Honest Assessment

I consider myself a good (if not really good) writer. I have been told by my wife and family(though they are sort of required to support me) that I have a gift and I should find a way to make use of it. Being as I am basically an office chump and part-time warehouseman, blogging is my outlet in this regard. Thus the question is: How should this look?

In an earlier post, I made a plea on behalf of Victory Caucus in which I laid out the basic argument that we must pressure our leaders to see the conflict in Iraq through to a successful conclusion. Soon after joining VC, I began to realize the power of one voice in this information age. The blogosphere has created underground celebrities out of average (though admittedly talented) Joes who take the time to comment upon current events. This is not true for people like Hugh Hewitt, Michael Yon or others who already had or would likely have achieved popularity on their own. The purveyors of blogs like Little Green Footballs or Captain's Quarters have moved from a set-up not unlike mine, to national cyber-fame. Both now have actual websites and Ed Morrissey (CQ) has jumped media into talk radio.

My dilemma is that I enjoy politics as sort of a three-piece-suit spectator sport. This is not to say that I am not passionate about it. I love to debate and my wife gets tired of me fervently lobbying her to accept a view she already holds (blogging has become an outlet for this personality quirk as well). I would like to have an informative and substantive political blog and given the opportunity, I believe I could. I have a better than average grasp of the constitution and current events coupled with a historical perspective (I guess the degree in history does have its uses). I do not, however, have the time and energy to invest into the research necessary to make a truly great political blog. Crap, I don't even have an Internet connection at my house.

People who simply talk are a-dime-a-dozen, particularly on the internet. My fear is that I will be a great writer without anything useful to say. For that, the world has The New Yorker magazine. As an added disincentive, I don't think the 4 of you that read my blog enjoy my longer, politically themed posts as much as the short, pithy cultural commentary. I seem to have fallen into the Internet version of the Daily Show niche. Thus, no matter how well done my blog is, it will still be mostly politically tainted comedy (complete with its fair share of bathroom humor). Oh well, I suppose with only 4 of you, I ought not worry too much about my internal conflict over creative control (politics vs poop jokes).

Thanks for reading and let me know if you have any helpful advise.

New Campbell Pics

Check out the link to Campbell's pictures or just click on his name.

"A blue-eyed boy meets a brown-eyed girl" (and made another blue-eyed boy)

Well, technically my sweet Sarry has hazel eyes, but since our first married dance was to "The Sweetest Thing", I am taking artistic license. I started this post with high hopes, but I am finding that it is extremely difficult to distill a 7 year relationship (3 1/2 in marriage) down to a few paragraphs. I guess the best thing I can do is to explain how she has changed my life.

She moved to Colorado in '99 and as her friend, I was not a good influence. During those years I drank too much and had no goals or aspirations above making it to the next weekend, shooting guns and working on my truck. If I ever wore a shirt, it was usually a wife-beater (the mention of which in this context seems inappropriate, but I have no other name for this article of clothing) and I felt no shame in lobbying to keep a sofa on our front porch. I think she was partially attracted to my bad-boy persona, while able to see the better man I could be. That summer holds a special place in my heart, not just for our budding relationship, but for the time with all my friends. After Sarah left, I was put in a position to analyze my life and its direction and it was not a Yellow Brick Road. At Lake Havasu, AZ I was confronted directly with the life I was leading and its affect on the soul of a person. As I looked at the debauchery of Havasu and juxtaposed that to Sarah, I all but cried as I realized that I was heading away from, not towards my heart's desires, being needed and respected, and my sweet Sarry.

That day, September 5th of 1999, I quit drinking, turned back towards the God I had been vigorously ignoring and resolved to return to college. Sarah was the catalyst that God used to convince me that his way was best for me. I can't think of a much better complement than to say that a girl not only makes a guy want to be a better man for her sake, but also convicts his heart to be a better human in the image of God. He (with her support) has led me to correct many of the above areas in my life (though I confess I still like weekends, guns, trucks and can think of few things more pleasant than a Colorado evening sitting on a front porch couch with no shirt on).

What else can I say? I've been so blessed with a girl that is enough like me to be amazingly compatible, yet unique enough to challenge me. She has simple tastes. She is pleasantly surprised by nice gestures, but is content enough not to demand them. She is the amazing mother of my boy and gives him more than I ever could. She married a guy who wasn't a hunter, but understood when I became one (plus she likes venison). She'll gleefully watch 24 or Gladiator with me but still reminds me that life is precious. So on Valentine's Day we don't need to go crazy because we so frequently enjoy lovely nights together that we don't yearn for an evening of unrealistic entertainment which we can't afford.

To Sarry: I love you and always will. Happy Valentine's Day and I'll be home around 5:00.

Non-binding Resolutions and the Victory Caucus

I am, if not addicted, at least a heavy user of political news. Typically I satisfy this craving with conservative talk radio (1460am & 740am in C/S) with an occasional Internet/blog chaser. To illustrate how serious this has gotten, let me give this example. My favorite band of all times is probably Pink Floyd. I can’t even remember the last time I listened to Floyd and given the choice between Micheal Medved and Another Brick in the Wall, I’d probably take Medved. I understand that this is an uncommon affliction among people my age, but it is what it is. It is because of my prodigious consumption of political news and others lack thereof that I write this.

I have been a supporter of President Bush’s policy on Iraq from the beginning. Please don’t believe the caricature that this means a blind belief that we can do no wrong (as people like me have been portrayed). I understand that some strategies have been poorly planned and others poorly executed. I understand that WMDs were not found in the volume that was expected. I understand that Abu Ghraib was at the very least a PR nightmare and at worst a tipping point for the negative in the hearts and minds campaign. I understand that the disbanding and de-Baathification of the Iraqi Army led to a larger more virulent insurgency and slower advancements in the capacity to deal with it. Here is my rebuttal to these mistakes: That’s war, folks. The science of destruction that is the military’s specialty is inexact at best. Volumes can be and already have been written about strategic errors and outright stupidity just within US military history.

What I cannot understand is how past mistakes justify making a bad situation worse. A cynical person, opposed to the war from the start, should at least be able to couch their criticisms in “you break it, you buy it.” Here are the facts:

1. Despite their current spinelessness, the Senate voted overwhelmingly to authorize the use of force (the "we were duped by cooked intelligence" excuse is a cop-out).
2. Whether or not you believe that Saddam was a supporter of international terrorism, Iraq is currently the central front for the Jihadist movement.
3. Those Jihadist are not offended by our presence in Babylon, they are offended by our existence.
4. If they are not fighting us there, they will come here (a la 9/11).

I am disappointed, but not particularly surprised by the current congressional trend toward non-binding resolutions of disapproval for the troop surge. Once again, here are the facts:

1. The Senate overwhelmingly confirmed General Patraeus as the commander of forces in Iraq after he explained his vision and goals for the surge.
2. Now they have audacity to complain about lack of oversight (not a constitutional authority of that body).
3. They are determined to pass a resolution that expresses their disapproval.
4. Ironically, the Democrat majority will only allow votes on resolutions that do NOTHING in order to sit on the asinine fence between disapproval and de-funding the troops in Iraq(their only constitutional power in war).

This overly in-depth post all leads to my recommending the Victory Caucus. It is an online source of news on the backpedaling legislators who feel the need to publicly express their a pointless opinion that encourages the enemy to stand firm and in doing so, discourage our brave fighting men and women. By registering at the VC (not Viet Cong), you can add your name to the group that vows to hold spineless politicians' feet to the fire.

"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it."

-- George Orwell

Update: Dean Barnett, poster on Hugh Hewitt's blog was kind enough to point out something that I missed on Victory Caucus this morning. Movecongress.org trumpets their exclusive briefing with Congressman John Murtha in which they state.

Chairman Murtha will describe his strategy for not only limiting the deployment of troops to Iraq but undermining other aspects of the President’s foreign and national security policy.

That's right, Murtha's goal is to undermine the foreign policy of the elected head of the US government. The most damning aspect of this story is that, caught in the act of honesty, movecongress.org removed the blurb that was quickly becoming popular ammunition for Iraq war supporters. Too late, kids.

What exactly is Pucky?

Ok, I'll admit it; I often get lazy, however, that is not the case in this instance. Without TV, I was not able to subject myself to the atrocity that was Sunday night's Grammys. Luckily, I was able to put my top reporter on this story and he gave us an insightful and poignant assessment of this culturally incestuous event. Check out Slick's report from behind enemy lines and learn what exactly "pucky" is.

Also see The Coach's assessment of the event, or at least the first 4 minutes of it.