My Photo
Blog powered by TypePad

Blogbar

Clustermap

My Politics?

  • Your Political Profile:
    Overall: 80% Conservative, 20% Liberal
    Social Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
    Personal Responsibility: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal
    Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
    Ethics: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal
    Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

May 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

May 26, 2009

Requiem For a Plant

In march of 2008, I purchased a year-old, bare root Manchurian apricot from Burgess Seed and Plant Company. I placed it in the ground a few days after it arrived, and babied it through droughts, storms, late frosts, insect attacks and all the other nuisances the would-be grower of trees faces in this part of the country.

When I received it, it was little more than a twig with roots. Bro Aaron (who can vouch for me) paid us a visit the very week I planted it, and probably returned to Ft. Benning doubting my sanity. Admittedly, my sanity is questionable. The tree's health, however was not. Like my late dog, Sweetie, it was a tough little shit, and, given sufficient "TLC," made a miracle comeback under less-than-ideal circumstances.

Until today.

Familial duty required that Mags and I light out for Columbia, South Carolina on Saturday. We dragged our asses back to Georgia on Sunday afternoon, had a gander at our garden/orchard, and retired contented and at peace with the world.

This morning, we arose at as decent an hour as any man or woman can on his/her day off and spent the day attending to the various and sundry tasks that render our "bohemian" lifestyle so "liberating" in "Weird Harold" Obama's Amerika. For the first time in ages I listened to talk radio, and actually found myself saluting Kim Jong Il. To be sure, he's a nutcase, but he's a ballsy nutcase, and no more "evil" than any of the baw'bags we've subsidized or otherwise aided for the last seven decades.

Granted, he's a maniac and a commie butcher. But so was "Uncle Joe," so who am I to pass judgment on Kim sonsaeng nim? If Roosevelt was one of the greatest Americans ever to tread this whirling ball of rock on his tottering, poliomyelitis-stricken legs -- a man who "fought evil in his time" whilst forking out billions to the most vicious, homicidal regime in human history (that would be the Soviet Union, for all you Levin and Hannity fans); then KIm Jong Il is simply a 21st century Roosevelt -- with markedly fewer imperialistic ambitions.

I have no idea of the political leanings of the squirrel/rabbit that gnawed my beloved apricot tree in half. Perhaps he was a commie. Perhaps he was a Nazi. Perhaps he was an Islamofascist Libertarian. Perhaps he was part of the Gay Rodent Liberation Front. And I don't care.

At 16:00 (the time at which I turn the radio off), I hied me to the "back forty" and found my beloved apricot sapling gnawed in half. I knew not whether rabbits or squirrels had committed this blatant act of war, so I grabbed my Chink pellet gun and took out my wrath upon representatives of both species.

The first squirrel I met was cheeky -- an absolute smartass. I was highly pissed-off (and shooting offhand), ergo, he did a backflip or two, convulsed a bit, then ran up a tree -- thereby depriving me of meat and hide. I hope the neighbors' cat is eating his mortally wounded ass alive at the moment, for the record. The first rabbit I met was an idiot, by way of comparison. I was rusty and out of practice, so Mags recommended flanking him rather than executing a frontal assault or trying for a "sniper miracle." Doing as she advised, I crossed the property line, circled the long-eared rat, and took a shot from perhaps twenty yards. 

I missed.

Beer is fun, but not necessarily good

Stupidity, however, is good. Especially when manifests itself within the target. I went prone, crawled up to the ridge on which Maggie, Aaron and I had  planted gooseberries and sand cherries, and aimed carefully, just as my father and other, equally skilled marksmen had taught me years before.

And I nailed ol' Peter Cottontail. Rather than fucking off, he opted for immobility -- and he paid for it by snifing the northern breeze and going broadside. 

The first shot flipped him. My Chink pellet gun isn't the most accurate weapon on earth, but it's plenty powerful. I hit the little fucker just behind the shoulder, as I would a deer. No flipping, no convulsing, no running. He simply keeled over and kicked for a minute or so. By this time, my anger had left me, so I jacked another one up the spout and put it through his heart from three feet away. That stilled him.

I offered the carcass to a neighbor (who refused it), thought of making hasenpfeffer, and then consulted my Ma. She recommended leaving it as a warning to others of its kind. I concurred, and have since been watching kung fu movies with my wife (and composing this post.)

I miss my apricot sapling. It was only a dumb, insesate plant, but I loved it as a democrat loves people he never intends to meet, or as a republican loves his investments in enemy nations.

Yes, this is a "So what?" post. We all lose plants (and other things we love) to vermin. It's a fact of life.

I am, however, disturbed by the fact that I actually enjoyed killing the squirrel, and felt nothing when I greased the long-eared rat.

You're absolutely right, my Bros. It really is too easy.

Alba gu Brath 

     

November 26, 2008

Disingenuous Bullshit

A few weeks ago, I had the misfortune of reading John W. Dean’s Conservatives Without Conscience.

When I say “misfortune,” I’m not implying that CWC is a reeking chunk of glib, sanctimonious bullshit, and I’d like to make that clear. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Rather like Greg Palast’s Armed Madhouse, only half of the book qualifies as a reeking chunk of glib, sanctimonious bullshit.

(I found both titles on Barnes & Noble’s “bargain” table for a mere four smackers a pop, incidentally. Bein’ a total fuckin’ gentleman an’ all that, I’ll politely ignore the possibility of an inversely proportionate relationship ‘twixt final sale price and taurine feces-content…)

However much I loathed the book, honesty demands that I concede its merits. Conservatives Without Conscience is a razor-edged indictment of the pseudo-conservatism that has fulfilled Leonard Peikoff’s direst predictions (see his magnum opus, The Ominous Parallels; easily one of the most important and underrated books of the twentieth century). Paradoxically, it also provides a fascinating look into the mind of a wimped-out, compromise-prone, wouldn’t-say-“shit”-if-he-had-a-mouthful “moderate.”

Before stomping both book and author into the pavement, I’ll admit that Dean’s anger at the right in general – and the neocons in particular – is justified. The despicable treatment he and his wife received at the hands of G. Gordon Liddy, Chuck Colson, Len Colodny and their cronies (last seen inhabiting a herd of swine in the land of the Gadarenes) was enough to turn Mother Teresa into Mad Max. His analysis of conservatism’s disturbing, authoritarian shift is spot-on, and he does a very nice job of serving up the goods on such neocon idols as Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay and Dick Cheney.

That, however, is the best that can be said for Conservatives Without Conscience.

Far from being the “moderate” conservative and anti-authoritarian he’d have the reader believe, Dean is little more than an apologist/whitewasher for the radical left  -- and a man with an axe to grind.

The latter is understandable and forgivable: I’d sooner condemn Vlad the Impaler’s anti-Ottoman crusade than Dean’s pitiful swats at those who slandered him and his loved ones. The former, though, is neither understandable nor forgivable, considering his professed convictions.

Now I enjoy a good, old-fashioned Donnybrook and/or venom-spitting polemic as much as the next guy, OK?

Hell, I enjoy the latter so much; I actually write ‘em now and again. Unlike Dean, though, I don’t cringe behind a pious façade of civility when launching personal attacks and/or counterattacks: You fuck with the bull; you get the horns -- end of discussion.


 Johnny-boy, on the other hand, has no problem with donning a phony halo whilst exchanging ballshots with his opponents, low blow for low blow.

In case the Gentle Reader hasn’t guessed, I find the halo far more irritating than the ballshots. I respect men who choose to remain above the fray, remain silent, and let the facts (and instant replay) justify them. I also respect men who, once the black flag is unfurled and “Havoc!” cried; toss the gloves aside and advance; grinning, cracking their knuckles, and growling: “OK, jerkoff. You just signed your own fuckin’ death warrant. You wanna play rough? Let’s play rough then, by God!”

What I simply can’t abide is a squealing wanker who, after having a piece of his ear bitten off, gouges his opponent’s eyes – but still claims to be playing by the Marquis of Queensbury rules.

John W. Dean – alas and alack -- is such a wanker.

In the light of Liddy & Co.’s despicable innuendoes, Dean was completely justified in pointing out that “Clitty” hid behind own his wife’s petticoats by signing his assets over to her while slandering ol’ Johnny and the missus. And slander it was, to be sure – albeit of a chickenshit, underhanded, plausibly deniable variety. According to Dean, the “Rodent Gourmet” (read Liddy’s Will -- you’ll get it…) and his pals, Coldsore and Colostomy, implied that Dean’s wife was a high-priced hooker, selling her ass to the DC elite.

That’s dirty pool, boys and ghouls -- and payback is a medevac. Under identical circumstances, I’d be tempted to trawl the Southside and ply the first loadie I met with $500.00 and a line of coke in exchange for alleging that Liddy, Colson and Colodny (dressed as Roller Derby queens and demanding that their six-year-old victim address them as “Gi-gi,” “Charlene” and “Lenora,” respectively) had molested him during a 1972 field trip to the Whitehouse.

Admittedly, I probably wouldn’t see it through. I’d still be sorely tempted, though; and if by chance I did retaliate in kind, I’d call it flat-out vengeance and nothing else. But that’s just me…

In dragging Liddy’s ol’ lady into the mess – even peripherally -- Dean retaliated in kind, but refuses admit it.

If it’s fair to assume that a man of Dean’s educational and professional accomplishments (White House legal counsel to Richard Nixon, chief minority counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee and associate deputy Attorney General) is sufficiently intelligent to judge methodological merit, then it’s equally fair to assume that he’s either an outright nutcase or pathologically dishonest. Admittedly, Dean does a wonderful job of exposing the slimy, Hitlerian underbelly of modern pseudo-conservatism. In so doing, though, he completely ignores the same side of modern liberalism. So much so, that upon reading his words, one would believe authoritarianism and elitism to be the exclusive preserve of the modern right.

In Dean’s alternate universe, only conservatives are capable of authoritarian attitudes. Having seen Ruby Ridge, Waco, “Know Your Customer,” “hate crime” laws and so-called “political correctness” (all the handiwork of the left, lest anyone need reminding), I found this rather odd. (I also wish I could have met Dean a few years ago, before I cleaned up my act -- whatever he’s on must be some really good shit…)

The veil of oddness was abruptly snatched away when I reached chapter two, thereby allowing the clear light of bullshit detection to shine in. As it happens, Dean – by his own admission – lifted his criteria for determining a given person’s degree of authoritarianism directly from Robert Altenmeyer’s so-called “RWA scale.”

The RWA scale, bluntly put, is a methodological nightmare. The survey used to measure it is a veritable DMZ of semantic landmines, binary thinking and non-sequiturs -- as objective as Das Kapital and as scientific as the Malleus Maleficarum. Worst of all, perhaps, it’s a “survey” in name only. Like a corporate “employee feedback” survey, Altenmeyer’s leaves the hapless respondent only: “agree strongly,” “agree,” “neutral,” “disagree,” and “disagree strongly,” as replies to a series of dubious statements, some of which are non-sequiturs or utterly pointless.

If, for example, I disagree with statement #18, “There is nothing wrong with premarital sexual intercourse,” I’m an authoritarian.

Well, I think there’s plenty wrong with it. I think it’s a sin, I think it cheapens sex overall, that it leads one to regard others as mere objects of self-gratification instead of actual human beings. In short, I disapprove of it very strongly. Not once, though, did I say it should be outlawed. So now having moral standards is somehow “authoritarian,” is that it, boys?

This, by the way, is where the Altenmeyers and Deans of the world step on their own peckers (meseemeth they have very, very short legs). The “anything goes” attitude they imply is the mark of a healthy mind apparently doesn’t include accepting so-called “authoritarian” attitudes in others – as long as they don’t try to force them on anyone else.

Let’s take another of my personal favorites, number 15:

“Some of the best people in our country are those who are challenging our government, criticizing religion, and ignoring the ‘normal way things are supposed to be done.’

Seems innocuous, doesn’t it? Well look again, and note the choice of conjunctions in the third clause. It’s a “package deal.” In order to agree or disagree, I must first concede that some of the best people in our country are engaged in all three activities. He wrote “and,” folks. Not “or.”

Moreover, Altenmeyer’s statement presupposes a fixed (but unmentioned) standard of “good,” and that some people are, in fact, “better” than others. Fine -- but by whose standards?  Ah, well. Who cares? If I say that Thomas Jefferson was a better man than Pol Pot, I’m safe, right? Both men engaged in all three behaviors, but by my standards, Jefferson was one of the best people our country ever produced.

A harmless word game, n’est ce pas?

It would be, except that in his book, John Dean combines it with the Social Dominance Orientation Survey (cooked up by four gents names Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth and Malle) when defining “right wing authoritarians.” In this gem of a survey, agreeing with the statements “Some people are just more worthy than others,” and “Some people are just inferior to others” is a sure sign of authoritarianism.

B-b-but wait! I just agreed that many shit-stirrers are among the best of us! How can I be an authoritarian?

For the record, I do think many shit-stirrers are among the best of us. Unfortunately, Dean’s twisted mix of the RWA and SDO surveys leaves the respondent “damned if [he does] and damned if [he doesn’t].” If I concede that my favorite shit-stirrers are among the best of us, I have to admit that (by definition, mind you – “best” is the superlative form of the adjective “good”) some folks ain’t exactly their equals.

Hopefully, the Gentle Reader gets the picture. 

As the RWA and SDO surveys are copyright, I’ve only included a few items from each, for the sake of criticism/review/lampooning. Now, since I haven’t the time to shred a thirty-five-question quiz, I’ll post my own “LWA” survey.

  1. The established academic authorities are correct on most matters, while those without degrees are usually just “loudmouths” showing their ignorance.
     
  2. The marriage “contract” should have no legal weight, and should be a purely private/religious matter.

  3. Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to redistribute wealth, destroy the old-fashioned ways and enforce all forms of equality.

  4. Hunters, smokers, and pro-lifers are just as healthy and moral as anybody else.

  5. It is always better to trust the judgment of the recognized authorities in government and academia than to listen to the noisy reactionaries in our society, who are trying to impede progress.

  6. Those who maintain the religious and cultural traditions of their ancestors are no doubt every bit as good and virtuous as those who have rejected them.

  7. The only way our country can get through the crisis ahead is to reject our traditional values completely, put some tough leaders in power, and silence the troublemakers who question progressive ideas.
     
  8. There is absolutely nothing wrong with home schooling.

  9. Our country needs people who judge ideas on their merits, rather than upon whether they’re old or new.

  10. Previous civilizations may have arrived at workable solutions to social problems that trouble us today, and should be studied.

  11. No one should be forced to associate with company not of his choosing.

  12. “Old fashioned” ways and values are of no merit in a changing world. 

  13. You have to admire those who challenged a nine-man panel’s views and the law by protesting for gun ownership, for freedom of speech, or to abolish property taxes.

  14. Gun owners and pro-lifers should be praised for being brave enough to defy Supreme Court rulings.

  15. It is better to have hateful and intolerant speech in our communities than to allow the government the power to censor them.
     
  16. The situation is getting so serious; the strongest methods would be justified if they led to consensus and social harmony.

Well, that about does it for today. Take the test and figure out whether or not you’re an authoritarian. Here’s the definition of the word, as per the American Heritage Dictionary, by the way: “Characterized by or favoring obedience to authority, as against individual freedom.”

The exclusive preserve of so-called “conservatives?” I think not.  Just think Janet Reno…

November 13, 2008

The Man Who Shot Liberty -- Period.

A few days before the election, I read a column so pathetic and poorly reasoned; I’ll not even mention the author’s name. Suffice to say that I began reading his work nearly thirty years ago, at the tender age of twelve, and that the respect I’ve since developed for both the man and his opinions precludes naming him.

As he’s a genuine soldier, one who has worn his country’s uniform and shed both his own blood and that of his nation’s enemies in its service, I won’t pull the despicable neocon stunt of calling him a “turncoat” or otherwise insulting him; I leave that kind of shit-slinging (and it is shit-slinging; nothing more) to the Hannitys, O’Reillys, Krauthammers, Levins and other useless “talking heads” of that ilk. I question neither his patriotism nor his sincerity – only his judgment.

Like many freedom-lovers of our acquaintance, my wife and I saw this year’s election as a no-win situation. For us, choosing between McCain and Obama was tantamount to choosing between inoperable cancer and AIDS. Both candidates score off the charts in terms of narcissistic and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders. Both are incurable elitists with near-pathological senses of entitlement. Both have drunk deeply of a sick, toxic cocktail of mixed delusions (persecution and grandeur). And both were completely out of touch with the “little people” they aspired to rule – although Obama was ultimately more adept at feigning empathy, a la Clinton’s “I feel your pain.”

As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

 

-- Proverbs 26:11

 

Being no fonder of vomit than of folly, we opted for write-ins, by way of protesting the “Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dum” choice of candidates. When offered a choice between the lesser of two evils, we opted to reject evil, period: “Vade retro, Satana!”

To be sure, our decision was impractical. It was, however, principled, and we’d hoped that a larger slice of the electorate would vote on principle rather than personality, on conviction rather than compromise. We’d hoped that more people – given the pre-election nattering about “change”-- would say, “Not on my watch!”

 

But they didn’t.

 

Sadly, neither did the man whose column I’m lambasting.

 

If the Gentle Reader doesn’t understand that all government is dependent upon the use of force, he/she is cordially invited to stop breathing. Like it or not, the law is enforced by men with guns. The Constitution may “guarantee” certain rights, and the law may recognize certain rights. Both, however, are enforced by elected and appointed officials and the armed men they command. See the entire history of the human species for further clarification. This being the case, I refuse to give up my weapons or vote for anyone -- party affiliation notwithstanding -- who demands that I do so.

No individual, however well armed, can even hope to equal the destructive capability of a modern army and its weaponry. No individual in history has ever managed to equal the destructive capability of a demagogue and his followers, as our species’ dismal track record of conquest, slavery and genocide attests. The best he can do is “give as good as he gets” in the face of tyranny, which, by its very nature, is a government-owned monopoly.

This sad fact being self-evident to all but the most historically illiterate, it goes without saying that a man who seeks to disarm others has plans for them. Plans that aren’t necessarily in their best interests, and which necessitate rendering them defenseless. In short, he means to rule them rather than serve them.

Pardon my French, but fuck that. In my forty-one misspent years on this whirling chunk of rock, I’ve used a firearm to assert my “rights” to life, liberty and property no fewer than four times. Obama, to the best of my knowledge, has never faced the threat of direct physical violence. McCain, to the best of my knowledge, was at his best when dropping heavy-duty firepower on third-worlders from thousands of feet above their heads, but managed to fuck up despite his technological advantage. Pardon my redneck ass if that doesn’t exactly leave me all broke out with confidence in his overall judgment and threat-assessment capability…

Beyond opining that when either calls or votes for the wholesale disarmament of the American people; he speaks whereof he knows not, I’ll ask one simple question: If neither trusts me with my pistols and rifles, why should I trust either with the world’s largest nuclear/biological/chemical/radiological arsenal? If neither considers me fit to bear arms in my own defense in a dangerous world, why should I consider either fit to occupy the country’s highest elected office?

 

Apparently, my target hasn’t bothered to ask these simple questions, as he chose to endorse McCain. Worse still, he chose to abandon reason entirely and appeal to gut-level, lizard-brain fear in the process. Stopping just short of claiming an Obama presidency meant instant, nationwide gun confiscation, he neglected to mention that an attempt at instant, nationwide gun confiscation might very well result in the instant, nationwide deaths of any number of federal agents and/or National Guardsmen (the latter recently freed from the shackles of the inconvenient Posse Comitatus Act by a president whose policies he apparently supports).

 

(How I love “conservatives,” by the way! One moment, they preach the virtues of integrity and individual responsibility. The next, though, they invoke the “Nuernberg Defense,” especially when men who’ve sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution “morph” into jackbooted thugs on command…)

As he’s getting up in years, I can attribute his inability to “think deeply on this” to age. I can’t, however, account for his refusal to bring elementary reasoning into play. If he can still write coherent sentences, he can still put two and two together and arrive at four.

In his argument, this gent conceded that McCain’s voting record on firearms issues left something to be desired. Kudos for that, although it’s tantamount to saying that Pol Pot’s human rights record left something to be desired -- “Ye need not stop work to tell us. We knew it many seasons before.” Unfortunately, our boy also sank to the level of noting that Sarah Palin was staunchly pro-gun.

 

Pardon my French once again, but big fuckin’ deal.

 

When last I read the Constitution, the Vice President’s responsibilities were rather limited. The President and the President alone was legally empowered to pass or veto legislation -- period. Even the Vice President’s role as president pro tempore of the Senate doesn’t mean shit in this case, as (see article I, section 3, paragraph 4) he/she/it “…shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.”

 

To anyone even remotely acquainted with contemporary politics and the current Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dum ratio on Capitol Hill, the chance of the Senate being equally divided on the issue of gun control – or any other, for that matter -- is as likely as Sean Hannity reading the Downing Street Memo or the first three pages of the patriot act on the air. The Democrats hold the majority of Senate seats – end of discussion. Palin as tie-breaker under those circumstances?

Nice try. Unfortunately, the argument is as full of holes as the Branch Davidians.

The next item that rankled me – and rankled me badly – was the mention of appointments to the Supreme Court. Apparently, many Republicans and conservatives believe that a Republican presidency is an absolute guarantee of strict constructionist appointees to our once-great nation’s highest court. (And a “high” court it is, indeed. If empirical evidence is anything to go on, the “Nine Unknown Men[tal Cases]” spend more time getting high than the combined populations of Atlanta’s and Chicago’s southsides…)

Once again, he completely ignores McCain’s voting record. Unlike him, I’m inclined to wonder why a believer in a “flexible” Constitution would do any such thing. If McCain, as the talk-radio pundits have repeatedly (one might say reflexively) assured us, is a man of principle, why would any rational human being expect him to abandon his anti-gun and anti-liberty principles (i.e., his “flexibility,” the antithesis of principle, ironically enough) when appointing Supreme Court justices?

I’ll allow for the possibility of my target hoping McCain would be elected and then abruptly snuff it, leaving Palin in the driver’s seat. If so, I applaud his sentiments -- if not his rational faculty. It is, after all, equally possible that I’ll commence to shittin’ rose-scented gold bullion and pissin’ cancer-curing sody-pop on the morrow. I’m not counting on near-miracles of that sort, though, and if the author of the offending article was, he should have said so in the first place. Millions like me would almost certainly have cautioned him against taking such a precarious position, but that’s neither here nor there.

No, my guess is that a McCain presidency would have seen the appointment of justices who share McCain’s views. He isn’t a constructionist by any stretch of the imagination, so the likelihood of his appointing strict constructionists to the bench was minimal, at best.

My distaste for fear tactics and shoddy reasoning of this kind notwithstanding, I have to give the column’s author credit for mentioning the Second Amendment, period. In this year’s election, it was hardly an issue at all; a fact that annoyed me to no end. To the Republicans, the only issues worth addressing were the so-called “war on terror” (which has somehow become synonymous with the occupation of Iraq), the ever-undefined matter of “national security” and the prospect of higher taxes.

 

Anyone with different concerns was summarily dismissed as a crackpot or branded a “liberal,” a “turncoat,” or “unpatriotic.” (The irony of Northeastern, second- and third-generation Americans hurling such verbal brickbats at 9th-14th-generation “Old Americans” like me -- direct descendants of the earliest British colonists, our ancestors having arrived between 1607 and 1775 -- is as delicious as it is offensive, by the way.)

 

And my concerns were very different indeed. The ability to protect my family and myself was first and foremost among them. As the alleged nationwide drop-off in violent crime seems to have skipped my hometown, this is a very real concern. My wife works just off Holcomb Bridge Road (known to local LEOs as “the Holcomb Bridge drug corridor”), and for years, I worked the graveyard shift in an area increasingly “enriched” by immigration. To me, then, ready access to a firearm has nothing to do with hunting, target shooting or dick-waving; and everything to do with remaining alive, unharmed and un-robbed. Unlike Obama, McCain and the other nattering nabobs of the political class, I don’t have a 24-7 circle of bodyguards with ballistic vests and submachineguns standing between me and the “hard working” illegal aliens they so adore.

I should also mention that if the threat of Islamic terrorism (I suppose the “Yellow Peril” and the “Red Threat” have been supplanted by the “Tan Terror”) is as great as McCain would have us believe, he’d want more armed Americans, not fewer. That, however, is another matter entirely.

And speaking of terrorists and foreigners (and bears, oh my!), there’s the matter of open borders and unlimited immigration. Only a “We create our own reality!” neocon could believe that an unsecured perimeter is conducive to national security. Only such a reality-challenged lunatic could believe that flooding the country with immigrants from countries with no tradition of individual responsibility or economic/social/political liberty is somehow good for the country as a whole. Admittedly, a permanent underclass of disenfranchised, unassimilated “semi-citizens” benefits the Democratic party (general happiness and prosperity would render them politically irrelevant, after all) and the Republican party’s corporate backers, with their seemingly unquenchable thirst for cheap labor – but it bodes ill for the rest of us.

 

My next concern is the unchecked growth of the Federal Government – courtesy of the Republicans. Not only was another cabinet-level department unnecessary and a waste of time and money; the shady, draconian, meta-constitutional powers conferred by patriot act I&II and the Continuity of Operations plan present a clearer and more present danger to my liberty than all the world’s terrorist organizations combined. This, needless to say, brings me full circle, to the matter of gun control.

When the Founding Fathers drafted the Second Amendment, they weren’t concerned with hunting, target shooting or producing Olympic gold medallists. Since the dark days of the Wilson administration, an entire specious school of “Constitutional scholarship” has grown up around the Second Amendment, but the founders’ intent remains clear, as expressed in their own words. Anti-Federalists considered standing armies injurious to liberty, and rightly so. Federalists conceded their point, but counter-argued that the militia – an armed populace, as later defined in the United States Militia Act (1792) – served to diminish the threat.

 

The Second Amendment, then, was a compromise between the two schools of thought. One of the shortest amendments in the Bill of Rights, it reads – plainly and simply: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” (Emphasis mine.)

 

When viewed in the context of The Federalist Papers – the Federalists’ “sales pitch” for foisting their proposed constitution upon the nation – the Second Amendment was the legal guarantee of a right asserted in the Declaration of Independence, the very raison d’etre of the American Revolution: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it…”

 

As the founders -- Federalist and Anti-Federalist alike -- understood, the common man and his weapons (i.e., me and my weapons and my countrymen and their weapons, in this day and age) were the “thin red line” between reasonable national security and outright despotism. In the sociopolitical context of the American Revolution and its immediate aftermath, then, the right to keep and bear arms implied far more than merely defending oneself and one’s country against Indians, outlaws and foreign oppressors -- it also implied defending oneself and one’s country against domestic tyranny.

 

My target once claimed to have been in accord with the English and French political thinkers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. At the time, I believed him -- and still do, to a certain extent. Perhaps, in his own mind, he still is. Unfortunately, his decision to endorse a “stealth tyrant” (McCain) as the only alternative to a quasi-Hitlerian windup doll with an apparent messiah-complex and every symptom of narcissistic personality disorder (I thank God for merely saddling me with manic-depression, by the way – I truly got off with a “slap on the wrist”…) gives the lie to his professed convictions.

I chose to adhere to mine: I voted for neither.

 

The poison of tyranny, whether administered in homeopathic or allopathic doses, is still tyranny – and still poison. Like lead and similar toxins, literal or metaphoric, it accumulates in the body politic and inevitably leads to toxemia and death (both conditions neatly conforming to the definition of “change,” for the benefit of the the Obama-worshippers among us...). To me, the idea of voting for McCain because he was slightly less authoritarian than Obaba was utterly ludicrous; it amounted to choosing to take the smaller of two doses of poison.

 

Thanks, but no thanks. I chose neither.

 

Beyond the article’s apologist stance (“Yeah, McCain sucks, but he’s the best we’ve got to offer”), what saddened me most was its near-hysterical, yet vaguely threatening tone. Like so much Republican rhetoric of late, it reminded me of a frightened school bully demanding protection money from increasingly indifferent children, while screaming that a rival bully was even worse than himself. In the world of politics, as in the schoolyard, the weaker “children” will eventually give their lunch money to the bully’s rival -- just for a change of pace – while the stronger ones will tell both to go fuck themselves.

 

The implied threat (“Vote for us -- or else!”) was indicative of yet another fatal flaw in the Republicans’ collective character: a breathtakingly arrogant sense of entitlement.

Granted, this country isn’t a democracy – thank God. All the same, the United States government “deriv[es] its just powers from the consent of the governed.” When a party and its candidates scoff at the will and values of its core constituency, said constituency can be expected to withdraw its consent at the ballot box. For nearly eight years now, the Republican Party has ignored the will of its voting-base and spit in their faces – but still has the audacity to demand their vote. This year, as in 2006, many of us ignored their demands.

In keeping with their ostensible “enemy’s” attempt to reduce us to crude, cartoonish stereotypes, we did indeed “cling to our guns and religion” – while letting go of the Republican Party by not voting for its candidates. And now, the “Party of Reagan” is angry with us, as if we were the ones who’d failed them and not the other way around.


We wanted reduced immigration and tightly controlled borders. They offered us McCain – an unabashed supporter of open borders and amnesty, and who never saw an H-1-B visa he didn’t like.

We wanted an end to wars against abstractions, tactics and nouns. They offered us McCain, who, not satisfied with the quagmire in Iraq and the unfinished business in Afghanistan, now wants to “Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran,” in his own words.

We wanted to stop subsidizing abortions with our tax dollars. They offered us McCain, who is anything but pro-life.

And we wanted to preserve our right to keep and bear arms. They offered us McCain, whose anti-gun voting record rivals Schumer’s or Feinstein’s.

Predictably, they lost our support – and the election.

Unfortunately, that leaves us with Obama in the Whitehouse and Democrat majorities in the House and Senate. This means that my target’s fears are justified to a certain extent. A federal gun ban is a very real possibility. There are, however, an estimated 80,000,000 privately owned firearms in the United States. Even allowing for collectors, survivalists and hardcore “gun goons” and “gear queers,” most of whom own a minimum of three firearms (a rifle, a shotgun and a pistol or revolver) each, there are at least 10,000,000 gun owners in this once-great country. This makes the American public the second largest armed body on earth.

 

Does an Obama presidency, then, portend the complete disarmament of the American people, as my target asserted?

Let’s leave that up to those 10,000,000+ armed citizens. To paraphrase Jim Morrison: “They got the guns, but we got the numbers – and a few guns of our own.”

 

G’night and God bless.

October 13, 2008

Thoughts for the Day (10/13/08)

Consider the Source…

 

Several months ago, I was perusing the content of a thoroughly unpleasant website (one of the many to which I refuse to link). Most of what I read indicated that the author had drunk deeply of a toxic cocktail of ideological Kool-Aid, media mythology and political propaganda. Most of his claims (this “gent” listed heavily to the left, incidentally – surprise, surprise!) were easily refuted. Most of his logic was anything but logical. And most of his arguments consisted of setting up and knocking down straw men.

 

Even worse, nothing I read indicated that the “puir bit crathur” could actually do anything but bitch about economics and politics. Tragic, as his understanding of both was disturbingly limited, and seemed to derive from public high school textbooks. Bluntly put, he was no more conversant with Marx or Machiavelli than with Locke or Lao Tzu. Not that I suppose it bothers him: a typical, anonymous “Internet creep,” he doesn’t allow comments and doesn’t provide contact information.

 

“Where do they find them – and why do they send them here?” as was often said on You Can’t Do That on Television…

 

(His “essays,” incidentally, reminded me of my college days, during the mid- and late-1980s. At the time, I commuted daily from Roswell to the GSU campus in Atlanta. As it happened, the most convenient way of doing so was to drive to the Lenox or Brookhaven MARTA stations and ride the subway to Five Points. When taking any form of mass transit, needless to say, one meets some “colorful” characters -- and in this respect, MARTA was no exception to the rule.

 

One of the more memorable specimens in this menagerie of misfits was a shabby young man, perhaps five years older than myself; best described as one of nature’s crueler jokes upon itself. He was of medium height and somewhat paunchy, with a shock of greasy, straw-blond hair; unfocused blue eyes behind smudged, coke bottle lenses; and a perpetual five o’ clock shadow. His molasses-drawl – low, but with a permanent, whining undertone – hinted at congenital retardation, while his obliviousness to even the simplest social graces left the mark of bad breeding writ large upon his sweaty brow.

 

Despite the fact that he had trouble forming complete sentences, he lectured all within earshot on the virtues of socialism  -- a subject he obviously didn’t understand. Occasionally, he handed out mimeographed leaflets – in this case, probably not of his own authorship – until someone actually expressed interest. When this happened, he apparently became convinced that They were “out to get him,” as he’d stuff his pamphlets into his grungy overcoat, clutching them to his un-bathed breast as if they were original copies of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

 

I suppose the associative connection between this creature and the blogger is obvious: both wave their antennae furiously – until someone actually pays attention to them. When the light of inquiry is shone in their direction, they scuttle pell-mell for the comforting darkness beneath the metaphoric refrigerator.)

 

A few of the blogger’s passages, though, merited further investigation. Something – intuition, perhaps – moved me to conduct a bit of additional research. Upon doing so, I found that of the lunatic’s many claims and allegations (most of them absurd), these few were factually correct.

 

The moral of the story: Even lunatics and idiots can speak the truth. Discernment consists of the ability to separate truth from bullshit, and to assess not only the credibility of the messenger, but the content of the message, as well. (The inability to do so, by the way, is why the gullible are easily misled by “experts.”) Yes, I know it’s a lot of work – but then again, no one ever claimed that critical thought was easy…

 

“A wise man will learn more from a fool than a fool will ever learn from a wise man.”

 

-- Japanese proverb.

 

Remarkable Men

 

Whenever someone whines about “Eurocentric” history, I usually roll my eyes and reach for the antacids. Nine times out of ten, the aggrieved party is either a confused weenie, fresh out of public school and with a head full of half-baked notions about life beyond the pale of Christendom; or the same sort of half-educated, agenda-driven fuckwit who can y chirp (merrily and ad nauseam) about Constantine and the Council of Nicea – but who goes completely “blank” when the term “canonic authority” is tossed into the (usually one-sided) conversation.

 

Occasionally, though, the complaint rings true. As most of what we consider “history” in this modern Dark Age adheres to the ideologically driven “deify/demonize” model, much of what has transpired beyond the Urals for the last few centuries is either swept under the rug, or inflated beyond its actual historical significance. (Exactly which depends upon whether the “historian” loves or hates the West. Most, as nearly as I can tell, fall into the latter category, these days.) The few who dare “oppose” either camp usually do so by treating history as a mysterious set of “processes” and “forces,” and portray the world as a chessboard, upon which human beings are mere pawns.

 

This is tragic, as history – minus humans – is mere paleontology. True history is a record of the actions and interactions of various individuals and groups. Some, it’s true, leave larger “ripples” than others, but establishing a meaningful perspective entails taking the whole “pond” (or such of it as we can see, at any rate) into account. Nowhere is the failure to do so more evident than in the history of the Eurasia. As students of Eurasian history generally adhere to one of two equally silly schools of thought: the Ex Oriens, Lux school; and the Drang nach Osten school the situation is unlikely to improve in the near future.

 

While pro-Eastern lotus-eaters dreamily prate of the “ancient” civilizations of Southeast Asia (perennial favorites of theirs, it seems), blissfully unaware that Thais, Vietnamese and Burmese – for example -- migrated to their current stomping grounds well within the Christian era, displacing the native Malay and Mon-Khmer people in the process; pro-Western beef-eaters try to prove that fair-haired, fair-skinned Scythians and Tocharians single-handedly civilized Asia, until their light was cruelly snuffed by the native barbarians.    

 

Both camps seek demigods and demons, villains and victims within history’s pages – and both are completely full of shit. Neither is willing to weigh and measure any given culture against another – honestly noting its’ virtues as well as its vices, its strengths as well as its weaknesses. Lest anyone think I’m espousing relativism; I assure you that nothing could be farther from the truth – as modern “relativism” isn’t relative at all. When compared relatively, some cultures, civilizations, and even individuals can indeed be considered superior to others. Some nations are happy, peaceful, prosperous, and long-lived. Others are brutal, war-torn, poverty stricken and ephemeral. Whether the purpose of a nation is: 1.) Self-perpetuation or; 2.) Protecting its citizens’ rights and freedoms, the former are unquestionably superior to the latter -- relatively speaking. Modern “relativism,” though, scrupulously avoids such comparisons, stating categorically that all things are equal. (Except Western civilization, which is thoroughly wicked. Isn’t it neat how “relativists” think in absolute terms, betimes?)

 

Modern relativism, alas, will be with us until the last relativist discovers -- preferably through firsthand experience -- that pork and plutonium are not equally nourishing. As for the EOL and DNA schools: I’d suggest gladiatorial combat, but it’s probably better (and more moral) to pity -- and ignore -- the benighted souls. Fortunately for those of us who are interested in piecing together what really happened, rather than feeding our own prejudices, a few brave souls have taken great pains to disperse the artificial mist dividing East and West. Giving the lie to Kipling’s bold assertion, they’ve demonstrated that the twain have oft met, and under interesting circumstances, as often as not.

 

The most recent of these is British historian David Nicolle, Ph.D. Whereas Dr. Nicolle’s name is hardly a household word; the quality of his work speaks for itself. Most of it, to the best of my knowledge, is confined to a few excellent volumes in Osprey’s Men at Arms and Elite series – a shame, as he deserves a broader audience. Being exhaustively researched (many of the photos were taken by the author in situ, during his travels, and the bibliographies are guaranteed to occupy the curious for months) and beautifully illustrated by Angus McBride, Nicolle’s “no-frills” military histories are a feast for minds and eyes alike. My only criticism is that he leans a little too far in the EOL direction (excusable in a scholar whose interest in his subject is both passionate and genuine, mind you), but ours is not a perfect world, after all.

 

I first became aware of his work during the mid-‘80s, when I purchased and read Arthur and the Anglo-Saxon Wars, The Age of Charlemagne, and The Vikings.

 

To say that I was deeply and favorably impressed would be a gross understatement. Here was a man –a respectable and legitimate scholar, at that -- who was neither a dismayed classicist, apologizing for the Dark Ages as if they were an embarrassing stain on the fabric of European history; nor a “Gothomaniac,” yearning for some mythical “Golden Age” of heroic barbarism. Here was a man who studied – objectively and rationally – the rise and fall of various tribes and nations, their strengths and weaknesses, their influence upon their neighbors, and their neighbors’ influence upon them. Having suffered the “slings and arrows” of SCA stupidity for years, I came to think of Dr. Nicolle an oasis of truth in an intellectual/historical desert: a man who wrote of the Middle Ages as they were; not “as they should have been.”  

 

A few years later, I obtained Hungary and the Fall of Eastern Europe, The Normans, and Attila and the Nomad Hordes. At the time, I was an avid student of Asian martial arts; albeit one whose previous and ongoing study of history, archaeology, linguistics, genetics and cultural anthropology (at times, academic; at others, independent) led him to question not only the wisdom of his putative teachers, but that of the recognized “authorities” in the field, as well. At best, most of the aforementioned “authorities” were bigots. At worst, they were fools, liars, intellectual cowards, or completely impervious to facts.

 

Nicolle to the rescue, once again!

 

Here was a man who, to the best of my knowledge, had never taken a marital arts course in his life. He had, however, studied archaeology and history, as a result of which – contrary to Draeger and Smith’s assertions – he noted that the “barbarians” of the steppes “gave as good as they got,” exercising an equal (if not opposite) influence on Chinese culture and technology in the process.

 

Smith eventually conceded  -- however grudgingly -- that the Manchu were “warriors, in their own right.”

 

Right charitable (if slightly condescending) of him, that...

Nicolle, on the other hand, pointed out that Turco-Mongol strategy, military technology, and martial acumen usually eclipsed those of their “civilized” subjects; and that acculturation and absorption (both civil, rather than martial processes, incidentally) did more to liberate the Chinese from foreign oppression than any number of renegade Shao-lin monks or shady “triads.”

With all due respect to the self-styled lo han and the spiritual descendants of the lin kuei, I’ll note that in the absence of popular discontent (ultimately, the Yuan and Ch’ing dynasties owed their respective collapses to the selfsame, unruly critter), neither group could have succeeded as it did – for better or worse.

The very notion of “waves” of this sort flowing in one direction or another is, sadly, every bit as alien to the deracinated, modern “post-American American” as the notion of objective reality. Like a millennial Byzantine, he envies the barbarians at the gates, but has neither the balls to join them, nor the intellect to recognize the threat they present.

 

This bring us to Rene Grousset’s Empire of the Steppes, a sadly – and perhaps fatally -- neglected book

Grousset, being a modern Frenchman – and closet commie; one suspects; it “goes with the territory,” after all -- decided that the flux of Eurasian history was irreparably disrupted by Euro-colonialism, and that “prehistory” ended with the founding of the late, unlamented USSR, and with Mao’s de facto ascent to the throne of the “Middle Kingdom.”

Como se dice, “Fumbling on the one-yard line?”

For all that Grousset never foresaw the collapse of the USSR; the PRC’s gradual shift from communism to fascism; or the pan-Islamic resurgence, Empire of the Steppes is mandatory reading for anyone with a genuine interest in bypassing the East/West rockpile  -- not to mention “grokking” the dichotomy between mutually beneficial interaction and irreconcilable differences.

Defining “irreconcilable differences,” though, is a challenge in and of itself.

In the absence of physical and philosophical inquiry, it’s damn-near impossible, as a matter of fact.

As nearly as I can tell, Jonathan D. Spence chases neither rabbit. His magnum opus – a translation of the autobiography of the Chinese emperor, Kiang-Hsi – leaves Gurdjieff’s Meetings With Remarkable Men “sucking wind,” insofar as it paints a portrait of a truly remarkable man; a man who -- on the surface -- was one of the most powerful men on earth, but understood his own mortality and limits, all the same.

Emperor of China: A Self Portrait of Kiang Hsi is an edited collection of the journals, letters, and edicts of Kiang Hsi; as genuine a “renaissance man” as Washington, Franklin or Jefferson – especially when his “barbarian” origins are taken into account.

Kiang Hsi, the son of a nomadic, steppe/taiga conqueror, refused to disarm his newly acquired subjects – especially the non-Han Miao and Yi : “Without their bows, how will they feed their children?” in his own words. He likewise refused to disarm the Han-proper, noting that all of his subjects (he was no republican, admittedly) had the right to defend themselves against the depredations of bandits and rebels.

Aside from noting that a lomg-dead Eastern despot trusted his conquered subjects more than the US government trusts the “governed,” from whose consent it purports to derive its powers, I’ll shut up and leave the Gentle Reader to do his own reading and draw his own conclusions.             

 

Religion and Politics, or:Silly Season” is Ycumen In

 

Well -- almost. In a few days, it’ll be time for the “sheeple” to traipse off, baaing and bleating, to the political slaughterhouse. Depending upon my mood, I may or may not be among them. Mags plans to resort to write-ins, as a protest of sorts. I’ll accompany her to the precinct, but unless Baldwin makes it onto the ballot in Georgia, I won’t be voting for president.

 

We both refuse to vote for Barr – politically speaking, his support for the patriot act is “the sin that will not be forgiven, in this world or the next,” as far as Maggie and I are concerned. Assuming that the “Islamo-fascists” really do want to “take our freedom,” the patriot act is sheer – if bitterly ironic – absurdity.

 

“Envy thou not the oppressor, and choose none of his ways.” (Proverbs 3:31)

 

Nor will we vote for McCain or Obama. Neither represents our concerns, our moral values, or our political convictions, and we’d rather not vote at all – or even “waste” our votes -- than share in the responsibility for electing either.

 

I’ve heard all the boring, panicky arguments (all of them from Republicans) against doing either – and dismissed them.

 

I made my choice during the primary. That choice was Ron Paul. Unfortunately for Mr. Paul, the Republicans’ dominant, neocon wing ignored him, then maligned him, misrepresented his positions, and finally resorted to insulting his “followers,” while referring to the rest of the scabby, diseased, ersatz-conservative herd as “supporters.”

 

This, by the way, was an interesting choice of words, and indicative of unbelievable degrees of denial and projection. It was propagandistic wordplay worthy of a Clinton-era Democrat, and a sterling example of the neocons’ penchant for attributing their own negative traits to their perceived “enemies.”

 

Well congratulations, boys. You’ve just turned your perceived enemies into real ones.

 

“Devise not evil against thy neighbor, seeing he dwelleth securely beside thee. Strive not with a man without cause, if he hath done thee no harm. (Proverbs 3:29-30)

 

“Followers?” Interesting. Ron Paul’s campaign (while severely hampered by McCain-Feingold) was largely a grass-roots effort. Freedom-lovers –whether conservative or libertarian – aren’t known for being “followers.” We aren’t the ones who constantly squeal about the need for “leadership” – you neocons are.

 

Worse still, after 2003, anyone who deviated from the party line in any way was simply dismissed as a “turncoat,” a “traitor,” “unpatriotic,” or worse. It goes without saying that these are unforgivable insults, all more so because they’re lies. No true patriot – no man with any backbone at all, for that matter – will ever vote for anyone who’s blackened his name in this way.

 

Neocons, though, being neither true patriots, nor men (except in the physiological sense; and this includes their women, as well), simply don’t understand this. But without offering even a hint of an apology, they now demand our votes. I’m not sure which is more disgusting: the sheer audacity or the implied sense of entitlement.

 

To hell with both. I respect neither. To steal a pet phrase from one of their sillier pundits, I’m going to be a “rugged individualist” and say, “Get bent. You need me far more than I need you – all the more so, because I don’t need you at all.”

 

So much for the “Well, those are your choices” argument. Once again: Get bent. I made my choice. Now be men enough to accept the consequences of your choices – even if said consequences include losing a few votes.

 

To those who whine, “But the Democrats will win”: yet another “Get bent.” You should have taken that possibility into account, and picked a less repulsive candidate. One who opposes gun control, open borders, tax-funded abortion, and rampant government growth might have been a good idea, as your support base is ostensibly conservative. Unfortunately, you neocons aren’t exactly renowned for the quality of your ideas. Well, stupidity carries a heavy price, babydolls. Study deeply upon this.

 

“But what about the war on terror?” is the lamest plea I’ve yet heard. “Terror” is a tactic, boys and girls. Like fuckwit Obama’s pet shibboleth, “change,” it’s a fucking process. Treating abstractions as concretes, and processes as objects has always led to failure and will always lead to failure, as it seeks to deny the nature of reality.

 

“Terror” exists, it has always existed, and it will always exist (the Assyrians were masters of the art, as were the Romans, Huns, Avars, Vikings, Pechenegs, Magyars, Mongols, medieval Scots, feudal Japanese, and Timurids, just to name a few), as all but the most ignorant know very well. Like war, poverty, and intoxicants (upon all of which the US has declared “war” at one time or another – with a 0-3 record, I might add) “terror” is simply a fact of life. It is no more preventable or eradicable than death itself, and the best we can do is hold it at bay.

 

“Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” (Matthew 6:34)

 

Call me “Mr. Skeptic,” but I don’t think complete dependency upon Mid-East oil for energy and Chinese goods for life’s essentials serve the purpose of attending to the evil of the day very well. Nor do I consider open borders and unlimited immigration the marks of wisdom or strategic genius. “War on Terror?” Yeah, right. You lot couldn’t win a barroom brawl, for the love of God…

 

Next, we come the “But there’s no perfect candidate!” ploy, so beloved of Herman “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims” Cain.

 

Ignoring the impossibility of taking a man who actually believes that the IRA, UDA, ETA, Tamil Tigers, Sendero Luminoso and FARC are Muslims, seriously (either he’s monumentally ignorant, he’s a liar, or he thinks you’re stupid – Hmmm. That sounds vaguely familiar…), I’ll call bullshit on his assertion. It’s utterly false. What he’s attempting, in essence, is to persuade his audience to abandon their own standards and adopt his: in other words, to settle for far less than second best.

 

Before my wife and I made up our minds to support Ron Paul, we thoroughly investigated his voting record and his political platform. The only thing either of us could hold against him (besides his hairstyle) were a few minor matters of application – not of principle. In short, he was our “perfect” candidate. Sorry, Herman.

 

“When sinners entice thee, consent thou not.” (Proverbs 1:10)

 

I’ll conclude with the “wasted vote” non-issue. Just bear with me: I’m one of those ever-pesky Christians – so pesky, in fact, that unlike certain ostensibly “Christian” talk-show hosts, I’m not squeamish about mentioning the name Jesus -- so this will take some explaining. I’m not a very good Christian, and I’ll be the first to admit it. I do, however, recognize the ultimate authority of God – even above the ultimate authority of the US government, the UN, the Republican Party, AIPAC, and the latest winner of American Idolator.

 

“Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.” (Exodus 20:3)

 

‘Nuff said?

 

Scripture often refers to the necessity of social order, and the importance of cooperating with temporal authorities in the interest of justice and stability. No Christian, least of all myself, objects to just and limited government. Rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s is second nature to us. Unfortunately, “Caesar” has become increasingly demanding of late. Not content with his lot, he covets God’s more and more – even to the point of demanding that we hold his law above God’s. For the first hundred-and-forty years of our nation’s existence, his law and God’s were seldom, if ever, at odds.

 

Welcome to the wonderful world of change. Where once “Caesar” sought only to prevent the establishment of a state-sponsored religion, he now demands that we abandon the free exercise and expression of our own in public. Where once “Caesar” taxed us to keep the government running, he now taxes us and uses our money to support unconscionable causes. Where once Caesar asked only that we defend our country, he demanded, during three of the last four major wars; that we take up arms and strive without cause against those who had done us no harm.

 

Even Caesar’s current war, in shifting away from Afghanistan (home of the Taliban, and hidey-hole of Osama bin Laden), to Iraq, and thence to remaking the Middle East in our own image is only a hair’s breadth away from demanding that we put aside God’s law in favor of his. There’s no draft – yet, thank God.

 

Non-existent “yellow-cake” uranium. Non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Non-existent ties between Iraq and September 11. Even the feeble “Yeah, but Hussein was a monster” excuse rings false. He was always a monster, and we knew it from day one –even when we supported him against Iran, during the ‘80s.

 

“Enter not into the path of the wicked, and go not in the way of evil men.” (Proverbs 4:14)

 

And yet the new “war” widens and continues, and American boys – some of them Christian – will eventually be pressed into service to continue it.

 

“These six things doth the LORD hate; yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood. An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.” (Proverbs 6:16-19)

 

Taking all of this into account, I refuse to vote Rebublican, as it means more of the same. The same party that abandoned a just war and duped us into an unjust one. The same party that erases our boundaries and culture, while “nation building” abroad. The same hubristic party that slandered and marginalized the only candidate who might have made a difference – because he wasn’t “with the program.” To vote for them is to condone their actions; just another way of helping Caesar usurp God, and I refuse to do that.

 

“He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord.” (Proverbs 17:15)

 

  As for Mr. “Change”?

 

Not on your life. Anyone (and I do mean anyone, not just Republicans) who treats a process as an object is an utter moron and beneath contempt; the more so if he treats it as an object of worship. For this reason alone, I’d never even consider voting for the Democrats’ would-be messiah. Add the facts that the Democratic Party has long been rotten to the core; that their “Golden Boy’s” “clinging to guns and religion” crack was a display of arrogance and ignorance worthy of Bush himself, and draw your own conclusions, Gentle Reader.

 

Obama symbolizes the very culture of self-worship and unaccountability that has rotted the country from within. Moreover, I’m none too fond of puffed-up, substance-free, semi-retarded megalomaniacs. Suffice to say that I’m no more impressed with the “leadership” qualities of a cliché-spouting simpleton than I am with those of a man best known for being captured by an enemy; and for voting to disarm his countrymen, abolish his nation’s borders, and silence dissent. Both represent the new, secular, statist god – to whom I refuse to bow, as I much prefer the real God.

 

See you at the polls. I’ll be the one shaking his head sadly and laughing out loud, by turns.

October 12, 2008

Fun With Shelving

Being a meandering relation of the thoughts to which teaching one’s wife the fine art of “wowing” the rubes gives rise. 

"OK, hon. Just do it – now.”

Mags took a deep breath, inhaling through her nose as I’d told her. Suddenly, her hand shot downward. She lowered her hips, twisted into the blow, and exhaled with an audible hiss. The next sound was that of the board -- now neatly halved – clattering to the pavement. Her pinched, apprehensive facial expression disappeared, replaced by wide-eyed astonishment and then childlike delight in the space of a few heartbeats.

“Honey, I did it!” she said, clapping her hands together as wonder sparkled in her eyes.

“You sure did,” I replied, laughing. Well, indeed ye’ did/ don’t ye’ know ye did/ too-me-right-fol-loo-ra-lassie/ well, indeed ye’ did, I thought, as I stepped forward and hugged her, nearly lifting her off the ground.

An hour earlier, we’d returned from a gun show at the North Atlanta Trade Center, and the now-broken board had still been part of a 1”x12”x6’ plank we’d purchased from Home Depot on our way home.

We’d gone to the show in hopes of selling jewelry and generating advance interest in Maggie’s forthcoming TEOTWAWKI novel by handing out “teasers” from the opening chapter. In other words; we aimed to erase the word “starving” from the term “starving artist.” Given the present states of the economy and the publishing industry, both were ambitious undertakings, but –to my mind, at any rate – reasonably successful. She’d sold enough jewelry to cover the fee for our table and defray the cost of the “toys” upon which we invariably load up whenever we attend a show. And while reading for pleasure isn’t a preferred pastime of the gun show crowd (or of the younger members, at any rate), she’d managed to give away most of the promotional material, as well. Needless to say, I was very proud of her, and of the opinion that she’d earned a treat of sorts.

A week earlier, we’d rented a passel of movies from Blockbuster (as neither of us has watched television in well over two years, books, movies and music have become our primary forms of passive entertainment), among them an indie release entitled The Foot Fist Way -- a literal rendering of the Korean term Tae Kwon Do, as the astute reader will note. In a nutshell, the Foot Fist Way chronicles the misadventures of a typical, not-too-bright strip-mall martial arts instructor from North Carolina. It’s a comedy with a “documentary” feel, and is to martial arts what This is Spinal Tap and A Mighty Wind were to heavy metal and folk music, respectively; or what Best in Show was to the AKC crowd: an affectionate kiss of death.

Having trained in various martial arts -- on and off, mind you -- since 1994, I’ve met the “real world” counterparts of the dramatis personae more times than I care to count. (Embarrassingly enough, I’ve actually been a few of ‘em at one time or another, but that’s neither here nor there.) As a result of this “interesting” background, I was laughing my ass off (literally rolling on the floor in convulsions of compassionate scorn and self-mocking mirth) from beginning to end. Mags, on the other hand, didn’t get much of it. I can’t fault her for that, as her martial arts experience is confined to “playing” with me when I’m in a good mood, and to a few hours of top-notch, down-to-earth instruction at two Animal List BBQs.

In short, she’s never been exposed to the KKK (“killer klown krowd”), as I’ve dubbed martial artists who don’t exactly have a “kung fu grip” on reality. TFFW being, in essence, 90+ minutes of inside jokes at the expense of said lunatic fringe, much of it simply didn’t register with her. She has, however, seen a few photographs and videotapes of Yours Truly during his “tofu-eatin’ Buddhist hippie” phase, as a result of which she mentioned that she’d like to see yer humble, Hillbilly narrator “do some Karate stuff.”


Paradox time.


As the Gentle Reader may have gathered, I have serious misgivings about the “puir bit crathur” that substitutes martial arts for a real life. Robert W. Smith (a.k.a. John Gilbey) and others have examined the phenomenon in greater depth than I could; ergo, I’ll steer the curious towards their observations/comments and continue with my own.


Having expressed my suspicion of those who maintain a “fear/flirt” relationship with Thanatos (and I’ve walked a mile of two in their boots -- poorly crafted, uncomfortable, and ridiculous-looking, they’re the spiritual/philosophical trappings of a platform-soled, ‘70s pimp, and indicative of the same level of consciousness), I’ll now reverse myself and posit that “do[ing] some Karate stuff” without a good reason denigrates both the art and its practitioners.


To be sure, I’ll willingly and cheerfully “play” with my wife (in the absence of genuine joie de vive, the “sword that preserves life” rapidly deteriorates into a nicked, rusty, blood-caked instrument of state-and caste-sanctioned murder – an overpriced version of a pipe, ice-pick or suppressed SMG), but I won’t amuse her.


I respect the art, the men who taught it to me -- and the men who taught them – too much to cross that particular line.


In modern America, landing a weak, ineffectual blow a fraction of a second before one’s opponent lands a weak, ineffectual blow guarantees an electroplated trophy. In medieval Okinawa, by way of comparison, not pulping a samurai’s knee, breaking his neck, rupturing his eardrums, or gouging out one or both of his eyes guaranteed that the karateka would be killed, and his wife and children raped, murdered, and/or sold into slavery. In its original form, Karate was the “final word” of the (presumably) powerless against the powerful – the ultimate kinesthetic expression of the modern Special Forces motto: De oppresso liber.


And not a whit of entertainment value to any of it.


I’ll admit to having taken up martial arts for all the wrong reasons. In nutshell, I’d planned to track down an ex-girlfriend and send whomever she was shacked up with at the time to the emergency room. Nothing personal, mind you (I’d neither met the guy nor done enough digging to determine his position in the “lineup,” as it were), just a bit of catharsis via anti-chivalry. After a few months, though, training became an end in itself. It also helped me to calm down (I’d been in full-bore psycho mode for nearly five years when first I threw on a pair of white pyjamas) and put things into perspective. As I’d benefited from it so much, it occurred to me that using it to trounce some gobshite I didn’t know from Adam would exhibit profound ingratitude on my part.


Before I continue, let me state – in no uncertain terms – that I’m neither an angel nor a stranger to violence and human nastiness in general. And I certainly won’t claim never to have misused the art. I’ll readily admit to having provoked many a poor, less-than-brilliant (and less-than-sober) bastard into “escalating” -- solely for the pleasure of seeing him back down and/or run off. Naturally, I only subjected the overtly aggressive ones to this particular treatment, as a convoluted chain of rationalizations allowed me to don a halo of righteousness (to these eyes, at any rate) when doing so. I was only acting in “self-defense,” after all. N’est ce pas?


Yeah, right: “And the bull rolled off the nickel!” as my great grandma often said. The Gentle Reader certainly knows better; and I suppose I did, as well – even then. Beyond the fact that intimidating obnoxious fuckwits is an unsavory pastime (and one that -- as historian John Garraty observed of slavery -- degrades the practitioner as much as the victim); beyond the fact that the “thrill” wears off very quickly; and beyond that fact that abusing a method of self-cultivation eventually gnaws at the conscience, my training ultimately changed my attitude towards violence.


I’m not repudiating it, by any stretch of the imagination. It has its uses, and the notion that it “never solves anything” is sheer idiocy. Try telling the Swiss otherwise – if you don’t mind being laughed at. As it happens, the intelligent application of violence in a narrow defile near Morgarten (15 Nov. 1315) solved their problem with the Austrians for quite some time…


As history abounds with similar examples, there’s nothing to gain from belaboring the point. Sometimes, violence (or the credible threat thereof) does indeed solve problems. End of story. This, unfortunately, brings us to a veritable amphisbaena of a problem: the double-headed “fight fallacy” that has become so irritatingly commonplace in modern America. One head of this singularly loathsome reptile hisses that violence never solves anything – while the other hisses that it solves everything.


In the case of a clear-cut bully/aggressor, violence is often the only solution. When last I checked, entreaties to morality and common decency had rather a dismal success record against megalomaniacs, sociopaths and rabid dogs.


Unfortunately, life isn’t a Zoroastrian battle between the irredeemably wicked and the incorruptibly saintly. (Having never met an incorruptibly saintly person, by the way, I categorize them as I would unicorns, flying horses and fairy godmothers: charming superstitions).

When the “magic wand” of actuality dispels the glamours of media mythology and propaganda, pissing contests between the irredeemably wicked and the irredeemably wicked (I no more doubt the existence of this particular class of critter than I do that of the IRS or FEMA, for the record…) or groups of “just plain folks” with conflicting interests are more evident than epic contests between opposing moral archetypes.


Jackals fighting vultures for scraps of carrion. Two groups of “the great unwashed,” both with legitimate grievances against (and equally illegitimate demands made of) each other; both sides egged on by ersatz godlings and minor-league Machiavellis.


“Only this and nothing more,” as Poe wrote. 


In these cases, violence seldom, if ever solves anything – except the short-term problems of a third party with interests of its own. Backing one side or the other is tantamount to attempting to introduce “democracy” to nations, the occupants of which have yet to produce a “homegrown” Magna Charta; or to assay polishing turds in a rock-tumbler: At best, the would-be dispenser of “righteousness” (or economic expediency) ends up with ruined machinery and crude fertilizer. At worst, he ends up with post-colonial, Sub-Saharan Africa.


In either case, he learns to ignore the “human cost” of his decisions and behavior.


This, incidentally, is at the root of my fondness for the Asian martial arts. Paradoxically, their emphasis on subduing the ego and controlling the id also demands personal and social responsibility of the practitioner -- accepting that actions have consequences, and that violence has a readily observable “human cost.”


I can speak only for myself, but in my case, training in martial arts actually shook the dust from my long-neglected capacity for empathy. Studying the human body’s strengths and weaknesses (and learning to exploit them) served to elevate my awareness of and appreciation for both. As my skill increased and I realized how easily I could kick others’ asses, I simultaneously realized how easily my own ass could be kicked by a person with sufficient experience and/or training. The more I trained, the more styles I observed, and the more fighters I met, the more evident it became that ours is truly a “rock-scissors-paper” world. It was quite a humbling epiphany. It was also physically painful at times – another empathy builder. (Being on the receiving end of certain techniques does wonders for one’s ability to “walk a mile in the other guy’s shoes” before applying them. There’s nothing quite like being put into a “tap out now, or lose the use of the limb for a few weeks” submission hold to encourage questions like, “Does this asshole really deserve this?” when confronted with a jughead whose belligerence far exceeds his combative capability.) 


During my first two years of training, my late father worried that I wouldn’t bother to ask myself questions of that sort. Given my temper at the time, I can’t fault him for it, but luckily he was wrong. Da himself had more than a nodding acquaintance with violence. He’d been in the Marines during the ‘50s, as a result of which he’d learned the Corps’ pre-Tae Kwon Do hand-to-hand combat (read: the good stuff) and done his share of shore patrol. After passing the bar exam, he’d renewed his acquaintance with the hairy side of life via indigent defense work for Clayton County. This necessitated taking the cases of those whose aggression/assets ratio averaged, say, 10:0, and whose “anger management” skills made me look like the Dalai Lama, in comparison. Needless to say, for Da, the outcome of clubbing a man or bouncing an ashtray off his head was neither theoretical nor theatrical. In his world, the righteous hero didn’t light a cigarette and exit the local saloon unmolested, striding through the swinging doors (while the formerly rowdy crowd held their hats to their chests in reverent silence) after putting the local bully into a coma for shagging his wife. On the contrary: in Da’s world, the poor bastard usually ended up in the clink, facing a ten-year minimum mandatory sentence for aggravated whatthefuckever. It was a point he never tired of driving home, sometimes subtly and sometimes with the finesse of a rabid bull elephant.


One afternoon in 1995, whilst practicing kumite and randori with a friend, I experienced the unmistakable sensation of being watched. Turning around, I noticed my father staring at us intently. Eventually, he left and I thought no more of the matter. Later that evening, though, he approached me and said, with his characteristic bluntness: “You realize that if you ever use that stuff on anyone, you’re in a world of shit, don’t you?” He then handed me a copy of the Georgia Criminal Code, the relevant pages and passages conveniently bookmarked. Even had the training failed to impress the value and fragility of human life upon me, this abrupt introduction to the terms “aggravated felony” and “minimum mandatory sentence” motivated me to elevate my consciousness – or at least to abstain from ripping bozos’ arms off and shoving ‘em up their asses for no good reason.


“Do some karate stuff,” eh? Sure, hon. Lemme jes’ send some fuckwit to the ICU for your amusement…


Fortunately, they worked in concert, as a result of which the focus of my training changed. Certainly, I was still interested in the combative and self-defense aspects of the art, but the fear, pain, rage and desire for revenge that motivated me to train in the first place began to dissipate in proportion to my progress. I never succeeded in banishing them entirely, mind you (and I’m glad for that -- pain, fear and anger alert us to the fact that something is wrong, after all), but I’d learned to manage them in ways I never could before “taking the plunge” and tying on the obi. I don’t suppose it’s at all obvious (evidence leads me to conclude the contrary, as a matter of fact), but the more competent one becomes at violence, the less inclined he is to use it. Competence builds confidence, which, in turn, alleviates fear. And the sad truth is; like most of our species, I was a “fear biter” during my teens and early twenties.


As Dave, the man, reined in the frightened boy/animal formerly known as “Jeff,” however, he became less interested in what he could do to other people, and more interested in what he could do, period. As I’m not a particularly “spiritual” person (and don’t trust those who claim to be, for the record), the physical elements of the art still appealed to me very much. I enjoyed the “moving meditation” of kata as much as the next guy, and was (counterproductively, I might add…) proud of my growing ability to focus solely upon counting my breaths during seiza  -- the day I made it all the way to five without noticing that my nose itched, getting miffed at the guy next to me for giving me ringworm whilst practicing wristlocks, or wondering when I’d last changed my oil was a leg-wetter worthy of Old Faithful -- but the euphoria following a hardcore workout, during which my own sweat plastered my gi to my body and left my hair a mass of dripping, unruly tendrils was every bit as satisfying. Obviously, I needed to strike a balance of sort. But how?


The answer fairly screamed itself into my ear – even as my nerve endings did some screaming of their own -- the day I tested for my advanced blue belt. It was, as I recall, a clear and sunny afternoon in the summer of 1995, a little over a year into my training. I’d bopped into the dojo, at one with the universe (if still at odds with the government) and happy as a hog in slops; wanting only to increase my meager store of combative know-how, do the art justice -- and find a plausible excuse for copping a feel off a lady I found strangely alluring, for all that she wasn’t even a Celt. (Who knows? Maybe it was the pair o’ Grade-A “sweater cows” she sported. I’ve long been an agrarian at heart, after all…)


“Bean,” says I to myself, “who could hope for a lovelier day? The sun is shinin’, birds are singin’ in the high-tension wires (funny how wind whistles over and around pure carbon, now ain’t it?), an’ the air is as clear as Bill Clinton’s thought processes ain’t. Ah! And rear bear-hugs, by God! Bless her heart, she’s none too skilled at defending against that particular attack! Well let’s change that, shall we? It’s for her ultimate benefit, after all…”


After jamming my street clothes into my weather-beaten surplus duffel bag in an untidy wad (and jamming myself into my gi in an equally untidy wad), I flexed my muscles in the dressing-room mirror, faked a few punches and kicks at imaginary enemies, derived shamefully macho pride from the fact that adjusting my “cup” to accommodate my Johnson required both “real world” ingenuity and abstract mathematical formulae I’d not used since high school; and sauntered into the dojo-proper.


Only to find it completely empty. 


Now being the only one to attend class was nothing unusual -- I was a fanatic, and trained several hours a day, every day, rain or shine. When rain or cold reared their ugly heads, though, the dojo was often as deserted as a titty bar on Cheshire Bridge Road. Shugyo and kokoro – alas and alack – are alien concepts in the Land of the Day-Glo Satin Gi; so had it been rainy or cold outside, I wouldn’t have been at all surprised. As, however, this day was neither, I can’t account for the absence of would-be budoka – I can only recount it.


“Well just damn!” says I. “I ain’t gonna figure out if that heathen Chinee calf-pinch thingy works or not – not today at any rate! Piss up a rope! Now my whole afternoon’s well an’ rightly fucked!”


Had I been more observant, I’d have noticed that the dojo was not, in fact, completely empty, for all that it seemed so at first. Would only that it had been… As it happened, though, my instructor had quietly entered the room and begun leafing through a plastic box of index cards. Apparently, what he saw didn’t make him happy.


“Bean,” he said, “If we had a dollar for every hour on this card, we could pay off the national debt. You plan on testing any time soon?” He also mentioned that there were more respectable ways of earning a black belt than having one’s current color disappear beneath a layer of electrical tape (one stripe for every ten classes).


In truth, I had indeed been planning to test –someday. Having only passed my green belt exam by the skin of my teeth, though (doing fifty-eight pushups in one minute -- immediately after a two-mile run -- and spending the next ten “Ralphing” up my pre-test Amphetacarb™ energy drink were the high points of the evening…), I’d been playing it safe ever since. I wouldn’t even consider testing unless I was sure I had my rank’s requirements down, pat.


Brian, though, wasn’t having it, and in retrospect I can’t fault him. Confidence and courage are two character traits every karateka should strive to cultivate, and playing it safe develops neither. Without challenge, without the possibility of failure, there is no uncertainty. And I can think of no better definition of courage than the ability to remain calm when confronted with fear and uncertainty.


“You’re way overdue,” he said. “And it just so happens that we have the dojo all to ourselves today.”


Thus began my test, under the singularly evil grin of my instructor – whose mood seemed to have improved markedly.


Until that day, I’d hated testing in a large group. For some reason, I’d imagine that all eyes were upon me, scrutinizing every move and misstep. That day, though, testing alone seemed infinitely worse. There was nothing to distract my instructor, no crowd in which to disappear. Previously, I’d hated crowds, but I suddenly realized that they’re actually a very useful medium of camouflage. Now, however, I was in the open, with nowhere to hide. It isn’t strictly germane to the topic at hand, but this element of the test was very beneficial. I’d long had a near-phobia when it came to crowds, but after that test, it simply disappeared. Interestingly enough, the experience also reinforced my ability to “take care of business” when everything was up to me and me alone.


This came later, though. The test itself was absolutely harrowing. We went through self-defense techniques, rolling and falling, combinations, free sparring, six kata, and finally, breaking. My first two breaks were relatively easy: two boards (no shims or spacers) with a spinning side kick, and a “speed break” (board supported from below only – no top hand) with a reverse punch. The third break was the problem. At my belt rank, the sensei wanted to see what I could do, so he asked me if I thought I was up to taking out two boards with the same punch.  Being a cocky little shit, I answered in the affirmative, flipped my hair out of my eyes, and grinned as cavalierly as fatigue allowed. Assuming a front stance and summoning up loud kiai, I effortlessly broke the boards – and the middle knuckle of my right hand.


I passed the test and spent the next six weeks nursing the injury. The experience, however, had left me with a persistent urge to take breaking to the next level. On my next day off, I drove out to the now-defunct Century Martial Arts Supply outlet on Peachtree Industrial, and picked up a copy of “Hei Long’s” (an obvious pseudonym) Iron Hand of the Dragon’s Touch, which, despite its uh, “interesting” title, is not a B-grade kung fu movie, but rather a B-grade kung fu book. And not one I recommend.


It’s taken quite a while to undo the damage I inflicted upon myself whilst putting Goodman Long’s method into practice, but I didn’t know any better at the time. Besides, it was, in all fairness, far less punishing than traditional Japanese hand conditioning -- however frightening the implications of that statement. I’ve long since discovered Chinese iron palm training, and whereas I’m a half-assed, sporadic practitioner thereof, I’ll concede its undeniable superiority. I benefited more from my first month of practice than from six months of damn-near ruining my hands on a makiwara, but to reiterate, I didn’t know any better at the time. If nothing else, it was a start.


Fast forward to the present. Until last Saturday, I hadn’t broken a board in years; beating up inanimate objects having lost most of its appeal during my mid-thirties. I haven’t stopped conditioning my hands, mind you. I still practice iron palm (sporadically and half-assedly, as previously noted), confining the pounding to a homemade beanbag, and massaging liberal doses of dit da jow into my hands before and after each session. The canvas covered boards, however, have long since been put to more productive use, and corning my knuckles in first-degree-burn-inducing brine now seems like a surreal dream – a hazy recollection of a time in my life during which I wasn’t playing with a full deck.


My hands are softer and more flexible now, but they’re actually stronger and – oddly enough – more sensitive. My foreknuckles, while still slightly enlarged and roughened, no longer sport calluses. The tendinitis that plagued me until very recently has disappeared, and even the bone-growth on my wrist is shrinking. Not a bad tradeoff, to my way of thinking…


And yes, I can still break boards.


When we returned from the gun show, I took the plank into the garage and cut it into 1’ sections with the circular saw. Mags steadied it as I sawed, but her facial expression suggested that she wondered what the hell I was up to. Finally, she came out and asked.


“You’ll see,” I said, smiling as pleasantly as I could. As I’ve mentioned, she’d done a bang-up job of selling our jewelry at the show, and it had since occurred to me that I could “do some karate stuff” without hurting anyone or cheapening the art.


I crossed the driveway, stood two cinderblocks on end, and placed the board atop them. Kneeling before them, I raised my right hand and split the board with a shuto (referred to by the culturally illiterate as a “karate chop”). It was an easy break, really. Nothing to it. It’s purely a matter of form and physics at that level. I noted, though, for all that I hadn’t broken in years, it was even easier than I remembered. There was no pain at all – not even a mild sting – and in truth, I’d hardly been conscious of the impact.


“Oh my God!” gasped my wife, as if she’d seen Moses parting the red sea, and not her beer-guzzling ne’er-do-well of a husband halving a piece of lumber.


(I found this funny as hell, as on the day after our wedding, Maggie had seen me break a chopstick with a folded piece of paper, under the tutelage of my Bro, Justin Kocher. Justin had spent years trying to convince me that it wasn’t a mere parlor trick, but knowing his sense of humor, I suspected him of trying to put one over on me. Moreover, my late granduncle Jim was a superb amateur magician, and having learned a similar bit of legerdemain from him decades before, I was even more suspicious.


Jim’s illusion consisted of surreptitiously extending his index finger alongside the lower edge of the paper, and breaking a pencil with said digit. Justin’s feat, on the other hand, was no illusion. Emphasizing the importance of form, focus and – in this case – “snap,” he coached me along until, on my tenth attempt, I did it.

With the zeal of which only the newly converted are capable, I grabbed a chopstick and a piece of paper, and set out to spread the word. My first prospective proselyte was my friend Raja, who (being many years younger; more inclined towards regular practice; and unable to escape a certain crazed Hillbilly, owing to a freak accident of positioning) managed it on his fifth or sixth try. As Mags was present the entire time, I’m at a loss to account for her surprise.)


Next, I assumed a very low horse stance and broke another with a palm strike. If anything, it was even easier than the first break. The expression on Maggie’s face, though, was priceless. She was clearly off-balance, and being the mischievous SOB I am, I couldn’t resist taking advantage of it.


“How’d you like to try it?” I asked.

“Oh, I don’t know, honey,” she replied, looking doubtful and apprehensive. “It looks pretty scary. Does it hurt?”

“Not if you do it correctly.”

“Well…”


And with that, I gave her a crash course in Board Breaking 101. I’ve shown Maggie a move or two in the past, and when she manages to focus her attention on the task at hand, she does rather well. Now I’m no Tony Jaa, and the Gracies have nothing to worry about (I’m a far too lazy, indifferent, and out-of-shape martial artist to pose any threat to the big boys) but I usually hit what I aim at, and I usually hurt what I hit. So much for my qualifications. I am, however, a halfway competent communicator, and was therefore able to teach her the rudiments without seeing her hands in plaster casts.


Obviously, her physical safety was of the utmost importance -- she’s my wife, and while I was admittedly having a bit of fun at her expense, I love her and didn’t want to see her injured. This, needless to say, absolutely shitcanned knuckle-blows. I’m one of those chauvinistic bastards who think women have no business punching at all; but lest the militant feminazis in the audience take up pitchforks and torches and lay siege to my house, I’ll add that with my bone structure, I have no business punching at all.


And I usually don’t. However counterintuitive the assertion, I’ve noticed that open-handed strikes are faster, less likely to result in injury to the one throwing them, and actually more powerful than blows with the fists. The “hammerfist” is the sole exception to the rule in my experience, but it isn’t as fast as the shuto, owing to the tension in the forearm. It’s also less telling, as the force of the blow is distributed across a larger surface area. This narrowed the choices down to the shuto and the palm strike (teisho).


Delivering the former from a kneeling position can be rather tricky for a complete beginner, so I opted for the latter. First, I ran her through some deep breathing, to relax her. When she was no longer visibly nervous, I had her assume a horse stance, and taught her to coordinate her breathing with her hip movements. Then, I showed her the basics of the strike, and had her put all three elements together during a few “dry runs.” Finally, I ran her through some “woo-woo” mental exercises I won’t recount, reminded her to aim three inches beyond the board, and asked if she was ready. She nodded and said, “I think so.”


“OK, hon. Just do it – now.”


Bam! The heel of her hand struck the board, which fell to the ground in two equal pieces. After congratulating her – and I can’t express how proud I was of her -- I picked up the remains and had a closer look. She’d done a fine job by any standard, but for a rank amateur, she’d performed it wonderfully. The break was as neat as if she’d split the wood with a hatchet, the lack of splintering indicating that she’d struck it dead center and directly along the grain.* For her first break, it was doubly impressive, as was the fact that she’d succeeded on her very first attempt – with a mere ten minutes’ prep-time.


I’m not terribly worried about 1’x1’ squares of shelving attacking Maggie, Gentle Reader (we’ve no resident poltergeists, to the best of my knowledge), but if ever they do, I know she can handle them. The most important thing to me was seeing her do it – even though I knew she could all along. Watching a person accomplish something he/she would previously have thought beyond his/her ability always leads to a feeling of great satisfaction –especially when that person is my wife. If ever she is hassled, though, it’s nice to know that an equally forceful strike to a skel’s nuts, floating rib, kidney or jaw** would give him something to ponder while she made her escape.


Next week, I think we’ll play around with the knifehand…


G’night and God bless.

* I’m almost loath to admit it, but the wonderful world of pugilism is actually home to a species of critter best referred to as the “breaking geek.” The “breaking geek” is the martial arts equivalent of the Star Wars fanboy – the kind of guy who actually knows that Han Solo’s name is the Norwegian third person singular male pronoun (han) welded to the Latin word for “alone” (solo). (No, I’m not a Star Wars fanboy, for the record. I just happen to speak a bit of Norwegian, and I’ve studied elementary Latin.)

His trademark is using his terrifyingly intimate knowledge of various woods (at times, one suspects him of actually having sex with certain trees) to “one up” other breakers – making them want to kill him in the process.

Hmm. Very impressive. But have you ever tried breaking the rare Tunisian tundra redwood? It’s close-grained and very curly – a true test of skill. Of course (polishing his fingernails on the front of his shirt) it’s also twenty dollars a square foot, and you need the right connections to get it. So I’ll understand if you haven’t…”

“Uh, Clarence? Could you jus’ set that there Georgia white pine down for a second? I’m fixin’ to test my fuckin’ skill on this here dipshit’s cranium.”

**Back in ’85, my late father (who was forty-seven at the time) sent a twenty-something, “urban cowboy” punk to Northside at the conclusion of a very short barfight. Not understanding that fucking with ex-marines isn’t terribly bright, he sucker punched my father and knocked him down – but not out, to his eventual sorrow. The kid ended up having his jaw wired for his pains, but avoided going to the pound for assault, as Daddy -- being a magnanimous sort -- reckoned the injury and medical bills were punishment enough, and opted not to press charges.

Charges or no, I (being a seventeen-year-old, borderline hood at the time) was very curious as to how he’d managed to put the guy on the ol’ soup-and-Slurpee diet. (God knows, I’d certainly tried to break other boys’ jaws in the past, but could never quite pull it off.) One evening some weeks later, I came downstairs for a snack and found Da sitting at the kitchen table, slightly in his cups. Taking a seat, I told him how cool I thought the entire episode had been (he disagreed emphatically, by the way), and asked him how he’d managed to rearrange the asshole’s face. He flipped the ash off his cigarette, took a sip of beer, shrugged, and answered: “Hook punch.” He then resumed staring out the kitchen window, at which point I hauled ass, posthaste. The story, however, stayed with me.

At forty-one, I’m in much better physical condition than my father was at forty-seven. I’m no less prone to excess, but I exercise more often, consume a more balanced diet, and actually practice hitting things. My open-hand techniques are (and have long been) more powerful than my punches, and whereas I’ve yet to break a jaw (to the best of my knowledge, that is: being as allergic to jail as is a typical, modern American kid to legumes, grains, seafood, meat, vegetables and dairy products, I’ve never actually stuck around to assess the damage after landing a “stunner”), I’ll still take ‘em over fists, any day.  

September 19, 2008

The Boor at a BBQ, '08 (P.8)

When last we saw our boy, he had just gotten married, was three sheets to the wind, and was making an ass of himself with a borrowed electric guitar – which, by now, the crowd probably wished he had shoved up his ass.

Most of the post-ceremony festivities have been covered elsewhere. The only things I forgot to mention were: 1.) My friend, Sam Walker, was the one who gave me the CD of bagpipe music (I should remember that, as I balked like hell at taking it); 2.) A few minutes after the conclusion of the ceremony, Bro Tristan Sutrisno called to wish us well, and; 3.) At some point during dinner, I removed my Fruit of the Looms and hoisted them skyward on the business end of my faux-claymore, as my cousin reminded me.


Another thing I suppose I neglected to mention was the dance. Yes, you read that correctly.
The dance.  Shortly after mangling Rosie and the Originals’ “Angel Baby,” (using language that definitely would have gotten us kicked off the Ed Sullivan Show…) I actually danced for the first time in living memory. Mags had requested “If There Hadn’t Been You,” by Billy Dean, and my cronies in Our Band Can Kick Your Band’s Ass (hereinafter abbreviated OBCKYBA, and probably soon to be known as Our Band Will Kick Our Former Lead Guitarist’s Ass) dutifully learned and performed it.

(I don’t listen to that stuff, mind you. My taste in Country Music is restricted to the classics: Waylon, Willie, Hank Sr. & Jr., Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard, Johnny Horton, Bobby Bare, Don Williams, Ray Stevens, Jerry Reed, Boxcar Willie, Grandpa Jones, Roy Acuff, etc. In short: if they ain’t dead or ain’t appeared on Hee Haw, I probably have no use for ‘em.)

I’d love to craft many an elegant (and possibly “purple”) passage in which the evening and the events thereof were immortalized (and romanticized) for all time. Sure and I’d love nothing more. The plain truth, though, is that I was completely shitfaced by the time we left. Christ! I was so hammered; I was running around in a pair of ripped jeans and a red velvet Jacobean-era vest. At that point, I looked like a Lynyrd Skynyrd roadie who’d robbed the “Gold Key” tent at an SCA event…

Being a stubborn bastard, though, I was determined to walk back to the hotel. This would have been a very bad idea, owing to my condition, which was essentially “code red (eyed).” Had I made it even a quarter of the way, I’d probably still be in the Douglas Country drunk tank -- if not picking up garbage along I-25 in one of those ever-fashionable orange jumpsuits. Luckily, I’d only made it to the corner of 5th Street when my entire central nervous system said, “Uh-uh. Chuck you, Farley. We ain’t goin’ any further," and pulled the plug on my muscles.
 

Actually, it wasn’t quite that dramatic. By the time I reached the corner, I realized that there were entirely too many streetlights. Blinking a few times, I noticed that this wasn’t a typical case of double vision. Au contraire, this was a case of – and I shit thee not, Gentle Reader – quadruple vision. Revolving quadruple vision, at that. It was so bad that for a moment, I fancied I was back in high school, watching one of those “safety” films like Angel Dust and Asphalt Don’t Mix. I mean; we’re talking Pink Elephants Meet Pink Floyd.


Diggest thou, Gentle Hipster?


Luckily, Tim “Bulletman” Brown and his wife offered us a lift. Tim, by the way, is the gent in the photo gallery who’s wearing the armor and allowing trained martial artists to land full-power blows upon him in order to test the effectiveness of their techniques.


Now
that is dedication to one’s craft, by God! I know that said armor is essentially state-of-the-art, and very protective, but damn me if I’d want to be inside it. Back in the good ol’ days, when FIST gear (which wasn’t at all bad, protection-wise – just ridiculously expensive) was the big thing, I was, on more than one occasion, blown completely off my feet by a well-executed kick whilst playing the “mugger” role. It never “hurt” in the strict sense of the word, but the impact was often very jarring.


The very protectiveness of the cuirass was, I suppose, a contributing factor. The old FIST chest/rib protector was so resilient and shock-absorbent (the wearer – and I’m speaking from firsthand experience -- could take a full-power blow from a police baton and not feel a thing); one was tempted to rely upon the device rather than breathing properly, “shedding,” etc. when struck. With the modern gear, I’d imagine that the temptation to rely upon it instead of allowing it to “cover your mistakes,” as MacYoung says, is nearly irresistible. If so, its strength actually increases the risk of certain injuries, ironically enough.


“It ain't me, Bubbie!” as a certain syndicated columnist was known to remark…


For this reason, my hat’s off to the MA/SD world’s “crash test dummies” – the guys like Tim -- who risk personal injury whilst training, in order to keep the rest of us from sustaining said in real life.


Noting that none of Tim’s four identical, revolving vehicles sported half a foot or so of silvery padding, I assumed that he held a different attitude towards driving, and that it was therefore safe to accept the ride.

 

The Browns got us back to our hotel in short order (and in four pieces each), at which point we thanked them profusely, opened the doors, and fell out of their vehicle. The pavement seemed as comfortable a place as any to catch a few winks – Colorado concrete being smoother and more neatly poured than Georgia concrete, an’ all – but the wife (alas…) had other ideas. Without her aid, I wouldn’t have known which of the four, revolving Holiday Inns to enter, so I suppose I owe her a debt of gratitude, after a fashion.

 

Once within the safety of our room, Mags announced that she had to powder her nose.


“Now just stay right there!” said the four of her, each pointing at different and ever-chaning spatial coordinates, as they orbited their common center of gravity. “And don’t get into trouble!”


Grunting and nodding my assent, I did as I was told, to the best of my ability.


Now when a woman enters a bathroom, the “Rip van Winkle Effect” kicks in with a vengeance. Once the door closes, the space-time continuum is irreparably disrupted on the woman’s side of the barrier. Beyond it, times passes normally. Within the space it both defines and isolates, though, all hell breaks loose. This is mere speculation on my part, but I sometimes wonder if the entire female populations of Atlantis, Gomorrah, Pompeii, Dresden and Hiroshima might not have saved themselves by going to the john, only to emerge centuries after the cataclysms that destroyed the five had passed. 


Suffice to say that I was in for a long wait, and knew it very well. I hummed a tune. I whistled another. I tapped my foot upon the floor until sheer fatigue forced me to stop. I smoked a cigarette. I smoked a pipe-bowl of Captain Black. I smoked a 12” novelty cigar a friend had given me some time ago. I smoked a few dozen Salmon – after walking to Alaska, catching them, and then returning to the hotel.


Granted, I’m exaggerating a tad. The wait was, however, of sufficient duration to move a normal (read: sober) man to call for an ambulance and possibly a SWAT team. As I bore easily, I found it altogether unendurable. Then, I noticed the refrigerators– all four of them – and remembered that they still held a few beers.


“Aha! Now them’s the tickets to Unknown Kadath!” I roared, leaping up and down for sheer delight. 


Oh! But what to do? How to get them?


Then it struck me (as did an old shoe -- apparently intended for the yowling tomcat on the fence between our hotel and the adjacent lot. Why the hurler would scream, “Shut up, you barking moonbat!” at a cat is, I fear, still beyond me -- that missed its mark and flew through our window): I’d simply close one eye, thereby halving the number of choices!


My plan worked like a charm. Once I’d narrowed it down to two, it was child’s play to remove one of the twenty assorted cans and bottles from the cubic foot of ‘fridge. As I cracked it open, the nagging voice of conscience, cooing accusingly in a mix of tones -- “lace curtain” Irish pretense, Cavalier propriety, and primordial, Catholic guilt -- assailed me at once.


“For shame, young Master Bean! For shame! What would your poor, dear mother think?”

“Well, I dunno what she’d think, but I got a damn good idea of what she’d say,” I replied.

“You know that the fruit of the barley is the parent of wickedness, woe and--”

“Billions of dollars for Anheuser-Busch, Coors, Miller an’ that bunch?” I asked.

“That’s not funny!”

“Damn right it ain’t! Those ‘licensed’ assholes (and whom, by the way, do you reckon spends the time and money lobbying to restrict home brewers?) are a government-supported oligopoly! ‘Free enterprise,’ my ass!”

“Uh, well, that’s a good point, but…”

“But what? If I drink their swill, I’m sinning like Cain himself -- but if I brew my own, or – Heaven and hell both forefend! – go teetotaler, I’m depriving some slob of his livelihood and sabotaging the economy (which, I note, was quite robust until a few weeks ago, at which point the wretched state of the ‘sheeple’s’ ‘personal economies’ necessitated their pouring less into the local and national economies, which suffered in turn…) is that it? Sounds to me like I’m damned if I do, and damned if I don’t!”

“Forget economics and propaganda! The malevolent shadow of Demon Alcohol falls across both prison and workhouse, young Master Bean!”

“So why are you busting my balls, and in a Holiday Inn, no less? Go to the prisons and workhouses and give those poor, fermented-Kool-Aid-drinking bastards the speech. And ask the folks at the service desk if they have a bottle opener while you’re at it. I’m tired of using my fucking lighter.”

“You’re hopeless!” wailed the voice as it faded away – for all that I heard only: “I’m melllll-ting!”


A moment of welcome silence passed, during which I contemplated the bottle in my hand – and tugged at the inch of beard I’d grown since Maggie’d entered the bathroom. I contemplated its shape, its smoothness, its coolness (the bottle’s -- not the beard’s, mind you). I meditated upon its clarity, the perfection of its black-and-gold label, and the fact that it was still full of beer.


“Oh, what’s the worst that can happen?” I asked myself. “I’m already pickled to the gills, as-is.” Returning my attention to the bottle, I thought of a Taoist maxim: “It is the empty space within that renders it useful.”


“Damn skippy!” I said, kicking off my shoes, making my way to the bed, and finishing the beer in three or four gulps. “What’s the worst that can happen?”


In time, a splinter of light formed on the opposite wall, expanding into a vertical bar, then a rectangle, by turns. Maggie emerged.


“Well good evenin’ ladies,” slurs I, shooting for ‘suave and seductive’ (but managing only ‘lewd, lascivious, and lecherous,’ I’m afraid). “So which o’ the eight o’ ye’ wants to be first?”


(
To be continued)

 

 

September 15, 2008

Defending America -- By Exposing Its Vulnerabilities to Its Enemies

In his October 2008 Soldier of Fortune column, neocon idol Ollie “Arms for Hostages” North (remember the ‘80s, when the U.S. did negotiate with terrorists?) does his part to protect our once-great nation -- by telling potential “evildoers” how best to attack Washington DC’s Union Station.

 

(Isn’t that a violation of the patriot act or something? Now let me get this straight: If I reprint a hundred-year-old article on homemade pyrotechnics, I’m committing treason and enabling the enemy. Ollie, though, can provide Al Qaeda with an actual game plan, and everything’s kosher? Is that how it works? Just curious…)

 

Read on. Ye’ jes’ can’t make this shit up…

 

“Unlike other public buildings in Washington, including our nearby Fox News bureau, there are no barriers to prevent a vehicle from turning off the street and into the front entrance of Union Station. Worse, the nearest vehicle lane – a taxicab rank – is less than seven feet from the face of the structure. In short, there is no offset protection whatsoever. You don’t have to be paranoid to envision a VBIED bringing down the 96-foot ceilings and turning the busy lobby into a charnel house.” 

 

-- “Beirut Comes to Washington,” Soldier of Fortune, October 2008, p. 82, paragraph 8.

 

North, of course, subsequently covers his ass by saying, “Had Amtrak officials not promised to take ‘immediate, interim measures to prevent VBIED attacks,’ I would not have acknowledged this vulnerability publicly.” (Paragraph 12)

 

That’s nice, Ollie. Here’s your lollipop. I feel ever so much fucking safer now, especially when I take Amtrak’s “track record”  -- no pun intended, of course -- for security (I’ve visited a few Amtrak stations. In every case, the clientele immediately brought post-Katrina New Orleans to mind…) and customer satisfaction (“Then take Greyhound, mothafucka!”) into account.

 

Since North’s done his patriotic duty and protected his country from the ravening Mussalman hordes by telling them how and where to strike, I’ll do my part as well.

 

In theory, Al Qaeda could partially paralyze the economic infrastructure of metro Atlanta -- “the New York of the South” – by purchasing copies of the local high society rag, Jezebel, and either greasing the “movers and shakers” oft found mugging within its pages or bombing the locales they frequent.

 

This sinister mission could easily be accomplished by savvy operatives infiltrating Atlanta’s vast (but dewy-eyed and innocent – we all know that illegal aliens disregard our nation’s sovereignty and borders out of sheer love for the almighty US of A and bear us no ill will...) undocumented third-world immigrant community; taking minimum wage, cash-under-the-table jobs and “running with it,” as it were.

 

Such critical vulnerabilities cry out for immediate attention!

 

Before Mayor Franklin applies even another molecule of peroxide to her “do,” she should demand that the feds cough up the cash and manpower to transform each of Atlanta’s vulnerable streets into carbon copies of Pennsylvania Avenue, as described by Ollie: “…a maze of bollards, vehicle barriers, high fences, and heavy gates. Without the appropriate pass, it is impossible to get a vehicle near the White House or any other federal building.”   

 

There. Now I’m a “great American,” too.

 

No need to thank me. Just lookin’ out for ya…

Oodles o' Noodles: Ramen Redeemed!

If you’re anything like me, you’ve probably eaten more than your share of ramen noodles during college and whilst working shoveling-shit-in-hell-for-peanuts jobs. Believe it or not, I actually know guys who were so dependent upon ramen for sustenance at one time or another; they can barely abide the thought of eating them. This is a shame, because with food prices rising as rapidly as they have been, ramen noodles are a great way to fill the belly without emptying the wallet. (Because they’re lightweight, easily portable, and cook rapidly, survivalist-types might do well to consider them a “poor man’s MRE” of sorts.)

 

Until fairly recently, the choice of packaged noodle soups was fairly limited. Sanwa, Nissim, Maruchan and a few other brands offered a rather narrow range of choices: beef, pork, shrimp, chicken, mushroom and a flavor known only (and with appropriate inscrutability) as “oriental.”  In the last fifteen years, though, things have changed for the better. The more familiar brands now offer a dozen or more flavors each, and new “players” have emerged, among them Nong Shim (South Korea), Indofoods (Indonesia), Vifon (Vietnam), Sakura (USA), and President Rice Products (Thailand), just to name a few.

 

As the number of companies and countries represented on supermarket shelves has increased, so has the range of products. In addition to the familiar ramen, packets of instant cellophane noodles (a.k.a. “bean threads”), rice vermicelli, and even vacuum-packed udon are now available, in a wide variety of flavors. In other words, these ain’t the ramen noodles yer daddy ate in college.

 

Despite the availability of more and better products, these packaged noodle soups are still very economical, ranging from the humble $0.15 packet of “bare bones” ramen with which we’re all familiar, to $1.00 of thereabout for vacuum-packed udon, noodles prepackaged in microwave containers, and even yakisoba in plastic trays. This being the case, ramen and its “cousins” should be major weapons in the culinary arsenal of those who like to eat well, but cheaply.

 

Now like any other product, ramen served as-is is unexciting fare. Fortunately, there are ways of “upgrading” prepackaged noodles without breaking the bank.

 

Before I cover a few of them, let me share a very simple trick for improving the flavor of prepackaged noodles. Many people of my acquaintance have complained about the quality of the broth in prepackaged noodle soups. In my experience, this is because the directions on most packages simply advise adding the flavor packet as soon as the noodles have cooked. When this is done, though, the residual starch from the cooking process permeates the broth, leaving it heavy, cloudy and unappetizing. The best way I’ve found of getting around this is simply cooking the noodles, draining them, cooking the broth separately and then combining them. This makes for a much lighter and tastier soup. I’ve also noticed that preparing both with distilled or filtered water improves the flavor markedly.

 

Another easy way of making noodle soups tastier and more substantial is to garnish them with whatever meat/poultry/seafood the package purports to mimic, i.e., bits of chicken, beef, pork, etc. (I don’t recommend adding chopped Orientals to the mysterious “oriental” flavor, though. That’s downright antisocial.) Not long ago, I dropped a few tablespoons of a frozen seafood salad mix -- clams, mussels, baby shrimp, scallops and squid rings – a few pieces of surimi and a teaspoon of wakame into a pre-packaged “seafood” flavored soup, and was very pleased with the results.

 

The more adventurous might try adding the noodles to homemade stock, for even better flavor. I’ve used Korean-style dried shrimp consommé, basic konbu/bonito dashi and homemade chicken broth before, with very satisfying results. Even the contents of the store-bought flavor packet, though, can be considerably improved by the addition of any of the following, singly or in combination:

 

A few teaspoons of soy sauce (or nuoc mam, for a more Southeast Asian flavor)

A few drops of toasted sesame seed oil

A teaspoon of sake or Chinese rice wine

Chile oil

Chile-garlic paste or Sriracha sauce

Thinly sliced green or red chiles (especially the Thai “bird’s eye” variety

Thinly sliced scallions, chives, or nira grass; or finely minced shallot

Thinly sliced ramps or wild garlic (literally available for free – they’re common lawn weeds. Use with caution – or a bit of ginger -- though. Some experience nausea when eating them.)

A small dab of grated ginger (goes especially well with seafood soups)

Thinly sliced daikon or Korean radish simmered in the broth (especially with beef soups)

Toasted black or white sesame seeds

Minced cilantro

Sprigs of mitsuba

Minced or crushed garlic

A poached or hard-boiled egg (sliced)

White pepper (doesn’t discolor lighter colored broths)

Seasoning paste made of galangal, lemongrass and cilantro roots

A squeeze of lime juice (especially with Southeast Asian-style soups)

Paper-thin slices of lemon, lime or yuzu citron (good luck finding the yuzu, though…)

Thinly sliced fresh or dried mushrooms, especially shiitakes

 

Now you may not have any of these items just lying around the kitchen. (I do, but then again, I’m kinda weird.) Most of them, though, are very inexpensive, and easily obtainable in any city with a substantial Asian population. Many of the vegetables and herbs (garlic, scallions, cilantro, mushrooms), as a matter of fact, are available everywhere, even in the chain supermarkets. Those of you who live in New York, Philadelphia, LA, San Francisco or Seattle are on easy street when it comes to obtaining this stuff, by the way, but even here in Georgia, my wife and I make weekly pilgrimages to Koreatown and “Little Saigon” where we purchase all the above and more at the Buford Highway Farmers’ Market and the Hong Kong Supermarket. We also save beaucoup bucks shopping in that part of town, for the record. Not only are the prices much lower than those in the chain supermarkets; the produce is of much higher quality, and the sheer variety of goods leaves them in the dust.

 

Admittedly, some of the seasonings are – well  -- seasonal and/or have to be imported, but some (ginger root and galangal, for example) can be stored in the freezer for months with little appreciable loss of quality. Others – scallions, chives, garlic, shallots, cilantro, daikon, Thai chiles -- can be grown in the garden during the warmer months, and in a greenhouse, or even in window boxes and pots during the winter. Growing one’s own vegetables and herbs to enliven packaged noodles, needless to say, is a fantastic way of saving money. Even when purchased, though, they’re used in such small amounts (add to which the fact that the noodles themselves are so inexpensive) that good, tasty meals and snacks are now within easy reach of even those on the tightest of budgets. To the humble ramen noodle, then, we can confidently say: “You’ve come a long way, baby.”

 

Note: As a postscript of sorts, and as an effort to convince ramen-sick former college students and slackers that ramen can be transformed into a damned tasty meal, I present the following recipe.

 

Ramen Noodle Salad With Peanut Sauce (For two)

 

2 packets ramen noodles, any flavor

3 scallions, thinly sliced.

1 pickling cucumber 

1 carrot

2 eggs

2T water

2t sugar or mirin

Chopped peanuts (to garnish)

Minced cilantro (to garnish)

Salt

 

Peanut Sauce 

 

3t prepared Chinese mustard

2-1/2T toasted sesame seed oil

1 or 2 Thai chiles, thinly sliced (seeded, if desired)

2 cloves garlic, minced

2T chunky peanut butter

2-1/2T water

1T soy sauce

1T nuoc mam or nam pla

2T rice vinegar

2T sugar

 

Halve cucumber lengthwise. Scoop out seeds and cut into julienne strips. Peel carrot and cut julienne. Place both in glass or plastic bowl, sprinkle lightly with salt, mix and let sit 15-20 minutes. Rinse and drain.

 

Beat eggs with water and mirin or sugar. Heat a lightly greased skillet, add egg mixture and cook until bottom has set. Gently turn and cook until done. Remove from heat. When cool, cut into ½” x 2” strips. (This is best accomplished by rolling the omelette up, slicing the roll into ½” sections, and then cutting them to the proper length.)

 

Sauce: Using a wire whisk, gradually mix peanut butter, water, mustard, soy sauce, sugar, vinegar, and nuoc mam. In a small saucepan, heat sesame oil. Add garlic and stir fry 30 second. Add remaining ingredients and heat until bubbling. Keep warm.

 

Noodles: Bring six cups of water to the boil, add noodles and cook for three minutes. (Save flavor packets for another use.) Drain. Toss noodles with sauce, cucumber, carrot, egg strips and scallions. Garnish with cilantro and peanuts and serve immediately.

 

 

Print Media: A Readable Newspaper At Last!

I don’t usually plug newspapers. Most of them, in my experience, are bona fide catbox liners, produced by liars for the consumption of idiots. After fifteen or so minutes of skimming a typical fishwrapper of this sort, I’m ready to throw up my hands in utter despair and groan, “What planet are these fuckwits from?”
 

Every so often, though, I stumble across a newspaper that neither insults my intelligence nor moves me to crank out page after page of venomous, profanity-laced invective. These exceptions to the rule, sadly enough, are always local dailies or weeklies with limited resources and circulation. What they lack in distribution, however, they more than make up for with integrity and devotion to the seemingly (and sadly) obsolete “five w’s and the h.” Such an exception is the Roswell Beacon, a gutsy, refreshing little weekly that’s a joy to read. Unlike certain of their fawning, wouldn’t-say-“shit”-if-they-had-a-mouthful competitors, the staff of the Beacon tackle local political issues with gusto and integrity that hearkens back to the Pre-World War II “golden age” of American journalism.

While the Beacon focuses primarily on local issues, its national coverage isn’t too shabby, either. This week’s issue, for example, contains an excellent article on Russia as a resurgent regional and world power. Entitled “Rising Russia – The Bear Awakens,” the article (co-written by one Col. Robert E. Quinn and a Beacon staffer named John Fredericks) takes an honest, hard-hitting look at a subject ignored equally by the Democrat toadies at the networks and CNN, and the “fairly unbalanced,” neocon “barking moonbats” at Fox News.

I’m not familiar with either man, but the article suggests that both “have their shit together,” a rarity in this day and age. Unlike the “see no evil” idiots at CNN and the networks, and the “see evil everywhere but right here” idiots at Fox (all of whom suffer from the “tunnel vision” that results from having one’s head up one’s ass), Quinn and Fredericks actually understand the global political, economic and military situation. I don’t agree with all their conclusions, but it’s clear that both are students of realpolitik, and more concerned with the way things are than with “creating [their] own reality.” Eschewing both ideology and mythology, Quinn and Fredericks shine the cold, hard light of objective reality on world affairs, with an approach reminiscent of Michael Scheuer’s Imperial Hubris. Their 4th Generation Warfare blog is a must-read, and these guys are going into this blog’s sidebar.

Happy reading.

 

http://Beaconcast.com

September 09, 2008

Yet More Photos

We've added a few more shots of the wedding. As uploading them is a time-consuming and laborious process, it'll be a while until they're all posted to the gallery. They're damned nice pics, though. Jessica Lueken (blatant plug) really knows her stuff.