years for a checkup, you can wait three years for a few beans that will stimulate the economy.
Until then, no free Mercedes for you. You'll have to settle for a Government Motors Trabant.
Posted by: kevin at July 14, 2009 01:32 PM (+nV09)
149kb generated in CPU 0.0295, elapsed 0.1117 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.0917 seconds, 299 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Search Thingy
There is neither happiness nor misery in the world; there is only the comparison of one state with another, nothing more. He who has felt the deepest grief is best able to experience supreme happiness. We must have felt what it is to die, Morrel, that we may appreciate the enjoyments of living. --The Count of Monte Cristo--
While our troops go out to defend our country, it is incumbent upon us to make the country worth defending. --Deskmerc--
Contrary to what you've just seen, war is neither glamorous nor fun. There are no winners, only losers. There are no good wars, with the following exceptions: The American Revolution, WWII, and the Star Wars Trilogy. --Bart Simpson--
If you want to be a peacemaker, you've gotta learn to kick ass. --Sheriff of East Houston, Superman II--
Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. You just leave a lot of useless noisy baggage behind. --Jed Babbin--
Dante once said that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality. --President John F. Kennedy--
War is a bloody, killing business. You've got to spill their blood, or they will spill yours. --General Patton--
We've gotta keep our heads until this peace craze blows over. --Full Metal Jacket--
Those who threaten us and kill innocents around the world do not need to be treated more sensitively. They need to be destroyed. --Dick Cheney--
The Flag has to come first if freedom is to survive. --Col Steven Arrington--
The purpose of diplomacy isn't to make us feel good about Eurocentric diplomatic skills, and having countries from the axis of chocolate tie our shoelaces together does nothing to advance our infantry. --Sir George--
I just don't care about the criticism I receive every day, because I know the cause I defend is right. --Oriol--
It's days like this when we're reminded that freedom isn't free. --Chaplain Jacob--
Bumper stickers aren't going to accomplish some of the missions this country is going to face. --David Smith--
The success of multilateralism is measured not merely by following a process, but by achieving results. --President Bush--
Live and act within the limit of your knowledge and keep expanding it to the limit of your life.
--John Galt--
First, go buy a six pack and swig it all down. Then, watch Ace Ventura. And after that, buy a Hard Rock Cafe shirt and come talk to me. You really need to lighten up, man.
--Sminklemeyer--
You've got to kill people, and when you've killed enough they stop fighting --General Curtis Lemay--
If we wish to be free, if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending, if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained -- we must fight! --Patrick Henry--
America has never been united by blood or birth or soil. We are bound by ideals that move us beyond our backgrounds, lift us above our interests and teach us what it means to be citizens. Every child must be taught these principles. Every citizen must uphold them. And every immigrant, by embracing these ideals, makes our country more, not less, American. --President George W. Bush--
are usually just cheerleading sessions, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing but a soothing reduction in blood pressure brought about by the narcotic high of being agreed with. --Bill Whittle
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
--John Stuart Mill--
We are determined that before the sun sets on this terrible struggle, our flag will be recognized throughout the world as a symbol of freedom on the one hand and of overwhelming force on the other. --General George Marshall--
We can continue to try and clean up the gutters all over the world and spend all of our resources looking at just the dirty spots and trying to make them clean. Or we can lift our eyes up and look into the skies and move forward in an evolutionary way.
--Buzz Aldrin--
America is the greatest, freest and most decent society in existence. It is an oasis of goodness in a desert of cynicism and barbarism. This country, once an experiment unique in the world, is now the last best hope for the world.
--Dinesh D'Souza--
Recent anti-Israel protests remind us again of our era's peculiar alliance: the most violent, intolerant, militantly religious movement in modern times has the peace movement on its side. --James Lileks--
As a wise man once said: we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
Unless the price is too high, the burden too great, the hardship too hard, the friend acts disproportionately, and the foe fights back. In which case, we need a timetable.
--James Lileks--
I am not willing to kill a man so that he will agree with my faith, but I am prepared to kill a man so that he cannot force my compatriots to submit to his.
--Froggy--
You can say what you want about President Bush; but the truth is that he can take a punch. The man has taken a swift kick in the crotch for breakfast every day for 6 years and he keeps getting up with a smile in his heart and a sense of swift determination to see the job through to the best of his abilties.
--Varifrank--
In a perfect world, We'd live in peace and love and harmony with each oither and the world, but then, in a perfect world, Yoko would have taken the bullet.
--SarahBellum--
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free. --Ronald Reagan--
America is rather like life. You can usually find in it what you look for. It will probably be interesting, and it is sure to be large. --E.M. Forster--
Do not fear the enemy, for your enemy can only take your life. It is far better that you fear the media, for they will steal your HONOR. That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoemaking and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poorhouse. --Mark Twain--
The Enlightenment was followed by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, which touched every European state, sparked vicious guerrilla conflicts across the Continent and killed millions. Then, things really turned ugly after the invention of soccer. --Iowahawk--
Every time I meet an Iraqi Army Soldier or Policeman that I haven't met before, I shake his hand and thank him for his service. Many times I am thanked for being here and helping his country. I always tell them that free people help each other and that those that truly value freedom help those seeking it no matter the cost. --Jack Army--
Right, left - the terms are useless nowadays anyway. There are statists, and there are individualists. There are pessimists, and optimists. There are people who look backwards and trust in the West, and those who look forward and trust in The World. Those are the continuums that seem to matter the most right now. --Lileks--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
--Winston Churchill--
A man or a nation is not placed upon this earth to do merely what is pleasant and what is profitable. It is often called upon to carry out what is both unpleasant and unprofitable, but if it is obviously right it is mere shirking not to undertake it. --Arthur Conan Doyle--
A man who has nothing which he cares about more than he does about his personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the existing of better men than himself. --John Stuart Mill--
After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." --Dave Grossman--
At heart I’m a cowboy; my attitude is if they’re not going to stand up and fight for what they believe in then they can go pound sand. --Bill Whittle--
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. --Alexander Tyler--
By that time a village half-wit could see what generations of professors had pretended not to notice. --Atlas Shrugged--
I kept asking Clarence why our world seemed to be collapsing and everything seemed so shitty. And he'd say, "That's the way it goes, but don't forget, it goes the other way too." --Alabama Worley--
So Bush is history, and we have a new president who promises to heal the planet, and yet the jihadists don’t seem to have got the Obama message that there are no enemies, just friends we haven’t yet held talks without preconditions with.
--Mark Steyn--
"I had started alone in this journey called life, people started
gathering up on the way, and the caravan got bigger everyday." --Urdu couplet
The book and the sword are the two things that control the world. We either gonna control them through knowledge and influence their minds, or we gonna bring the sword and take their heads off. --RZA--
It's a daily game of public Frogger, hopping frantically to avoid being crushed under the weight of your own narcissism, banality, and plain old stupidity. --Mary Katharine Ham--
There are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms
of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. --James Madison--
It is in the heat of emotion that good people must remember to stand on principle. --Larry Elder--
Please show this to the president and ask him to remember the wishes of the forgotten man, that is, the one who dared to vote against him. We expect to be tramped on but we do wish the stepping would be a little less hard. --from a letter to Eleanor Roosevelt--
The world economy depends every day on some engineer, farmer, architect, radiator shop owner, truck driver or plumber getting up at 5AM, going to work, toiling hard, and producing real wealth so that an array of bureaucrats, regulators, and redistributors can manage the proper allotment of much of the natural largess produced. --VDH--
Parents are often so busy with the physical rearing of children that they miss the glory of parenthood, just as the grandeur of the trees is lost when raking leaves. --Marcelene Cox--
