Bears In Iraq

Elections today; stocks tomorrow. Apparently, liberty abroad really is good for America.

UPDATE: As of 11:00am Monday, all the major indeces (or indexes, if you didn't like Latin) are up. My stock, by the way, is way up, which is really the only index I care about.

8,000,000:35

That's the ration of Iraqis who have voted to those who sacrificed their lives on the altar of democracy. If you want killer Iraq-Vote blogging, visit InstaPundit (if you haven't already; if you have already, hey, visit again!), for a bevy of links and data.

The last time I was this excited about one day in history was 9 November 1989--when the Berlin Wall fell. I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I got the news. (I got detention for running up and down my high school halls screaming "The Wall is down! Reagan won! Democracy rules!" No, Barbara Boxer was not the principal.) I had the feeling at the time that the world was changing, shifting right in front of my eyes, and for the better at that. I remember thinking that this simply must be the most incredible time to be alive, to witness first hand millions of people taking control over their own lives and lighting yet one more beacon of freedom (I wrote a lot of poetry in the twelfth grade, so I was given to blustery thoughts like that.) Funny, though: Fifteen years later, that's pretty much how I feel today.

Unheard Of

Here's another angle you won't get in the MSM: The Church is urging people to vote as a religious duty. I can't help but think that this increases turnout, as Syriacs and Chaldeans don't take lightly the instruction of the Church. They don't make up a large percentage (although it's bigger than most Americans realize), so it may not make that much of a difference. Nonetheless, they are embracing their freedom, and that's huge.

"No One Is Fit To Be A Master, And No One Deserves To Be A Slave"

Yes! On Thursday, the Princess (age ten, on the right), the Angel (age six, on the left), and I (behind the camera) traveled from North Carolina to Washington D.C. for the Inauguration. We left at four in the morning, we braved the cold and wind, we made acquaintances with kind persons from all over America, and we heard our President verbalize his vision for our great nation (and what a vision it is!). And we saw Washington: D.C. in January snow is third in beauty only to D.C. in Christmas dress and D.C. in full cherry tree bloom. While we saw the sights and visited the scenes you would normally see and visit in D.C., below are thoughts and pictures limited to the Inauguration ceremony itself. I've divided them up into separate posts for convenience: Speech, Money, Security, and Protests. The best part of the event? When, after the ceremony was over and everyone began walking off the Mall, the Angel looked at me confusedly, looked back at the Capitol, and said, "Dad, aren't we going to go talk to Mr Bush?" Classic. I hope you enjoy the posts. If you want to know something more, or if you suspect I've accidentally omitted something, let me know on the comment board.

Inauguration: Speech

A lot has been said about the speech, so I won't add too much: First, as you can see by the picture below, it was not easy to actually see the President or the proceedings, and we had decent tickets. However, plenty of video screens were set up to telecast it, so we still got a good view. The crowd was very responsive, with numerous interruptions for cheering (myself included). The President didn't have a great cadence in his speech, but he never does, really. Sometimes he paused for too long; I suppose he thought a certain line might garner even more response when we were listening attentively for more. The speech was nonetheless remarkable; it was remarkable, not for any abilities of Ciceroan rhetoric, but for the grandeur of the ideas and the passion with which Mr Bush believes them. I don't know if that came through over TV or radio, but it definitely came through live--even via video screen. The President believes that every person should be--and can be--free. That's not unrealistic. It should be the American ideal; it is definitively the Christian goal.

Inauguration: Money

The MSM has been touting the $11,900,000 that D.C. will shell out as an unfunded mandate. I'm sure the city won't recuperate all that money, but what isn't being said is all the money D.C. will get in revenue. Consider: D.C. receives nine percent taxation on off-premise liquor; ten percent on restaurant meals, on-premise liquor, and rental cars; and fourteen and a half percent on hotel rooms. That's not including alcoholic beverage taxes on distribution and taxes on cigarettes, and other taxes associated with tourism that I don't know about. Now, I saw quite a few people at the Inauguration (the high estimate is 750,000 and the low is 100,00). We all had to eat and sleep somewhere. (I, for one, certainly spent enough money to help out the municpality!) And plenty of people were paying those alcoholic beverage taxes. So while the city doesn't get money from the federal government to pay for the Inauguration, the federal government also doesn't receive the revenue generated by the festivities.

Cities routinely lose money on the Olympics, but they are always vying for a chance to host them. Why? My guess is because being the host generates goodwill which will continue to create tourism dollars well into the future. I imagine the same is true of the Inauguration. D.C. may lose immediate money, but it won't be the entire sum that the press is reporting, and they will indubitably get more of it back long into the future.

Inauguration: Protests

Although I haven't had a chance to peruse the MSM accounts of the protests, I'm confident they found the most, er, interesting groups they could find. There were, in fact, conservative and liberal protesters nearly everywhere and most of them were a complete embarrassment to their cause. Three exceptions: One man who had a ticket for the Mall simply turned his back on Bush for the entirety of the proceedings. He was polite and respectful, speaking only when spoken to and insulting no one. There was a group of Socialists by the Judiciary Metro entrance (who obviously had no tickets) handing out literature. They were vocal, but not insulting or aggressive. This particular group also did not impugn Elephants or the President, but simply outlined the differences between Republicans and Socialists (of which there are a few). Four young adults beside the Rayburn Building held up a sign with the head of a partial birth abortion victim; they were handing out literature and were polite if passionate. Really, though, the sign did all the work for them.

The pro-lifers, back turner, and Socialists were, as I said, the exception. The photo below is of a group that carried signs saying, "Fear God", "Thank God For Tsunami", and "God Hates Fags". They were cursing conservatives and liberals alike. An unsavory group, to be sure. I am tempted to say that they were the only out of control right-wing group I saw, but their vitriol and hatred isn't really even right-wing. It's completely off the chart. One group of teenagers walking down Constitution carried signs saying "Worst President Ever". This, of course, had me wondering how many Presidents they remember. Woodrow Wilson, for example? They were deriding anyone who even marginally supports Bush. They reflected poorly on the left for their idiocy as well as for their argumentation (or lack thereof). One group on the Mall (past the checkpoints, with tickets) was walking through the crowd yelling, "Fuck Bush". The crowd around me began screaming for them to stop and I was honestly surprised that violence did not break out. This group was grossly outnumbered and their lack of respect only added to their reckless and puerile behavior.

It seems to me that the protesters broke down into two groups: The almost-frighteningly vocal liberal margin on the one hand, and the high school/college age protest-as-cool-thing-to-do crowd on the other hand. The "Worst President Ever" teens were in the second group. The group running through the Mall were in the first. I can handle the second. Everybody does something stupid when they're young (God knows I did), and so I don't worry so much about the kids. But the second group--the ones that impugn and insult and deride--are harmful to both the democratic process and the social fabric simultaneously. Why try to cause riot at your opponents' rightly one celebration? Why attempt conflict when every cop in America has you surrounded? These people, in my opinion, are dangerous on both the ideology level and the public safety level. Encourage the kids to be activists, for sure--that's why we have a two party system. But as long as the Democrats continue to abide a tyranny of the minority, they will continue to decline in numbers and power.

Inauguration: Security

Due to the press reports about D.C. being in 'lockdown', I arrived expecting something along the lines of Polish martial law enacted. Nothing could be further from the truth. Admittedly, the law enforcement officials were omnipresent and deliberately conspicuous. But they were immensely polite and helpful, and, while they were armed, their arms were concealed. No M-16s or M-61s to be seen. In addition, I had to look for snipers to locate them, as indicated by the photo below. There were checkpoints at numerous locations, but the officers again were considerate and efficient. I was impressed by the demeanor of the officers, especially since a great many of them were imported (I talked to officers from as far away as Colorado). Mobility was limited, but security was nowhere near as daunting as I thought it would be. My daughters noticed the inconvenience of the multiple checkpoints, but nothing more. All in all, I thought the security was balanced. It was visible and restrictive enough for me to feel safe carrying my daughters to the event, while invisible and open enough for me not to feel like I was in the Gulag.

Which is why I think this piece from Kathleen Parker is asinine. Worse than the Guardia Civil? Worse than being interrogated in East Germany? Where was she? Now granted, I didn't get to go to any of the balls or dinners, so I can't speak to that. But I did walk all up and down Constitution and Independence and Third and everywhere else you could go with the ticket I had. I like to think that the inauguration is mainly for people like me--average Americans who want to somehow participate in and introduce their children to national civic life. That means freedom as well as safety . I found the level of security to provide both.

What, No Sushi?!

The Sushi Doc updates us on. . .well, his boredom and homesickness. And the steady flow of troops coming in.

Ad Fontes

I don't know why I keep reading the AP wire--or anything promulgated by Boston, for that matter. At the risk of beating the media and religion horse to death, I'm linking this article on Dr King and the pro-gay movement. It seems to me that at least three things are of note here:

• Martin Luther King, III is, like Jesse Jackson, whoring after liberal support, both financial and otherwise, in my humble estimation. He is not advancing his father's legacy; he is living off of it. When Trip King comes out against the liberals on an issue while still advocating the liberty advanced by his father, I'll start thinking he's his own man. Until then, I refuse to believe he is automatically the heir to Dr King simply because he shares the genetic and experiential material.
• How biased can a piece be? Notice how opposition to gay marriage is assumed to be "homophobia". Funny, that. I have numerous friends who are gay. I'm not afraid of them. I'm not afraid of their lifestyle. I see neither them nor their behavior as an inherent threat to me or my family. I wish they would worship with me. I enjoy having them around. I oppose gay marriage. How to explain that, Ms Chu?
• Dr King drew his vision up from the Bible. He followed the example of his namesake, Martin Luther, who himself followed the example of Desiderius Erasmus in proclaiming, "Ad fontes!"--"Back to the source!" Dr King had a vision of liberty and harmony because that's the vision of the Scriptures. He did not articulate an agenda and then quote the verses that seem to back him up. Where the Canon led, Dr King followed. I do wish he were still here. He would know, I think, how to uphold the Scriptural teaching of homosexuality as a sin while simultaneously welcoming them into our communities as equal partners and persons. He was that great a man. We could sure use him now.

Fifteen Minutes

I've gotten recent plugs from three blogs--two well-known and one up-and-coming. Here, here, and here. While I'm happy about InstaPundit and PoliPundit mentions, my daughter's is the one that really puffs the chest out. :)

"You Have Heard It Said"

This article in Ha'aretz (translation: The Land) is interesting. It certainly keeps with the 'eye for an eye' theme from the headline (taken from the Book of Exodus). And I suppose I understand to some small degree the desire, not for revenge, because that isn't what Mr Marcus is talking about--but justice. A balancing sort of justice that evens things out. You kill one of mine, I kill one of yours; there, now we're even and we can stop killing. Or so goes the thinking. The church's viewpoint is a wee bit different. It is just this passage from Exodus that Christ references when he says, "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist and evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." This is from Matthew five, at the beginning of which Christ says, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God." The church's aim is not for a balanced justice, but for a peacemaking forgiveness.

So what to think about Iraq? Perhaps we should have just 'turned the other cheek'? I am no theological expert on pacifism and all of its variations (if you want someone who is, read the late John Howard Yoder, who was a pacifist, an incredibly sharp thinker, and a clear writer). But it seems to me that Einstein was right: Stuff is relative. I do see a possibility that we are waging a short-term war for a long-term freedom. In other words, peace is always the thing, but you sometimes must live in lesser peace for the hope of greater peace.

'Uterine Contents' Speak About Surviving Abortion

While Planned Parenthood might consider fetii merely 'uterine contents', Ms Jessen, I think, would disagree. This is why abortion is the new civil rights movement.

Sons Of Slaves And Sons Of Slaveowners

How can you tell we still haven't caught up to MLK's dream? The black communities honor MLK more than Christ Himself. The white communities don't honor him at all. Does that sound like integration to you?

UPDATE: Christine has a more optimistic view. That's right, to a degree. I'm a white guy pastoring a black church, so the discrepancies tend to always be right in front of my face, I guess. Also, there is a difference in generations. She's talking about six-year-olds; I'm talking about forty-year-olds. And in just those years lies a sea change (and a good one, at that).

A Sad Enjoyment

The Sushi Doc is back to blogging about his deployment to Germany. Hey, pass the beer!

Let The Drive Begin!

Gentleman, start your engine.

Over There, Over There

Don't be fooled by his lack of posting: Capt. Sushi Doc has landed at Landstuhl, Germany to do his part!

Crack Surgical Team Saves Foot Of 'Uterine Contents'

How ironic that just above an article referencing Planned Parenthood's bastardizing language to further impersonalize fetii is an article about an Australian in utero surgery that saved a baby's limb.

Random Musing

How can merchants offer 'ice cold water'? If the water was ice cold, wouldn't it be ice?

A New Decade

The Princess celebrated her tenth birthday yesterday by first dancing in church (we have a liturgical dance ministry) and then opening more presents than any kid should have (not really). When asked where she wanted to eat for dinner, she replied, "Macaroni Grill". (Sigh) At least I've raised a daughter with taste! I'm sure she'll update her blog after she finished her homework this afternoon.