Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

West Coast Notes

I’m transplanted for the summer out on the central coast of California (cooler and less humid than Washington), where I hope I’ll pick up the laggard pace of my blogging. I’m in San Luis Obispo County, one of the few coastal red counties in California, though my little beach town (Cambria) is, regrettably, deep blue. A new bistro has just opened, advertising its cuisine as "progressive American," which the French would find an oxymoron, I think.

I think I can answer the question of how high has prices need to be to get people to reduce their driving. Answer: higher than they are now, at least judging by the holiday traffic here and elsewhere I’ve driven lately. I got into a traffic jam in Paso Robles yesterday--only the second tie up I’ve seen of this dimension in 20 years. (I was also on I-15 between Los Angeles and Las Vegas a few days ago, where the Vegas-bound traffic was bumper-to-bumper . . . for 100 miles.) And keep in mind that California gas prices are about 25 cents a gallon higher than the national average, thanks to our regulators.

Even at these prices, gasoline is still cheaper, adjusted for inflation, than it was in 1970, and is still cheaper than bottled water, which seems to have become a necessity for everyone to have these days.

Discussions - 11 Comments

Steven: If you’re feeling out of place or unwelcome in that blue zone on the Left Coast, consider Iraq this summer. Perfect opportunity to give some substantive support to our fighting men and women. I’m sure they’d give you a hearty welcome. You could blog right from the battle zones! This way we could get direct, first-person updates and, much like your environmental reports, you could tell us how things keep getting better and better every day - MSM be damned! Sure, it’s a little dangerous over there, but remember those insurgents are in their "final throes." I’m sure we’re on the cusp of another "turning point," so it should be fine. Go 101st Fighting Keyboarders!!

Sorry to hear about the traffic jam inconvenience, but I’m glad you’re still finding gas within your budget.

Not content with losing us the war in Vietnam, people like Mr. Novoselic honestly hope the war goes poorly. The existence of a large group of such people is why I despair when I think of our Republic’s future...no matter what the circumstances, a good part of the electorate always assumes Amerika is at fault. They are anti-patriots.

As for the smarta.. suggestion that Mr. Hayward needs to visit Iraq before he can say anything about politics or war, what nonsense. I guess FDR was wrong to get us into WWII, and really wrong to open his mouth during the war. I don’t recall he had any military service record, and certainly no battlefield experience.

Mr./Ms. Dain - Well, I happen to find Mr. Novoselic’s suggestion tobe an excellent one. However, please don’t blame me for "losing (you) the war in Vietnam." I was BORN in 1975. Quit blaming others for your failures. I do NOT "always assume Amerika (sic) is at fault." Currently, the Bush administration is at fault for squandering the lives of 1,700 + soldiers for a stupid war with reasons to justify it that seem to change with the seasons (or even more often than that!). WMDs?? Nope! Al-Quaeda connection? Nope!! "Fixing" intelligence to match the desired action or outcome?? Yep! Anti-patriot, my ass!!!

I think you’d better go back and read that 9/11 commission report again about an Iraq/Al Queda connection again. Might also help if you’d read the inspectors’ reports about WMD and Iraq...you view seems to come from the mass media. And you are an anti-patriot...maybe even a traitor if you’ve ever given a dollar to MoveOn.Org.

Dain - I see you’re the armchair General of the 101st Fighting Keyboarders. Look, the armed forces are having some serious recruitment problems, so why not take up arms and get over there if you care so much about Bush’s conceptions of liberty, freedom, democracy, fighting terror, or whatever delusion of grandeur is substituting for those WMDs and threat to the U.S. these days. Tapping away on this blog you’re primarily preaching to the converted. I don’t "always assume Amerika" is at fault, and I don’t spell America that way. I love this country, and a hell of a lot of its citizens; I just happen to think that Bush is squeezing it right into the crapper. You or Hayward CAN say whatever you like about the war without serving in it - fine. One major difference between you two and FDR, however, is that he was the U.S. president, while you guys are low-level participants in the right-wing, war-boosting chattering class. I always like to hear why war cheerleaders aren’t putting their money where their mouth is; some have valid reasons, many don’t. Having polio (ANOTHER valid reason keeping FDR off the front-lines) would cut it, being wheelchair-bound, etc. And until Bush and chatterers like yourself should succeed in taking away such freedoms, and narrowing the definition of treason to asinine new benchmarks, I am gloriously FREE to have viewpoints opposing this war and this administration, and I can give my support and my money to MoveOn or an Atheist Teachers Union (I made that up, but I figure it would repulse you) if I please. And since I, and many other Americans, don’t agree that the war in Iraq is doing jack-squat to ensure our, or anyone’s, freedom, liberty, democracy, etc. - let alone finding those WMDs that could be launched within 24 hrs. - there’s nothing even remotely treasonous or traitorous about us in our intentions, let alone our actual harmless activities. Far from your leftover Cold War fantasies, we aren’t trying to bring down America. Actually, if that was desired, we’d just do nothing or push to drop the prez term limit. But we’re not doing that. We care about this country every bit as much as you do. And all of your non-stop caustic bloviating doesn’t change that one bit. I’m sure this won’t stop you from responding, but I’ll urge you to save your furious keystrokes for someone else who cares what you have to say. I truly don’t. I’m going to MOVE ON (but not .org - I haven’t given them any money so far, but thanks for the tip, I might now).

Dainy boy is a bumper for Progressive stickers, not an actual person.

Good riddance, Mr. Patriot.

FDR had his chance to fight in WWI, but he decided to stay in Wilson’s administration instead. How brave.

Haven’t you yourself become one of the "chattering class?" As for me, I assure you the military wouldn’t have me at this point...I’m old and broken down. But I do realize that Lefties like you often use ad hominem attack to discredit and/or shame their adversaries into silence...that’s the name of your game. Well, it won’t work. And if you really LOVED America you’d be doing everything you could to help us win in Iraq, not tear us down and mock what is a noble mission. Last I looked, "patriotism" doesn’t include running down the mission when we have men on the battle field. You had a fair chance to change the policy in 2004, YOU LOST, and now you should abide by that democratic decison (i.e. shut up unless you have something constructive to say). Oh yea, I know you have the RIGHT to say whatever you want to and support whomever you want to, but that doesn’t equal PATRIOTISM.

From Wikipedia:

Between 1913 and 1917 Roosevelt campaigned to expand the Navy (in the face of considerable opposition from pacifists in the Administration such as the Secretary of State, William Jennings Bryan), and founded the Navy Reserve to provide a pool of trained men who could be mobilized in wartime. He was also involved in the frequent American interventions in the affairs of Central American and Caribbean countries: he personally wrote the constitution which the United States imposed on Haiti in 1915. When the United States entered World War I in April 1917 Roosevelt became the effective administrative head of the United States Navy, since the Secretary of the Navy, Josephus Daniels, had been appointed mainly for political reasons and was widely considered to be not up to the job.

Geez, Dain, I’m hardly a huge fan of FDR, but one would think that these kind of credentials would effectively ward off any backhanded attempts to call him a chicken, especially from a (chuckle, chuckle) Bush supporter.

As for the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection, just give it up Dain. It’s just embarrassing to even watch. The "liberal-biased" papers that cheered when we into Iraq to get the WMDs reported what the commission said:

"We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

9/11 panel sees no link between Iraq, al-Qaida

Although I’m sure that the good boys at PowerLine and other tinfoil hat moonbat sites beg to differ!!!

Yea, yea, FDR was quite a man...but he chose to serve his country at home rather than in the armed forces...just like "chickenhawks" like Rumsfeld. OH...same logic...ouch. Just using the preferred tactics of the Left.

As for the Iraq/Al Qaeda connection, do you really expect me to believe a set of pre-Rathergate MSM reports on this. If you look at little more deeply what you will find is that 1) contacts existed, and 2) while there is no evidence of Iraqi complicity in the actual 9/11 attacks, they were hip-deep in terrorism around the globe (some of which involved Al Qaeda). Don’t believe me? Well, how about the Clinton administration’s indictment of Bin Laden? Here’s a direct quotation from the 1998 indictment:

"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of
Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on
particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al
Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq."

1998 Bin Laden Indictment

Now I’m sorry if this is an inconvenient fact, I’m also sorry that the heavily politicized 9/11 commission preferred to ignore clear evidence before it, and I’m sorry the MSM ran with sensational (and inaccurate) headlines, but it’s really illogical to suppose that a man like Hussein wouldn’t hold a grudge against the U.S., or that he wouldn’t have had dealings with all kinds of terrorists. In fact, he did (e.g., Salman Pak). And I’ll be you that if Bush hadn’t invaded Iraq then Bin Laden would be there today, enjoying Saddam’s hospitality (just like Abu Nidal and Zarqawi).

To increase you edification, I would also point you to Stephen Hayes’ book, The Connection: How al Qaeda’s Collaboration with Saddam Hussein has Endangered America.

Have much joy in the reading :)

Novoselic:

FDR came down with polio in the summer of 1921, well after the end of the First World War.

By the way, have you seen the thread where your fellow leftist Fung has been calling Julie Ponzi a bully and Dain a racist? Maybe you should run over there and favor Fung with one of your sermons about showing respect and not calling names.

Oh, and FTR, I don’t think that FDR’s being Navy secretary rather than on the front lines in WWI made him a "chickenhawk." Nor do I think that Frederick Douglass was a chickenhawk for publicly supporting the Union military effort in the Civil War while not serving in uniform himself.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/6856