Charles Johnson points out a very interesting interview with the President. The part I liked the best:

A president shouldn't worry about how history will judge him. I'll never know. I'll know how short term history will judge me, if I'd ever read the editorial pages I'd figure it out, because they're the ones writing the history. But when we try to do big things—accomplish big objectives—whether it be cultural change, or … the struggle we're in—it's going to take a while for history to really judge the accomplishments of a president and the true impact of a presidency. If you're doing little things, then maybe 20 years from now we'll be able to figure it out … But with big things it's going to take awhile. And so when you hear this thing about, "Well he's worried about his standing in history." I'm not. And most short-term history will be written by people who didn't particularly want me to be President to begin with.

I also very much enjoyed the end of the interview when he talks about how the war is affecting him personally. Read it if you have time; it's a window into the personal life of the President.

Posted by: Sarah at 01:35 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 204 words, total size 1 kb.

I hate that sneaky #@$%&#$ Kerry.

Posted by: Sarah at 09:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

I love the President.

Over on RWN there are four stories about what kind of man President Bush is. I know some people in the blogosphere are reluctant Bush supporters; I however genuinely like the man. I don't agree with him on everything -- religion plays a much bigger role in his life and his politics than in mine, and I disagree with some of his stances on issues (marriage amendment, stem-cell research, etc) -- but I truly like him as a person and as a President despite our personal differences.

When I read about how he reacted to a child whose mother died in the WTC and a woman who whispered that she prays for him, I can't help but think of what a good man he is. He cares. He has the weight of the world on his shoulders -- he has ordered our servicemembers to go to Afghanistan and Iraq and die for their country, while the rest of the world hates him with every breath they take -- and yet he stops to comfort someone else who needs it.

Can you imagine for a moment what it must be like to be President Bush? Knowing that everyone around the world hates you, that they burn you in effigy and carry posters that liken you to Adolf Hitler? Knowing that everyone thinks you're too stupid to be President, too incompetent to be trusted, and too big of a liar to listen to? Knowing that servicemembers are dying because you are trying to do what was right for our country, and all anyone can focus on is WMDs and imminent threats? Den Beste complains that his readers won't see the forest for the trees; how must President Bush feel knowing that he's trying to make the world a safer place in the future while so many people are harping on the details?

And of course with my love for the military I'm especially touched by the two stories about President Bush and soldiers. The first shows him jogging with a SSG who lost a leg in Afghanistan; the second finds him saluting a wounded LTC in the hospital.

I cry nearly every time I read a story about a servicemember's death; I can only imagine how much it affects the man who made the decision to send them all to the war in the first place. I sometimes can't sleep at night if I'm worrying about being a good teacher; I can't even believe President Bush gets any sleep at all. I really feel for him: he has the hardest job in the world.

I love him. He's my President.

Posted by: Sarah at 06:16 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 444 words, total size 3 kb.

I saw an AP article with the intriguing title Iraq War Proves Thorny Issue for Kerry. What struck me was this unrelated paragraph towards the end:

During his day on campus, Kerry promoted his plan to give a free college education to students who agree to public service. He said he would pay for it using $13 million that banks earn for issuing government-backed student loans.

Huh? So I decided to check it out. First I found a little more info in the original article from Iowa:

Kerry proposed the "Service for College" initiative to help make college affordable and strengthen America's security. According to this initiative, for two years of service to the United States, every young person can earn the equivalent of the state's four-year public college tuition. Students could also get two years of college tuition in exchange for one year of service.

"It is great because it offers tuition to students and at the same time helps out the whole country by getting students involved in service like AmeriCorps, Peace Corps or the military," Schoenthal-Muse said.

We already have that for the military: it's called ROTC. Still not satisfied that I understood exactly what Kerry is proposing, I went right to the link at his website.

Now, I was a little disgusted when I read the opening paragraph

On September 11th, 2001, America experienced the most terrible and deadly attack in its history. Yet, President Bush's response was to call on Americans to wait in long lines at airports, go shopping, or wrap their windows in plastic.

which has nothing at all to do with education, but somehow Kerry ties it in to making our nation stronger by calling on young people to get into public service. I don't know what that has to do with 9/11 or the jab at Bush, but whatever.

So I finally got to the pdf file of his proposal, and I see that he's offering

a simple deal to hundreds of thousands of America's young people: If you will serve for two years in one of America's toughest and most important jobs, we will pay for four years of tuition at the typical public university. Young people will also be able to use their educational awards to pay off student loans if they have already finished college or to enter job training, start a small business, or buy a first home.

Forget for a moment the big question of where the money will come from to implement this plan and focus on some fine print. My big question is whether you get a salary while you're doing your two years of service. Are those two years done for no money and then you just get tuition at the end, or do you make some sort of salary for the service in addition to the college tuition? That's a big difference, and it's not addresed.

If you're working and making a salary for two years, plus you get free college, then that's a lot of money that has to materialize out of nowhere. I'm nowhere near competent in economics or business (wish the husband were here), but this sounds fishy to me.

Does anyone else understand how this could work?

Posted by: Sarah at 09:45 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 541 words, total size 4 kb.

1 It works by everyone forgetting he ever said it. Of course, only Congress can make it happen. AmeriCorps now does things groups like the Boy Scouts are no longer allowed to do.I know one young woman who cleared trails in Arkansas for a year. They were paid virtually nothing, but had "the experience of helping others." It is, however, the only true public service. Politicians like to claim they've spent their lives in public service, but I hardly consider a good-paying job with lots of perks a "service."

Posted by: Mike at April 15, 2004 01:29 PM (cFRpq)

2 You're right to be concerned, as the details are important. Arguments for alternative public service have been around since the fights over the draft in the late 60's. Every time we propose to increase incentives for non-military "alternative" public service, careful consideration needs to be given as to whether such incentives will be detrimental to the ones for enlistment in the military. No matter how you slice it, domestic public service is not the same and a "one-size fits all" strategy won't work IMO. A "one-size fits all" approach is generally true for military enlistment incentives (with some exceptions). But what complainers often fail to understand is that even a soldier in some specialized non-combat MOS is still as deployable to a combat zone (Iraq) as any combat soldier. Not so for "Americorps" volunteers, who I gather often design their own public service projects (to include such dangerous duty as passing out condoms in high schools and teaching about STD's).

Posted by: Paul H. at April 15, 2004 03:57 PM (s6c4t)

3 Here's your answer. He said he would pay for it using $13 million that banks earn for issuing government-backed student loans He's gonna rob a few banks. )

Posted by: Larry at April 15, 2004 05:54 PM (6TcYT)

4 Americorps volunteers do a lot of the social service stuff that would otherwise not be done at all. I'm of two minds about Americorps and CityYear (a similar program that, for a time, was affiliated with it). My eldest daughter was a volunteer, and she thinks of it as one of the best things she has done. It does give inner-city youth a chance to be of service, and also to be influenced in a positive direction. There is putatively a structure for discipline, but it can be sporadically implemented. My daughter was older than some of the volunteers, and a college graduate. Her service (2 years) gave her an opportunity to work through some issues, and decide on a career direction. It also gave her some practical experience with being in charge of a group. She will be taking her first vows this summer in a Franciscan order. These programs need to be supported by the business and charitable community, not just supported by the government. I don't think they can realistically be expanded to the general population, though. There's a big difference in the quality of volunteer you get when you spread the net too far.

Posted by: Linda at April 19, 2004 01:26 PM (pF95l)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I've said before that I think many on the Left use the empty Support Our Troops claim to soften the blow when they rally against President Bush. (Others just say what they really mean.) Most of the time I doubt their sincerity, because you can't fully support the troops without understanding them. So I wasn't that surprised when I found this today on LGF:

Sometime overnight, someone used yellow spray paint to write “Kill Bush” on a section of the memorial where names of local veterans are displayed on a sloping wall. The same slogan, along with others, was repeated on the back of the memorial.

A lot of people will do whatever it takes to get their point across, even if it comes to vandalizing something as significant as a veteran's memorial. As long as word gets out that Bush is evil. I've come to expect this from the Left, and it really makes me sad.

Comments of some others who stopped by the memorial Saturday morning are unfit for publishing in a family newspaper.

I wish I could have met and talked to those people.

Posted by: Sarah at 02:43 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 189 words, total size 1 kb.

No time to blog, but I was flipping through the paper at work this morning, and an editorial caught my eye; naturally it's on what a horrible man President Bush is. There was one paragraph that finally made me say ein Minuten bitte:

When he focuses on human embryos, he speaks of his obligation to foster and encourage respect for life, but when respect for human life gets in the way of his wish to strike back at those he considers enemies of the United States, he is willing to bring about the deaths of thousands of innocent human beings. These are not the actions of a person of principle.

That's unfair. We all have conflicting values that depend heavily on the situation. I don't support indiscriminate killing, but I do support taking a life under certain circumstances. That sure doesn't mean I lack principles, it just means that my principles can't be summed up and contrasted in one small paragraph. It's completely unfair to write an editorial saying the President has a "meandering moral compass" when everyone has nuances in their value system.

MORE:

My ein Minuten bitte has caused some wrinkled brows. No, it's not proper German; it's a line from Eddie Izzard's stand-up routine about Martin Luther. We use it a lot in our house here, as well as the Simpsons psuedo-German quote Das Phone ist eine nuisance phone! and the Family Guy's Du werdest eine Krankenschwester brauchen!

We love fake German.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:17 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.

1 This is something I agree with completely. Anyone who doesn't have conflicting values within their own lives are either so good that God is about to assume them bodily into heaven, or they are absolute evil incarnate.

Posted by: NightHawk at March 30, 2004 09:19 AM (5GWma)

2 I take it you saw the editorial in the paper, Googled it, and found a copy at Common Dreams? Or do you start off every morning with Common Dreams? Never been there, and don't want to start now. The name sounds so Leftist - the idea of a collective sharing einen Traum (dream). Ein Traum, eine MentaLLLität, eine Gehirnzelle (brain cell)!

Posted by: Amritas at March 30, 2004 10:47 AM (kRnVN)

3 Yep, googled it. I tried to go directly to the LA Times, but their page was such a mess that I gave up and went elsewhere. No "common dreams" for me...the thought weirds me out while reading 1984 and Brave New World!

Posted by: Sarah at March 30, 2004 11:09 AM (VwSPl)

4 Einem Augenblick bitte! (Is that right?) It's not just unfair, it's total bullshit. Bush does everything possible to avoid the deaths of innocents. And other civilians. While still getting the job done.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at March 30, 2004 11:22 AM (+S1Ft)

5 I think it's "einen" mit dem Akkusativ. It's not just Bush - it's the US military as a whole which "does everything possible to avoid the deaths of innocents". If there were a massacre, everyone would know about it. But there is no Iraqi My Lai.

Posted by: Amritas at March 30, 2004 07:33 PM (dpay0)

6 LA Times (all the way in Germany? - wow!) ... registration ... grumble ... grumble ... on those occasions when I see LAT articles (usually reprinted in the Hawaii papers) I try to Google them so I can copy, paste, and link them. "Everyone has nuances in their value system"? And we're the ones being accused of simplisme?(Simplismus auf Deutsch?) I don't see conflicting values here so much as I see situation-sensitive, hierarchical values. It's not a matter of having contradictory values; it's a matter of valuing both X and Y - but ultimately valuing X more given the choice. (Picked X because if I picked Y, I could be accused of being "sexist"(TM). "That chauvinist pig prefers HIS own chromosome! Gasp!")

Posted by: Amritas at March 30, 2004 07:46 PM (dpay0)

7 Marc - Yep on the U.S. (and allied) military. Heck, they were trying to minimise enemy military casualties, even at risk to themselves. My high school german hass accumulated nearly two decades of rust... Ich bin, du bist, er/sie/es ist, wir sind, ihr seid, sie sind... Der/die/das/dem/den/des...

Posted by: Pixy Misa at March 31, 2004 12:46 AM (kOqZ6)

8 "Buenos noches, mein fuhrer!"

Posted by: david at April 01, 2004 02:31 AM (EjwYl)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I told my mom last night about how Oda Mae's vote is going to cancel out my co-worker's vote in the November election, and apparently my mom is going to be doing some cancelling-out of her own. Today is the Illinois primary, where my mother will be voting Al Sharpton. Hysterical. If Democrats wanna play anyone-but-Bush, then my mama will give them a taste of anyone-but-Kerry. What a little saboteur...

Posted by: Sarah at 02:13 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

I was thinking about the annoying conversation between my co-workers as I was cooking my delicious cow-on-a-bun for dinner. I keep my mouth shut all the time at work. Despite the fact that we're on a freakin' military post and people around here should value and respect the USA, I never talk about politics or things that I think aren't good office talk. I respect my German co-worker and don't want to make a fuss. But do they even consider for a moment that maybe I'm not turning cartwheels at the thought of John Kerry? Nope. Completely unprovoked, out of the stinkin' blue, my officemate says, "Do you think Bush already has Bin Ladin?" Immediately, without taking a breath, I answered with a firm "no." To which the other officemate supplied a "yes." I looked at both of them and said, "You can't really be serious?" and they said that they were, that they had heard that this might be true. They heard it, like it's on the same level as rumors about whether Johnny made out with Susie over the weekend or whether we're getting a Subway in the old Bookmark building here on post. I looked at the American co-worker and said, "Do you really have such little faith in your own government?" and he said, "I do if Bush is in charge." And that was the end of the conversation.

I have never brought up politics in our office, and I've made it a point not to say anything unless asked a direct question, but they have to be warming up to the idea that I'm not a Bush-hater. I already know that they are both extreme Bush-haters; in fact, my one co-worker who is a German with American citizenship through marriage, and who has never lived in the US, is going to register to vote for her very first time ever just so she can vote against Bush. (That really pisses me off.) I am just waiting for the day that someone asks me outright who I'm voting for.

So while I was cooking my beef, I started thinking about how many DVDs you'd have to offer me to vote for Kerry. The number is much much higher than how many I'd give to talk to my husband. I can safely say that if someone offered me $100 to vote for Kerry this year, I would turn it down. So I raised the bar in my mind: would I take $1000 to vote for Kerry? In my janky little part-time job, I make roughly $1000 per month (oh god that's ridiculous for someone with a Masters Degree.) Would I give up the chance for an extra month's pay to vote Kerry? You bet your sweet bippy. I would sacrifice one month's pay to have an extra four years of President Bush instead of Kerry.

Wait til my co-workers hear that one.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:07 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 493 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Don't worry, Sarah, I'm registering for the first time to vote in a Presidential election so I can vote for BUSH!! I'll cancel her out for you.

Posted by: Oda Mae at March 15, 2004 05:07 PM (Wdo4K)

2 About ten trillion dollars is right, I think. Then you could do the job that Kerry won't. Or buy a lot of DVDs...

Posted by: Pixy Misa at March 15, 2004 09:10 PM (+S1Ft)

3 I'm reminded by something my cranky but sharp as a tack granny always said--- you can respect other people's opinions without giving up your own dignity. Seems to me that there's little commednable in biting back your tongue for the sake of making nice in a public environement (i.e. work). Politics is a public realm as it is, voicing your opinion among the opinions of others is what politics is all about. If other people invade your space by making assumptions and assume alliances that aren't there and you don't call them up on it, you've only yourself to blame. It isn't their fault that you don't say your piece and go home fuming. It's yours. The key is to be both respectful of them and yourself. You do yourself a grave disservice by keeping silent. Speak up.

Posted by: Crystal at March 15, 2004 09:35 PM (s6c4t)

4 Crystal, that's beautiful. Oh, and, Sarah, 1,000 bucks?! Go for it! If that's what it takes, we'll chip in!

Posted by: Tuning Spork at March 16, 2004 12:38 AM (PucHz)

5 I'd give up a years pay, if not more. Also, I've convinced two co-workers, as well as a childhood friend, all whom have never voted, to register this year. I hope they vote for Bush, and I talk to them about politics when they ask, but they haven't said who they'd vote for.

Posted by: Blueshift at March 16, 2004 05:51 AM (crTpS)

6 You want to get your point across without having to say an actual word? Just show your co-workers this advertisement. They'll be shocked.

Posted by: CavalierX at March 16, 2004 04:28 PM (R9DSb)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

In a weird twist of irony, my dislike of Kerry is reaching bushian proportions. The thought of Kerry becoming president both scares and repulses me, which I imagine Bush does for many other people. But at least I can point to concrete reasons why I vehemently oppose Kerry the Waffler for president, like this account of Kerry supporting unilateralism in Iraq...back in 1997 before Hitler, I mean Bush, was at the wheel. For pete's sake, Kerry, this is the age of the internet. It's so easy to find what you said before; you'd better start being consistent.

Posted by: Sarah at 02:38 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.

OK, Lileks, OK. I won't sit this one out. You're right.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:14 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

President Bush and Chancellor Schroeder just met, and David compares the President's greeting from 2001 to this significantly colder recent one. He also found a shockingly honest interview with David Frum. My favorite exchange:

Frum: I have studied the European press. We had exactly three good days after the 11 of September.

Interviewer: And shouldnÂ’t you ask yourself why it is so?

Frum: No, the Europeans should ask themselves that. You were good at crying at the graves of the dead Americans. But when it came down to us Americas feeling threatened by Islamic fanatics, then as now, that was already too much starting in December 2001. And then these unspeakable books turned up on the bestseller lists in France and Germany, these conspiracy theories surrounding the 11 of September. That says quite a lot.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:35 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 137 words, total size 1 kb.