Impossible Scissors

Richard Perle gives us another reason to take joy in Colin Powell's departure: Powell nixed plans for an alternative to our occupation of Iraq following the defeat of Saddam Hussein.

The Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz plan envisioned a different kind of occupation which I had supported before this war began: enter the country using significant numbers of Iraqi resistance fighters, and install an exile government-in-waiting after taking over the country.

I noticed from the beginning of the occupation that we were too slow in forming an interim government (The Iraqi Governing Council,) and even then we did not give them real power. The main criticism leveled by Tommy Franks, aside from a lack of international assistance, is that we were too slow in implementing our post-war plan.

Paul Bremer was put in place with the mission of building democratic traditions and eventually a government from the ground up; a government should have been in place by the time we got into Iraq. If we had some way of holding together Saddam's old army before it melted away in May 2003, a significant part of the "disaffected Sunni" insurgency would not have existed.

Here's an update on the aerial refueling tanker controversy that irked John McCain and eventually ruined the Secretary of the Air Force. The point of the article is that traditional contracting processes would delay the deal by 18 months or more. If the Air Force believes there is an urgent need for tankers, it should forego the traditional contracting process. However, Boeing is keeping 767 production open for another two years or so, so there is still time.

Marvin Sambur also details the steps that Secretar Roche took to distance himself from crooks ike Darleen Druyun. I hope you're reading this, Sen. McCain.

I get the impression that John McCain is a vindictive SOB. Case in point is the departure of Air Force Secretary James Roche after constant needling by McCain.

John McCain never ran out of reasons for tearing into James Roche. First he was blaming Roche for the sexual assault scandal at the Air Force Academy. This is a lot like blaming the current Texas governor for the state's long-held fascination with the death penalty.

Another point of contention was the proposed lease of Boeing 767 tankers to the Air Force. McCain basically called the lease "corporate welfare" and claimed that Roche was opposed to competition. Truth be told, it was never clear whether the replacement tankers were supposed to be delivered under a competitive contract. Boeing was shutting down the 767 production line and needed a quick decision on whether the Air Force wanted the line to stay open a little longer. Roche, like myself, felt that buying Airbus (dirty Euro-socialist bastards) tankers was not an option.

Well, Sen. McCain, you got your wish, and James Roche has left the Air Force. Are you happy now? Is it any wonder that your fellow Republicans can't stand you?

The Pakistani government declared over this weekend that they were abandoning the search for Osama bin Laden because they haven't found him after a two-year search of the Waziristan region. Thanks a lot, "allies."

I firmly believe that bin Laden is in Pakistan and living fairly comfortably because elements of the Pakistani military or intelligence services are sheltering him. Maybe I'm wrong, but all of the evidence would suggest that bin Laden is in Pakistan, and his most recent video looks like it was filmed from a safe house.

If Pakistan is truly giving up, there need to be consequences. For instance, Pakistan is in talks to buy more F-16's (after the batch they bought in 1992 was embargoed and eventually split between the Air Force and Navy.) The recent decision to quit the hunt is reason enough to cut off the sale of all military equipment that is not going to be used in hunting Islamic militants.

But wait--there's more! If Pakistan decides to go soft on us, we can throw our full support behind India. The green light for nuking Pakistan will be turned on. Should India completely eradicate Pakistan (a delightful possibility, though probably not possible given the size of India's arsenal,) a nation of Islamic militants and Wahhabi clerics will be totally vaporized.

Of course, the possibility of getting nuked back to Allah should frighten a rational guy like Gen. Musharraf. So maybe he will get the idea that his military needs to be purged of bin Laden sympathizers and the terror mastermind will finally be handed over.

Truth be told, getting results out of the Pakistanis is like pulling teeth. It's a wonder that Abu Zabaydeh and Khalid Sheik Mohammed were captured by the Pakistanis in the first place.

Today I re-learned a lesson that I first experienced in December 2003: never take cough syrup and tea on an empty stomach. Unfortunately, it's something I do too often when I am sick. The result: the fourth event.

Ahh, Thanksgiving. What remains to be said that already hasn't been said? How I got the flu again while I was at home? How I was subjected to the judgementalism of family members who would prefer to condemn me for the person I used to be and refuse to look at what I've become? How my grandfather landed himself back in the hospital (for at least the fourth time this year) with congestive heart failure? Or how my poor father was subjected to another emotionally taxing trip to his in-laws house again?

I love Thanksgiving (sarcasm.)

Well, at least there's a bright side. I got to spend quality time with good old Dad, and I got to see my lizards (Marge and Hungry Hungry Homer) again. And I slept, wrote newspaper stories, and read my materials assignment. So it wasn't a total waste.

In this list of the top ten conservative colleges on Michelle Malkin's blog, Embry-Riddle surprisingly doesn't make the list.

The stereotype of the technical school (and this is borne out by ERAU and by Michigan Tech) is that they're pretty conservative. I think the disintegration of the Green Party on campus is proof enough of this school's nature. Even the College Democrats (who represent the Ted Kennedy wing of the party) get very little attention in spite of all the noise they make. The College Republicans have a huge membership roll, despite the disorganized (and unfortunately inactive) nature of the club.

If we make the connection "military = conservative," which applies for about 72% of service members and their families, ERAU certainly passes that test. ERAU probably has the highest percentage, among all other schools, of its students enrolled in some type of military training program (service academies excepted.)

I would definitely say that Riddle is conservative in character, without resorting to the "Krazy Khristianity" of places like Bob Jones University. It's a place where protest is a word whose definition is unknown to most.

In Congress's $388 bil spending bill, they cut all funds for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP,) touted by the White House and advocates of "credible deterrence" as a long-needed penetrator bomb.

The RNEP always seemed redundant, because we have the B61-11 nuke with some underground penetration capability. RNEP would have taken the concept further, with a rocket motor to bury the nuke good and deep into the buried target before exploding.

My thoughts on "credible deterrence" and tactical nuclear weapons has been influenced by Dr. Craft and his lecture on the nuclear options available to us during the Korean War. There are few, if any, ways that nukes could be used in a tactical environment without harming your troops on the front lines.

The kiss of death for RNEP was the recently-announced Massive Ordinance Penetrator (MOP.) This conventional bomb will weigh 30,000 pounds, get dropped from a B-2 or B-52, and bury into its target before exploding. If the 21,000 pound Massive Ordinance Air Burst (MOAB) gets you excited, MOP will really get your engine running.

Moe came to the office today looking for a professor who could help him with his Engineering Physics senior design project. He's designing an improved space shuttle and wanted to know how one could find the vehicle's altitude if the velocity, duration, and thrust are given. I sent him to Crispy, but Crispy wouldn't help him.

There are two types of professors in the world: those who help all students, because they strive to teach all, and those who teach the students they are paid to teach. The former are far more noble than the latter.

Last fall I went sniveling to Dr. Jacobs for help with partial differential equations. His policy is that he will help students who aren't his, but his students will always have priority. Fair Enough. Dr. Jacobs helped me for at least an hour, and I am eternally in his debt.

By contrast, I felt bad for Moe and got this sick feeling that a student in need would be shot down so harshly. I did my best to explain to Moe how I would solve the problem (numerical methods, not an exact solution,) but I still think he's going to be swimming upriver on this project.

Greg Zsidisin is back with an anti-Republican screed that masquerades as an opinion piece on space policy. He repeats the Democrat talking point about "Krazy Khristians" electing George Bush, without taking a critical look at the factors that drove swing voters away from their own candidate (lack of a plan for Iraq, slander of Vietnam veterans, limousine liberal lifestyle, etc.)

Most distressing about Zsidisin's rant is how he ignores the importance of the Vision for Space Exploration in the mind of President Bush. Our president views space the same way that his father and Ronald Reagan did: if America is to be a respected leader, it must take the lead in exploring space. President Bush's silence on the issue is not one of neglect; he's trying to distance himself from the VSE to allow bipartisan support to swell. People may say that Bush is dumb; I think he's dumb like a fox.

If you want to drink more of Greg Zsidisin's swill, check out his company's website at Astroexpo.com.

Everybody is up in arms about the new video game "JFK Reloaded," which lets players re-enact the Kennedy assassination. The game's creators say their game proves that the Warren Commission's version of events was plausible.

As I've said numerous times, it's fun to believe in conspiracies. Was there a conspiracy to assassinate the president 41 years ago? After looking at the evidence, the Warren Commission's version of events is plausible, although a number of details need to be explained before we can rule out a wider conspiracy.

Reliable ballistics tests show that the book depository was the most likely place where the shots were fired from. We should be less certain that the Italian-made rifle found in the book depository was the actual murder weapon. That's not to say Oswald wasn't the assassin; maybe he did use the Italian sniper rifle, or maybe he planted the rifle (to confuse the police) and used a different, better rifle to commit the murder.

Jack Ruby really screws things up. Why did he kill Lee Harvey Oswald? Was he trying to cover up a greater conspiracy to kill the president, with Oswald at the tip of the iceberg? Was the mafia responsible? What about Lyndon Johnson? Or the French? Unfortunately, Ruby took these answers with him to the grave.

We had a wonderful banquet last night. The food was good. Astro Nick and I went into forbidden territory in the rocket garden, and we will soon have the pictures to prove it.

Our first guest speaker is an engineer for Project Constellation, which will hopefully get us back on the Moon and then to Mars. In her presentation, she showcased the Orbital Sciences proposal. I was heartened by her decision, as the Orbital Sciences proposal had gotten my attention as the most promising one in the lot.

Unlike the ther proposals, Orbital's follows a simple philosophy: if you want to go to Mars, go there. Don't take a detour at the moon. Orbital calls for a very large (80 metric tons to earth orbit) rocket, a reusable lunar lander, and direct flights to the moon and Mars.

I hope that different design approaches won't be stifled, but I fear for the worst. Boeing and Northrop Grumman are already a team, while Lockheed Martin and Orbital Sciences are another team. I'd like to see Orbital's mission architecture win, but Boeing should build the capsule and Northrop Grumman should build the lunar lander due to their historical experience building these elements for Apollo.

...can be a dangerous thing.

If a guy knows that lizards' tails grow back, he will try to lop the tails off with a paint-covered stick. What he doesn't know is that the replacement tail segments are made of cartilage instead of bone and is nowhere nearly as flexible as the original one.

Please don't torture lizards, okay?

Yes, I told the wing commander I would be at the beach bonfire. Really, I was all psyched to go. Then my ride (who shall remain anonymous) backs out with an hour or so to spare. At first I planned on taking a nap tonight. Then I get a call from the model club guys, who want to go to Hobby Town (aka Hobby Clown.) I couldn't refuse. Then we went for dinner at a decent Chinese restaurant. So that's my lame excuse for breakng the wing commander's balls tonight.

World Tribune takes a look at who the insurgents are and how they've prepared for extended guerilla warfare. Some may knock World Tribune as a neo-con website, but there should be no doubt about what they're reporting in this instance. The insurgents planned for an invasion well in advance (perhaps more than three years ago,) and they're getting money and weapons from Syria.

It's disappointing to think that Izzat Ibrahim may have escaped to Syria, where we will be unable to snatch him. Then again, I have no clue what his health is (he supposedly has cancer,) or whether he has formed an alliance with Zarqawi.

I'm still wondering about "Jaish Mohammed." Although they used to be members of Iraqi Intelligence Services, their name makes you think of Islamic militants. Can they support both Baathism and Sunni militantism? The two may not be mutually exclusive.

My group's Materials presentation did not go as smoothly as hoped. I am glad that the Air Force worked the "umm"s out of me. I've also learned to embrace my Italian-ness and use my hands when I speak.

Another group used the automatic slide timing on Powerpoint and it backfired. I made the same mistake back in speech class my first semester, and it really hurt me. I learned a mighty valuable lesson: automatic timing can almost never be justified in the course of a presentation. You need the flexibility of choosing the right time to change slides.

I have mixed feelings about Condi Rice's nomination to be our next secretary of state. I don't know too much about her, aside from her steadfast loyalty to the Bush White House, her background as a Sovietologist, and her poise and demeanor. But I do know that the countries where our enemies live (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, etc) do not respect women.

Back in 1990, the Iraqis did not respect the wishes of the United States because our Iraqi ambassador, April Glaspie, was a woman. Next thing you know, Kuwait gets invaded and we find ourselves permanently entangled in the mess that is middle eastern politics. Similarly, Madeline Albright didn't seem to have much luck in getting Iraq to open up about its WMD programs. For all of her post-Clinton criticisms of our Iraq policy, Albright was one of the most vocal advocates of ignoring Iraq until regime change occurred.

Condi already has my respect. She will have to work hard to earn the respect of the rest of the world.

I'm a very clumsy person. In the past two weeks I was burned by an iron and stung repeatedly by yellow jackets. Monday I burned by left index finger on the roof of a toaster oven. This led to an awkward situation today in control systems class, as my blister from the burn began to ooze.

I may yet Darwinize myself...

I have to say I enjoyed the Simpsons season premiere, especially when Bart becomes Hugh Hefner and turns his treehouse into a mini-Playboy mansion. The previous week's "Treehouse of Horror XV" was also one of the most memorable in years, maybe since "Treehouse of Horror XI."

If this season is anything like the past three, FOX will play the best episodes during these next few weeks. I don't know if this is intentional on the part of FOX, or if its just the way the episodes fall: the strong creative team gets its episodes out first, while the weaker creative teams release later in the season. I expect to see a few gems out of the Simspons this year (episodes as good as last year's "The Regina Monologues,") and plenty of stinkers that make you say "Jump the shark!" The Simpsons have done everything there is to do and satirized everything there is to satire, so the writers are scraping the bottom of the barrel as FOX forces them to make more episodes past the show's natural expiration date.

I wonder if President Bush will make his first ever appearance on "The Simpsons" (if you don't count the cardboard cutout from season seven.) His father was on twice, and Bill Clinton was on several times (the animated Clinton confesses to being "a pretty lousy president" and having sex with pigs. Homer calls him "Jimmy Carter with a FOX attitude.") So where do the political loyalties of "The Simpsons" lay?

In his moment of desperation, a Marine has shot down the rationale behind the International Criminal Court.

It all began with a firefight in Fallujah. The Marines storm a mosque being used as a sanctuary for insurgents. The Marines do what they do best--kick butt and take names. In the midst of this, one wounded insurgent is still moving. The Marines have seen this too many times before--the insurgents are playing dead so the Marines will come closer, allowing an insurgent to take a desperate shot before his inevitable death. The Marine finishes off the jihadi with a double-tap to the head.

Who is the war criminal here? Is it the Marine, who kills out of fear that he will be killed if he doesn't act? Or is it the insugent, who wears no uniform, does not fight on the behalf of a recognized government, and, most dishonorably of all, uses the sanctity of a holy place to shelter himself?

It is easy for an American to sympathize with the Marine. For people in other countries who oppose U.S. policies, it is easier to take the side of the jihadi. If the United States had been party to the International Criminal Court, the Marine would be on trial by now.

The world is ripe with people who are deserving of war crimes trials. Slobodan Milosevic is getting his, Saddam Hussein is awaiting trial, and the parties responsible for Sudanese genocide may be in for a rude surprise in the near future. But what will this court do when they are not dishing out justice to history's worst tyrants and genocidists? Presumably, they will be trying to punish the United States for pursuing its agenda. The easiest way to do so is to put members of the U.S. armed forces on trial to send a message of opposition to U.S. policies.

Do not believe for a second that the Intenational Criminal Court would stop after prosecuting the aforementioned Marine. There are plenty of other cases that could be brought to trial. What about the crew of the Spectre gunship that fired on an Afghan wedding party after some idiots decided it would be wise to celebrate with gunfire? The Iraqis and anti-war activists who filed suit against Gen. Tommy Franks in a Belgian court during April 2003 would probably get another chance to file their lawsuit. Similarly, the pilots responsible for the "Highway of Death" from February 1991 would find themselves under renewed scrutiny, as the International Criminal Court has no statute of limitations.

It is true that President Clinton, in the twilight of his presidency, signed onto the International Criminal Court. It is also true that Preident Clinton did not recommend the treaty's ratification unless U.S. demands (i.e., immunity for American citizens) were met. The United States has no obligations to International Criminal Court, in the same way it has no obligations to honor the Kyoto Treaty and the earlier Versailles Treaty. Without Senate approval, no treaty may go into effect. This may disappoint the United Nations, who equated a presidential signature with a green light to proceed, but it's how the Constitution works.

In the case of Kyoto and Versailles, the Senate acted in its capacity to check the power of the president in negotiating treaties, should the president sign a treaty that brings more harm than good to the nation. Even if President Bush, who is viewed as the poster boy for unilateralism, acquiesced to the International Criminal Court, it is highly likely the Senate would have rejected it anyway. The best interest of the United States is in specialized war crimes tribunals, like the one that will try Saddam Hussein, rather than standing tribunals that will put American citizens at risk of prosecution by nations who do not share our policies and values.

Drudge has some good video on his site showing about five minutes of unedited Fallujah fighting. You see soldiers and Marines giving and receiving fire with machine guns, tanks, and rocket launchers. For the brave men on the front lines, the best tribute to them is to paint an accurate portrait of what they went through.

If you want an accurate portrait of the enemy in Fallujah (and the real risk to civilians,) there is another good story on Drudge Report from a wounded soldier:

They described the rebel fighters as young, disorganised and often reckless but well-armed.

"You recognise them easily. They wear masks, they carry weapons, they move in small squads," said 22-year-old soldier Kris Clinkscales, who suffered an arm injury from an exploding shell.

"Civilians are usually wearing traditional gowns, they lift their hands when they see you." He said he was sure he had not shot at civilians because they were easy to identify. "There were bodies on the street, but only insurgents," he said.

Clinkscales is among the 275 wounded on the US side according to figures given by commanders in Baghdad, although a spokeswoman for the hospital said that up to Monday it had treated 419 injured servicemen, mostly from the Fallujah offensive, and that 46 more were due to arrive later that day.

Thirty eight US soldiers have been killed in the assault.

Clinkscales, who arrived at the hospital on Saturday, described the rebel fighters' approach as "reckless", "especially the young ones, aged 18 to 20. They were quite disorganised."

We've already seen one positive benefit from the Fallujah offensive: the leader of Jaish Mohammed was captured. Jaish Mohammed was a major insurgent group, comprised of former Iraqi intelligence, Baath party, and army holdouts, with a few Islamic militants thrown in the mix (although the group claimed to be "angry farmers" in a recent statement.) They specialized in attacks on helicopters and aircraft with RPG's and SA-7's. They also took credit for the UN bombing in August 2003, although many believe Zarqawi was responsible for that heinous attack. After Saddam Hussein was captured, the documents in his hideout linked him to Jaish Mohammed.

Today I spoke with a young man who lived in Egypt and relies on al Jazeera and the Egyptian media (while distrusting the American media) for his news. He thinks that Iraq has become totally unsafe, all the Shiites hate us, and that 80,000 foreign Islamists comprise the insurgency. He also "has some questions" about 911, which I take to mean "I don't think bin Laden, Muslims, etc were responsible." In an earlier conversation, he explained that the Iraqi army was defeated because it was comprised of children--another al Jazeera lie designed to salvage Arab pride.

I would like somebody to step forward and educate him about the way things really are in Iraq. I am not the person to do it, because I have never been there. I believe the government line that the insurgency consists of 20,000 individuals (including part-timers,) that 80% of the insurgency is former regime fighters, and that between 11 and 15 of Iraq's 18 provinces are safe. Somebody who has actually been there should do the talking for me.

al Jazeera has brainwashed an entire generation of Islamist killing machines. The al Jazeera building should be flooded with anthrax and the Qatari royal family (who puts up the money to fund this Islamist propaganda) should be noosed with tack-studded ropes and dragged through the streets of New York.

I don't feel too bad about the resignation of Colin Powell. I certainly appreciate the work he put in when he got Pakistan and other hotbeds of Wahhabism on our side after Osama bin Laden attacked us. I'm far less enthusiastic about his work when our focus turned to Iraq. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were urging three UN resolutions on Iraq: one for WMD's, one for human rights, and one for supporting terrorists. Colin Powell, like his brain-dead buddy George Tenet, felt the WMD case was so strong that it should be the sole thrust of our case for war. Now the US is discredited because the president listened to Powell and Tenet when he should have sided with Rumsfeld and (gasp) Wolfowitz.

I'm at a loss to explain why Powell chose today to resign. We all saw the resignation coming (according to Tim Russert, the "Curveball" scandal is what tipped Powell in this direction,) but most did not think it would take place until after the Iraqi election. My wild guess is that a forthcoming development in the Scott Speicher mystery would have forced Powell to resign. He's biting the bullet now so he can save face.

There are plenty of body-count websites out there, which purport to document the "innocent Iraqis" who are the victims of AmeriKKKan aggression. I do not feel they give us an accurate count of truly innocent people (non-combatants) who have been killed as a DIRECT result of U.S. military action.

These studies are normally conducted by people with anti-war agendas and are done with a variety of methods: surveys of hospital death records, compiled media reports, or statistical techniques. None of these are very reliable. The hospitals cannot confirm that the death was the direct result of U.S. military action, nor can they confirm the person killed was not an insurgent. Many of the hospitals have officials who are sympathetic to the insurgency and distort the truth so it plays better in the anti-American press. Even the American press can't be trusted to get the body counts right, because of factors like "fog of war" or simply the laziness / inability of reporters to confirm who the dead were and what the circumstances of their death really were.

I would like to see a study of how many deaths can be blamed on the Saddam Hussein regime and the insurgency. How many innocent Iraqis were killed by car bombs? How many were used as human shields by the Fedayeen and Ba'athist militamen? How many were placed in harm's way during urban convoy attacks or because Saddam was hiding missiles and tanks in mosques and schools?

Saddam made the decision to fight a dirty war, and his former followers are continuing his work. As long as they continue to do so, Iraqi citizens will pay the price.

NASA has seen its hopes raised that a robotic mission can save the Hubble Space Telescope.

I have opposed the thought of sending another shuttle mission to the telescope, because the shuttle must be retired as soon as possible. It's too unsafe and it's taking money away from programs to explore the moon and Mars.

On the topic of Hubble itself, I am torn between replacing the telescope with a modified spy-sat (one placed in a more desirable orbit than Hubble's) or a robotic repair mission. Plenty of challenges remain, but the robot looks more feasible now than it did in January when the shuttle mission was cancelled.

A robotic Hubble repair may cost as much as $1.6 billion, or twice the estimated cost of a shuttle mission (that's without factoring in the irreplacable crew.) Yet the robotic mission will be worth every penny. The DEXTRE robot pushes the envelope in terms of what robots can do. Nobody can imagine how much a successful DEXTRE mission will benefit the world of robotics. In that way, the $1.6 billion is money well-spent.

George Lucas, who at one time was ebullient about making an Indiana Jones 4, is probably not going to do it for lack of a good script and the aging of Harrison Ford. Yet I still think they can milk a fourth quality movie out of this excellent franchise that has created a rare treat: a movie that suspends reality and creates an enjoyable fantasy for children and adults alike.

"Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "The Last Crusade" were very good, while "Temple of Doom" seemed out of place in the trilogy, and never felt as engaging as the other two. The reason is because "Temple" disposed of the biblical themes that made the others great.

Another sticking point has been the age of Harrison Ford. It's generally felt that he would play an older Indy in the new film, mentoring new adventurers in much the same format as Lucas's "Young Indy" TV show. But what if they set the adventure ten, twenty years after "The Last Crusade"? I think Harrison Ford could play an older Indy who isn't ready to retire just yet.

This is my concept for Indiana Jones 4. In late 40's or early 50's Turkey, the race is on to find the remnants of that great Biblical artifact, Noah's Ark. Indy is pulled out of retirement to find the Ark on behalf of the U.S. government. Unfortunately, Josef Stalin has sent the KGB on the same mission--except that they want to destroy the ark. Sean Connery would return as Indy's father, and the mystical secret of Sean Connery's immortal libido will be revealed.

I don't want royalties for this idea, as long as it gets made. The only challenge I see is finding a title that won't be confused with the original "Raiders of the Lost Ark."

Mike Scheuer will say on "60 Minutes" tomorrow that Osama bin Laden has received permission from a Saudi cleric to use a nuclear bomb in the United States. That's not to say bin Laden has a nuke, but it brings up a scary what-if scenario.

Assume bin Laden gets a nuke, from either the Russian mafia or his allies within the Pakistani military. A major U.S. city gets wasted. What do we do? bin Laden is safe in Pakistan, a nominal U.S. ally. We can't enter Pakistan for fear of Gen. Musharraf getting toppled by a pro-bin Laden government. We could get India to do the job for us. But it's impossible to ensure bin Laden's death, and getting India to do our dirty work will only lead to nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

It's impossible to conclude that bin Laden doesn't have the trump card here. He is a clever and resourceful foe, and we can only hope that he dies soon.

Reading stories like this and this really break your heart when you read them. They are posted here to honor the memories of these brave souls and those like them. This is why we must pray daily for the men and women who wear our uniform; we must also pray that our enemy will reject armed insurrection and instead choose the peaceful route of rebuilding Iraq and using the political system to achieve his aims.

There are a lot of high-profile resignations going on at CIA right now, and I doubt we've seen the end of it. First the agency lost Mike Scheuer, who anonymously wrote the books "Through Our Enemy's Eyes" and "Imperial Hubris." Now Stephen R. Kappes (deputy director of operations) and John McLaughlin (deputy director) have quit, claiming they were "treated disrespectfully" by Patrick Murray, the top aid to DCI Porter Goss. This Washington Post story takes a very nagative tone towards the agency's shakeups and towards the way Porter Goss has been running the agency.

I don't think that shakeups and resignations are a bad thing. The CIA needs radical reform, and a lot of the "old blood" has to be let before the agency can heal itself. All of the Tenet loyalists have to leave.

I've said it once and I'll say it again: George Tenet may have been the worst DCI we ever had. During his watch (1997-2004,) the United States was attacked on its soil, at its African embassies, and at sea when one of her destroyers was in port. The intel community's assessment of Iraqi WMD's switched from "Iraq possesses the ability to make WMD's" to "Iraq possesses WMD's," due mainly to group-think. The agency never got any conclusive answers about Saddam Hussein's relationship with terrorist groups, and often spoke of terror ties in heavily-nuanced terms. The agency failed at infiltrating Iraq and did not get results when it was time to infiltrate al Qaeda.

At the same time, the CIA has to be purged of partisanship and individualism. The Democrat talking points regarding Porter Goss say that he's too partisan for the job; I hope that's not the case.

CIA officers like Mike Scheuer who have their own agendas may be adding to the national debate, but as CIA employees they are being disloyal to the agency.During the run-up to the election, we had CIA leaks implying that Abu Musab al Zarqawi had no ties to the Saddam Hussein regime; these heavily-nuanced statements were spun in the media into statements negating any Saddam-al Zarqawi link. In part, it's because CIA officers were adding their own views on the subject into their statements rather than official agency positions.

America should not be satisfied until we have a CIA that acts in the best interests of the nation, gathering quality intelligence and presenting it in an objective manner. The politicians, and not the analysts, should decide how to spin he intel and act on it. The Democrats will say that the CIA was never as partisan as it is right now, and it's all the fault of Bush the Evil. It's a pretty ballsy claim when one considers the CIA's reputation for having a pro-Democrat tilt.

Mike Scheuer is now free to write more books, and I hope he does. Sometimes he makes plenty of sense, and other times he's way off the deep end; either way, he's contributing to a debate that's of vital importance. If any of these CIA guys want to speakout, may they do so at their own risk and not while they are on the taxpayers' time.

Embry-Riddle professors occasionally make the headlines. I remember back in fall 2002 when Prof. Chuck Eastlake was talking to MSNBC about United's practice of fixing holes in planes with "speed tape." Eastlake has been he predominant media darling from this school, but there have been others. Now Dr. Mehmet Sozen (my old physics I prof) gets in the act with this news story. Check the bottom of the article.

Scott Peterson was found guilty by a jury of his peers after two of them were removed during deliberations by the judge. The jury will soon decide whether the fertilizer salesman will become fertilizer by way of California's death chamber.

I've always felt that Peterson killed his wife and kid, so I feel quite relieved by the verdict. The prosecutors, who were the underdogs in this case from day one, triumphed over high-price sleazeball Marc Geragos. Mad props to them for getting the conviction. Bt they shouldn't sleep too soundly, as Geragos surely will appeal, and the actions of the judge in this case have created solid bounds for the appeal.

I went back to my room at noon hoping to take a two-hour nap. I set the alarm on my watch and on my clock for 2 PM so I could make my 2:15 class. The alarms must have never gone off (or they were shut off,) as I ended up sleeping until 5 PM. I missed a quiz in Prof. Cracker's class, but I can get the notes for control systems. Overall, I feel like a dork who has disrespected his professors by skipping out on their lectures.

Happy Veterans Day to all who have worn the country's uniform in our time of need.

This day usually reminds me of World War I, because it was originally the day of the armistace. Two of my great grandfathers fought in the first world war; a great uncle fought the Germans in the second. I wish more people remembered the great sacrifices our young men made in World War I; over time it as become a forgotten war. For those of us who embrace the German-killing ways of our ancestors, it is an event we can never let go of.

Go forth and kill Germans.

A joke once held that a soothsayer told Yaser Arafat he would die on a Jewish holiday. When Arafat inquires which holiday it will be, the soothsayer replies that it doesn't matter. Arafat's death will become a Jewish holiday.

The joke was more a statement of reality than a humorous tale. Rabbis are already discussing whether they should treat the occasion with joy. From a personal perspective, I hope that Arafat's death will inspire Crispy to give us all "A's" on our project that's due tomorrow.

Iraqi forces in Fallujah claim to have found a "slaughterhouse" where Zarqawi's savages murdered their captives. Inside the house were the black uniforms worn by the Zarqawi savages, CD's full of death videos, and info on the hostages. There is no word if human remains were found in the area.

If the claims are true, they will vindicate the Fallujah offensive and give us one reason to cheer: the slaughterhouse is closed.

Boxer briefs are, generally speaking, the greatest undergarment known to man. They stay in place, offer decent support, and can be quite comfortable. However, physical training is the one purpose for which boxer briefs are inferior.

The Air Force shorts are too baggy to be worn with boxer briefs. When doing situps or other exercises while lying on one's back, the shorts slip back too far. Man, I wish the old shorts (the ones with the "asbestos nutsack") were still being issued.

Despite the ferocity of the resistance, US and Iraqi forces have about half of the city in their control. During the abortive April offensive, they only controlled a quarter to a third of the city. So why have they gotten so far so fast?

The bombing campaign that has gone on since June can receive some credit for killing off key Zarqawi operatives and destroying their weapons. Still, I think that a sizable number of Fallujah's insurgents, both Islamists and former regime fighters, have left Fallujah for other hotspots like Samarra, Ramadi, and Hit.

The exodus of enemy fighters does not by itself constitute a failure. If our goal is to rid Fallujah of insurgents, it is still working. The key is to seal the city off so these fighters cannot return. We also have to follow the offensive up with offensives in Ramadi and other pockets of resistance. Now is not a time to be casualty-averse. The greater good is accomplished by keeping pressure on the enemy, forcing him to stay on the defensive and not allowing him to regain the initiative.

Godspeed, guys. Lay the smack down on the Islmic militants and FRF's.

Robert Bigelow has finally announced his long-awaited America's Space Prize.

The requirements are very challenging: two orbital flights within 60 days, 80% reusability, and a crew of five. And the prize must be won by Jan. 10, 2010.

The technology to fulfill Bigelow's mission is clearly available. The problem is the time he's asking the industry to do it in. Unless one of the heavyweights (like Boeing or Lockheed Martin) uses their Crew Exploration Vehicle as a contender, I don't feel it can be won.

As an engineer, this is how I'd attempt the prize. First, start with the upcoming Falcon V rocket, because its first stage is reusable. The problem here is that its payload capacity might be too small. Next, design a 5-man capsule based on the tried, true Gemini design but with a reusable heat shield, docking collar, and abort tower.

Man, Bigelow, you're breaking our balls. If you gave us no time limit, we could design a true reusable launch vehicle that uses flyback boosters and a winged orbiter. There's also a concept, based on the X-43, that would use a turbine-based combined cycle aircraft as the first stage that accelerates from the ground to Mach 10. But that won't be around until 2015 or so. We can either do it the fast way or do it the right way.

I wanted to take the easy way out this morning, so I volunteered to play an injured pilot, thinking I would get a chance to lay down for most of the two hours. How wrong I was.

I went to lay down on a fallen tree when I felt a sharp sting on my right elbow, near the spot where I burned myself with a hot iron the night before. I got zapped by a yellow jacket. Soon, they were all over me. Staying still didn't help, as I must have agitated their nest. I came running out of the bushes, shouting "Medic! Medic!"

When all was counted up, I had stings on both elbows, two on my left wrist and one on my right, two on my chin and two on my right ear, and at least one on my right ankle. Luckily for me, it was a cold morning, so the yellow jackets clinging to my clothes were unable to fly into action as I swatted them.

If I had been allergic, I probably would have died out there in the sand pits. Fortunately I am not. Holder took me out of action and got me into Health Services as soon as they opened (an hour after the swarm.) I came back in time for retreat, thinking they still needed me (they actuallly replaced me.)

I lived to tell (and joke) about the incident. Hopefully the safety staff will use my experience to prepare for future insect sting incidents, especially in the case somebody is allergic.

Soldiers, Marines, and Iraqi National Guardsmen are storming Fallujah. Godspeed.

The days and perhaps weeks to come will be very difficult for all of us, in some way or another. But it's important to remember that the only way to defeat an enemy, especially an unconventional one like those we face in Fallujah, is to persistently stay on the offensive. If Iraq is to have a chance, the former regime fighters and foreign Jihadis must be defeated. This offensive regains the initiative for us that we had ceded to the Jihadis and ex-army insurgents.

The hospital in western Fallujah has been secured, and already there is an outcry over denying doctors and ambulances into the hospital. I cannot blame our forces for their tough decision. If the media accounts are true and most civilians have skipped town, an open hospital would only benefit the enemy. Ambulances would be used for shuttling around enemy weapons, as had been done during the aborted April offensive.

Press on and take the city. Take the fight to the enemy and don't let up until HIS charred carcasses have been strung up along the bridge. Free the city from the Mujahedeen Shura, let the townspeople come back, and cut the cancer out of the noble experiment that is Iraqi democracy. Godspeed.

All I've heard about Team America: World Police is that it's a pro-America, pro-Republican movie. A quick glance might make one think so, but looking under the surface shows much more depth than that.

If we take Team America to represent the United States, what are Trey Parker and Matt Stone saying about the nation? We have good intentions, but we meddle in places where we aren't wanted and we are too clumsy when we do go meddling.

Of course, we have to look at the villains of TA:WP as well. The Film Actors Guild is so extreme they're funny. Of course, celebrity activists are way in left field, well outside the Democrat mainstream. However, the Dems are guilty of pandering to the Michael Moores of the world, making them implicit targets of Trey and Matt's jabs. Terrorists (the Dirkadirkastanis) get absolutely zero sympathy from Trey and Matt (which is 100% appropriate,) and Kim Jong Il is turned into a laughingstock.

There's plenty of satire to go around in TA:WP. Just don't get the idea that Trey and Matt are being slanted. Everybody gets zinged in their puppet action-fest. Don't try to look for any deeper meaning in the movie; just sit back and enjoy watching panthers maul Danny Glover and Matt Damon.

Colin Mochrie and Brad Sherwood performed for ERAU tonight. It was a really funny act that looked like an uncensored version of "Whose line is it anyway?" I wish I could improv like Colin and Brad.

Come January, President Bush's cabinet is going to be awfully bare. Colin Powell will probably leave after the Iraqi elections. John Ashcroft will be gone within the next few weeks. Ditto for Tom Ridge and Tommy Thompson. Fifty-fifty odds say that Donald Rumsfeld will step down soon. Mel Martinez quit a year ago so he could successfully run for Senate.

So who does that leave? Condi Rice, Rod Paige, Ann Veneman, John Snow, Porter Goss, and the labor secretary who came up with the much-despised new rules on overtime pay. President Bush has his work cut out for him in picking a new cabinet. I tend to think that a lot of the president's problems stem from his trust of the wrong people (namely George Tenet, and to a lesser degree Colin Powell.) He had better make the new picks good, and congress should provide the appropriate oversight.

For one, Paul Wolfowitz should not get consideration as a defense secretary. His pro-Israel views are too strong for my liking. We need a defense secretary (and indeed, an entire cabinet) who can balance Israel's self-defense with a desire to see justice and peace for Palestinains and other neighbors of Israel.

My three picks for a replacement cabinet: John Lehman, Paul Bremer, and Rudy Giuliani.

John Lehman was the youngest and most controversial Navy secretary. He built Ronald Reagan's 600-ship Navy, and his commitment to finding the truth behind 911 (and his openness to the involvement of the Fedayeen Saddam in the plot) have sealed his reputation in my mind. e would be a strong candidate for defense secretary, if he can be convinced to leave the private sector.

Paul Bremer did his best with a difficult situation in Iraq. Many blame him for disbanding the Iraqi army and contributing to the insurgency; I see that as an incomplete description of reality, as the Iraqi army was melting away before Bremer came on the scene. If the pre-war plan was better, we may have been able to lure some of these soldiers away from "the dark side" with lucrative reconstruction jobs and a place in the new Iraqi army. But I also think that some level of insurgency (perhaps not as intense as the current insurgency) was inevitable. Even Saddam was plagued by insurgents throughout his time as Iraqi dictator. Bremer's extensive work in diplomacy and nation-building should make him a shoo-in for Secretary of State.

Rudy Giuliani--what more remains to be said about one of America's most beloved politicians? I have never been to New York, but Rudy Giuliani is MY mayor--not Scarlet Yvonne-Golden or Russ Petrizz0 (depending on where I am residing.) Rudy fought the mob as a prosecutor, and he must fight the terrorist enemy within our own country as our Attorney General.

President Bush can also use some of his cabinet spots to open a dialogue with Democrats. He was unable to do this in his first term because the Dems were trying to successfully take over the Senate, and could not spare a Senator to serve on the cabinet. There is no obstacle to inviting in John Breaux at this point. Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh, or Joe Biden might be good cabinet members if they could be persuaded to relinquish a Senate spot.

Yes, Mr. Wendy, the un-funny spokesman for the fast food chain is out of a job.

Perhaps Wendy's can bring back the late, great Dave Thomas as a cartoon character. After all, this "animated reanimation" worked for Col. Sanders and KFC.

I wonder if we'll see Mr. Wendy in a welfare line standing behind Tom Daschle.

Media conservatives are scrambling to explain the fall of John Kerry (aside from the failure of P. Diddy's asinine "Vote or Die") campaign. The two common answers are "Swift Boat Vets" and "Same-Sex Marriage."

I tend to feel that the Swiftees were a bigger factor. Their emergence as a potent political force occured at the same time that Kerry relinquished his lead in the polls. As much as the pundits tried to discredit the Swiftees and claim they were Republican tools, the Swiftees stayed in the spotlight, because their cause was just and their words were true. The Swift Boat advertisements will be compared to the Willie Horton ads from '88 and the "Girl picking flowers-Nuclear bomb" ad from '64 when the history books are written about the most devastating political ad campaigns. Not even the "beloved" John McCain could defeat the Swift Vets, despite his shameful attacks on them. Even the ERAU College Democrats were forced to respond by holding their own bull-session with Max "He Ain't Got No Legs" Cleland and Pete Peterson.

The same-sex marriage ("Marriage Equality," in the politically-correct lexicon) issue was important to the overall campaign, but it did not change my vote either way. I have no problem with the legal union of two men or women, granted that it will not cost me anything and will not be recognized as a Christian marriage. Other people see it differently. We are all worried that activist judges could make same-sex marriage the law of the land, despite state bans on it. This is not a strong enough argument for a marriage amendement, but it reinforces the belief that George W. Bush, and not John F. Kerry, should be picking the next justices for the Supreme Court.

I'm still thinking about the awesome speech Col. Billman gave last night regarding space power projection.

I totally agree with him about the value of sub-orbital weapons. The idea of projecting surface-to-surface power through space is equivalent to what ballistic missiles do today. This time, we will be using spaceplanes that take off in California, launch their weapons, and land in Florida while Jihadistan gets blown up halfway across the world.

The key to space weapons is kinetic energy, the so-called "Rods from God" concept. Thousands of metal rods (chosen because they are heavy and have low drag) with brilliant targeting systems would have the energy to strike halfway across the world with the explosive force of a 500 pound conventional bomb. Overflight rights would be a thing of the past, and Osama bin Laden sitting in his Baluchistan cave will be toast. That's what the Air Force FALCON project is all about.

I get a bit more jittery thinking about orbital weapons, as militarizing orbital space may interfere with mankind's ultimate objective of exploration. I think that space-based missile defense systems like "Brilliant Pebbles" are great ideas, but they should be approved and funded equally (or proportionally) by the major nuclear powers. (I know that this sounds like John Kerry's Global Test, but defense against nuclear attack is an issue that affects the whole world, and the balance of power is preserved if all nuclear nations have the right to missile defense.)

The best part about Brilliant Pebbles is that it creates an instant, guaranteed requirement for a thousand or more space launches over a short period of time. The main obstacle to building reusable rockets has been the lack of a market. If this huge launch demand emerged overnight, the industry would be chomping at the bit to develop new reusable launch vehicles.

The world is bracing for the imminent death of Palestinian chairman Yaser Arafat. At this stage, I think he may yet survive his current hospitalization (there has been plenty of misinformation, pro- and anti-Arafat, about what his medical state really is,) but he will not survive through 2005. His health has spiraled downwards for far too long for him to last much longer.

It is assumed that Mahmoud Abbas would come back to power after Arafat dies. Abbas is more liberal-minded than Arafat, and a quick US endorsement of Abbas would be the best thing we can do for the peace process. One can only hope that favorable regime change in Israel (the election of Ehud Barak or another PM who is less stigmatized than Ariel Sharon) will accompany the end of the Arafat regime.

Israeli officials have said that Arafat will never be buried in Jerusalem, but I really question the wisdom of this denial. Burying Arafat in Jerusalem would be a meaningful gesture towards starting a peace dialogue, and it would not require effort on the part of Israelis. Nobody is hurt by denying a dead man his wish to be buried in the place of his choosing.

If John Kerry was in office when Arafat's death came, I would be very afraid that he would use the occasion to send American "peacekeepers" to the West Bank and Gaza. He said he wanted as much during a May 2003 "Meet the Press" interview, altough I don't know if he'd be as trigger-happy about a West Bank deployment with the Iraq situation being what it is now.

Post script: Bush got re-elected. Then why is Fallujah still standing? Maybe we're holding out to find a smarter solution: sparking a city-wide war between former regime elements and Islamic militants.

Riddle played "Spider-Man 2" for our movie on the lawn. The two problems were the underwhelming screen and the underwhelming attendance from the students.

"Spider-Man 2" was excellent. It was even better than the first one, which is a very tall order indeed. I liked the way they handled Dr. Octopus, as he wasn't the standard "take over the world" supervillain. He was a good scientist possessed by both his misguided desire and his evil machines, and ultimately finds redemption for his sins. (I knew the priest was on to something when he cited this movie as a good Christian movie during a summer homily.)

Unfortunately, Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire will only be sticking around for one more Spider-Man movie.

What does the future hold for "Spider-Man 3"? Either Harry Osborn will become the new Green Goblin, or he will become the Hobgoblin. My hope is that Osborn will become the Green Goblin, while Roderick Kingsley becomes Hobgoblin (like in the comics.) Like in the comics, the two Goblins will try to kill each other because they hate each other so much. My only problem with that storyline is that it might run into "Octopussy" syndrome, where you get two underdeveloped villains fighting for screen time.

There's just so many wonderful things they can do with the Spider-Man movie franchise, and a shame that the series will end with only three movies. There's no time to cover Gwen Stacy, Peter Parker's first true love, who acts as a wonderful foil to Mary Jane until she is killed by the Green Goblin (or Spider-Man, depending on how you read that story.) They dispense with Eddie Brock, the anti-Parker reporter, who hates Spider-Man while he is the spider-like alter-ego "Venom." Kraven and Chameleon, the two brothers who hate each other as much as they hate Spider-Man, could also make a good storyline.

So many good ideas, so little time.

George W. Bush was placed in one of the toughest fights imaginable for an incumbent president seeking election. With mounting casualties in Iraq, rising fuel costs, and fears over a sluggish economy and outsourcing of jobs, most Americans were saying it was time for the country to seek a new direction. The army of the president's opponents, led by Michael Moore, Dan Rather, Bruce Springsteen, and George Soros, unleased vicious daily attacks and mobilized all of their resources against the man they sought to unseat. Yet we stand today facing another four years of George Walker Bush.

The Democrats will be analyzing this campaign for the next four years, but one thing is certain: the Democratic party underestimated the president. Their campaign was run with the belief that an angry America would choose anybody but George Bush. Some Democrats probably felt they could run a turd sandwich as their candidate. Instead, they chose the next best thing: John Kerry.

Perhaps the best thing that could be said about candidate Kerry was that he wasn't George Bush. The fact that he couldn't stick to a campaign position for a whole week did not bother anti-Bush voters. The fact that he voted to authotize military action against Iraq did not deter anti-war voters. In short, John Kerry was less of a candidate than he was a conduit for the pure and unadulterated outrage that many Americans felt for the president. For moderate voters, who feel that President Bush has done a tolerable job as president, given the state of the world when he was inaugurated, the Democrats would not automatically earn their votes by submitting an empty suit for election.

The undoing of John Kerry was not engineered by George Bush or Karl Rove or Rupert Murdoch. It began with John O'Neill, Kerry's nemesis from 1971 who opposed Kerry's anti-war efforts back then. O'Neill, like other moderate voters who sided with Bush, were more opposed to Kerry than they were enthralled by the president.

O'Neill and other Vietnam veterans funneled their righteous anger into the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, who exposed John Kerry as a man who abandoned his unit so he could seek notoriety as a dishonest and manipulative war protestor. Kerry's actions from 1971 are still relevant today, because his character has gone largely unchanged. He authorized and initially supported invading Iraq, but now calls it "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time." He claimed to own an SUV, then claimed it belonged to his family. He portrayed himself as a hunter even though his Senate record reveals his desire to toss the second amendment in history's wastebin. He claimed that he believes life begins at conception, but voted against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. He wants America to protect itself, but only if it can pass the "global test." He divorced his first millionaire wife, then married a second millionaire.

On Nov. 2, Americans had a very distinct choice. There was a man who, for better or worse, takes decisive action because he feels it will benefit the nation. Then there was the candidate who governs by trial balloon and makes every attempt to boost his popularity and prestige. By a small margin, Americans picked the man who follows his conscience rather than the mob.

The Democrats could have easily won the election of 2004 had they gone with a candidate who had the slightest ideas of honor, integrity, leadership, and decisiveness. If they truly want to win the presidency back in 2008, they had better learn the lessons of 2004.

The policies and directions the United States has taken over the past four years have been influenced by disasters borne out of the mistakes of previous administrations. Particulalry, one horrific day remains seared in our minds as the day a foe, devoid of logic or compassion or purpose, struck our beacon of freedom. Since that horrible day and thoughout the challenges that have subsequentl faced the United States, George Walker Bush has provided bold and decisive leadership for a nation that has lost its way.

Americans will need a leader over the next four years who understands what makes this nation strong and what it will take to keep her that way. For the past four years, George Walker Bush has been our commander in chief. There have been times when I could not be prouder to say he was leading our nation in the right direction. There were other times when I had to say that he stumbled. Yet his vision and clarity will lead our nation from our malaise. There are plenty of people who could be a better leader for America. However, John Kerry is not among them.

During this difficult time, our nation was attacked by the evil of militant Islam. Since then, our president has taken the fight to Islamic militants on their own turf rather than ours. The Taliban regime that once oppressed Afghanistan was swept from power and al Qaeda fighters were routed in record time while avoiding a Soviet-style quagmire. Afghan elections proceded without violence. Osama bin Laden has fled to Pakistan and been largely silenced while his terrorist commanders have been killed and apprehended, one-by-one.

President Bush also recongized that following the Taliban's defeat in Afghanistan, Iraq was emerging as a nexus where Islamic militants could find refuge and eventually acquire weapons of mass destruction. Twelve years of Saddam Hussein violating the Safwan ceasefire agreement was enough for the Bush Administration. Saddam Hussein and his cronies were brought to an ironic justice that they denied to millions. In spite of the difficulties we have faced in Iraq, the president sees the big picture of Iraq's importance towards a freer middle east, and is steadfast in his committment to a free, safe Iraq. He pins his hopes not on unrealistic plans to internationalize our efforts, but on engaging Iraqis to fight the Islamic militants who kill them daily.

President Bush has championed the technologies that will sustain human civilization. His support of nuclear power is far more important than his pronunciation of the word "nuculer." Bush's bold challenge to explore the moon and Mars was the correct course of action following the nihilistic mission that cost us the Columbia astronauts, and it will lead to mankind's destiny as explorers.

We have two presidential candidates who believe that life begins at conception, but only George W. Bush backed up this belief with concrete action. George W. Bush has said no to the barbarism of partial-birth abortion, and he has fought to criminalize the death of an unborn child during crimes commited against pregnant women.

President Bush understands that other nations are trying to impose their values on us with detrimental results. He sees that tariffs on imported goods are countered by tariffs on our goods by other countries. He will put the interests of our nation ahead of the interests of the United Nations when our goals come into conflict. He will shield American soldiers from the International Criminal Court and will continue to protect us from the flawed Kyoto treaty.

If given four more years, President Bush will free us from the obsolete graduated income tax and Internal Revenue Service. He will continue to stimulate an economy that stagnated after the dot-com bust and a lack of supervision from an under-funded SEC. Over the course of these four years, America has gone from recession to recovery. George Bush's tax cuts softened the initial blow. It put money in the hands of practically every American, and returned money to the people who spend and invest it. George Bush understands that tax increases, particularly those for the wealthiest Americans, will not improve the economy.

This is my concise list of reasons why Americans should give George W. Bush another four years.

Author Tom Wolfe isn't afraid to offend the literati: he's actually expressed sympathy (although he hasn't expressed support) for George Bush and has derided Sen. Kerry as a man who stands for nothing. These comments come in the UK's Guardian, a very left-wing newspaper, which recently printed an editorial implying that 1) President Bush should be assassinated and 2) if Bush wins, it means there is no God.

I don't view Wolfe as a partisan in any sense of the word, but his values are a bit more conservative than those of other contemporary authors. His upcoming novel chastizes America's over-sexed college campuses. The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test parodied Ken Kesey's counter-culture movement, while he won me over with the personable The Right Stuff. After I read his master-work, Bonfire of the Vanities, I will make sure to blog about it. Wolfe will remain the consummate Virginia gentleman, and an intellectual counter-balance to the limousine liberal elites that John Kerry represents.