In no particular order:

• I'm thankful I live in America. That might strike people as jingoistic. Well, I'll say it again: I thank my lucky stars I live in America, and if for whatever reason some people don't like that attitude, then by jingo, I don't care.

• I'm thankful I live in the time I do. All expressions of nostalgia to the contrary notwithstanding, We have a duty to be more creative than longing for the past. When one thinks about it, day to day life in past eras were pretty miserable for most people most of the time in most places, and we have gained a lot. There are things to work on, even things lost that should be regained, but it can only be done by moving forward, not looking back, and keeping the best of what we have and building on it.

• I'm thankful I live in a country that, by and large and for the most part, respects Liberty, something that's rare in the world. People often think this is a natural state and take it for granted, getting embittered when it doesn't meet utopian standards. They forget, or do not realize, the extent to which we're lucky. We should move forward, and be vigilant and jealous of our Liberty and resist encroachments upon it. But we shouldn't let that cloud our judgement about how things could be, or follow the siren song of those who don't see the value of what we have and would sacrifice it in an attempt to emulate "utopias elsewhere" that aren't really all they're presumed to be.

• I'm thankful for the people who, at great personal sacrifice and risk, protect that freedom, which I realize would not long survive without their efforts. They do so with great skill and great honour, showing more concern for enemy civilian populations than that of any other military at any other time in history, for all that they too frequently get no credit and too much blame for their efforts in just that regard, used as a political football by those who disregard, disparage, and devalue their efforts while still claiming to support the troops.

• I'm thankful I live in a country where the typical person, through their own efforts, can prosper to the extent of their abilities. Yes, there are problems and we must strive to work on them. But, again, in most places and at most times, opportunities are far more limited for most people.

• I'm thankful that I live in a country that responded to an attack on its own soil not by launching a war of annihilation, not by engaging in a clash of civilizations, but in a war of Liberty that has, so far, liberated fifty million people from oppressive tyranny. I am thankful of living in a country that, wherever its soldiers have successfully planted its flag, freedom and democracy, not oppression and dictatorship, have taken root and grown - from Germany to South Korea to Panama and the Philippines and beyond. When the USS Vandegrift sailed into Saigon harbor a week ago, it docked in a land that would be freer, more prosperous, and happy today if we had won rather than lost, kept our pledge of support that we gave to those who fought alongside us rather than withdrawing it as we did in '74 by cutting off their funding. They were imperfect, but today Vietnam would likely have gone the same path South Korea did, to everyone's benefit, especially those who live there. Which invokes a great responsibility: upon our resolve depends the Liberty of millions. We will only lose in our efforts if our civilizational resolve falters. We must be resolute rather than self-loathing.
  Let martial note in triumph float
  And liberty extend its mighty hand
  A flag appears 'mid thunderous cheers,
  The banner of the Western land.
  The emblem of the brave and true
  Its folds protect no tyrant crew;
  The red and white and starry blue
  Is freedom's shield and hope.
  Other nations may deem their flags the best
  And cheer them with fervid elation
  But the flag of the North and South and West
  Is the flag of flags, the flag of Freedom's nation.

  Hurrah for the flag of the free!
  May it wave as our standard forever,
  The gem of the land and the sea,
  The banner of the right.
  Let despots remember the day
  When our fathers with mighty endeavor
  Proclaimed as they marched to the fray
  That by their might and by their right
  It waves forever.

  Let eagle shriek from lofty peak
  The never-ending watchword of our land;
  Let summer breeze waft through the trees
  The echo of the chorus grand.
  Sing out for liberty and light,
  Sing out for freedom and the right.
  Sing out for Union and its might,
  O patriotic sons.
  Other nations may deem their flags the best
  And cheer them with fervid elation,
  But the flag of the North and South and West
  Is the flag of flags, the flag of Freedom's nation.

  Hurrah for the flag of the free.
  May it wave as our standard forever
  The gem of the land and the sea,
  The banner of the right.
  Let despots remember the day
  When our fathers with might endeavor
  Proclaimed as they marched to the fray,
  That by their might and by their right
  It waves forever.

• I'm thankful I live in a country where people, however foolish and misguided, are free to disagree with all of the above, express their disagreement vociferously, and even loudly and stridently proclaim that they're dissent is being stifled. They aren't sent to the gulag or laogai for it, or tortured with their family, or simply disappeared as happens in so much of the rest of the world, including many of the places that not a few of them exalt by comparison with our own country, simply because those places are ruled by despots who oppose this country. All of their melodramatics and that of the apologists who make political common cause with them, who would rather forge and maintain a popular front with them rather than make common cause with those who fight our enemies rather than make rationalizations for them, make me thankful for standing with those I stand with, rather than with them.

• I'm thankful I live in a country that has a strong-minded enough leadership, which doesn't crumble in the face of disaproval both at home and abroad, that our foreign policy is still made in Washington, D.C., rather than in Paris or Brussels or UN HQ in New York City in the interests of those who, frankly, do not share our interests nor so many, many other things that would be too long to detail and for which archives were created. My reasons for being thankful for this are fully layed out therein.

• I'm thankful for family and friends, and for making more (friends, that is). For each being there in their own way, and for being family and friend to others. For the generosity they show me and the opportunity to show the same to them.

• I'm thankful for lessons learned, relearned, and then rethought with the help of such a friend.

• I'm thankful for my dog, who is getting rather elderly, is very smart (I know, everyone says that, but you don't know my dog. If I've gotten stupider with age, she's gotten smarter), very demanding, and is always there no matter how ill-tempered or gloomy one gets. You can keep your cats. I'd rather be packmate to a dog.

• I'm thankful that no matter how much the flame flickers, it never quite goes out, this idea that eventually a triumph of hope over experience may pay off.

• To absent friends, and twice to absent enemies. May fewer of the former and more of the later be absent this time next year.

Update: Austin Bay gives thanks.

Ok, I couldn't resist this:

The romance between Keyshawn Johnson and the Buccaneers lasted, well, about the length of the average modern romance. Actually -- three and a half years is long by modern-romance standards! But they lived apart half the time, which tends to postpone the big showdown relationship talk.

TMQ thinks Johnson and the Bucs should have signed a prenuptial. Certainly considering the Keyshawn debacle, other NFL teams will now request prenuptial agreements before trades are consummated. In fact, Tuesday Morning Quarterback has obtained the draft of an athlete-team prenuptial that is, at this moment, being reviewed by the NFL Players Association:

I, the player {hereafter, THE PLAYER} do take this team {hereafter, THE TEAM} to love and to cherish, to have and to hold -- wait, holding is illegal -- for as long as it shall serve our mutual interests.

I, THE PLAYER, promise not to throw temper tantrums on national television, not to call press conferences on the sidelines during games, and not to compare my coach to notorious evil dictators from world history. If I cut too many classes to know specific examples from world history, then I promise not to compare my coach to supernatural monsters from horror movies.

We, THE TEAM, promise not to treat the player like an eight-year-old, not to insert a mind-control chip into the player's hippocampus, and not to insist that lawyers be present whenever he speaks to his position coach. Additionally, we promise to publicly blame the player for a crushing defeat not more than once per season.

Since all relationships experience strain, if tension arises, THE PLAYER and THE TEAM agree to seek counseling from Dr. Phil or, failing that, Larry King.

Should this romance end for any reason -- especially ratings! -- THE PLAYER agrees to return all team-owned equipment, especially cell phones with rollover minutes remaining, and not to toss toilet paper all over the coach's lawn. Additionally, THE PLAYER agrees to tell sportswriters that he really loves and respects his previous employers, and agrees to say this with a straight face. THE TEAM agrees to pay the player's cab fare to the airport, and not to erase every trace of his existence from the press guide. Additionally, THE TEAM agrees to tell reporters it was a really, really wonderful experience working with THE PLAYER, and to say this without a laugh track running in the background.

As for the disposition of any rings or other valuable items that may be mutually shared by THE PLAYER and THE TEAM, the parties agree that mutual possessions will be donated to charity, along with any unused timeouts.

Go America! Go Broncos Packers!

China has become a bit of a theme of late, and the degree to which the oligarchs who rule the country love us so and shower us with gifts as a sign of their undying affection and eternal goodwill. To that end, via Instapundit, I'll note this.

Oh, no!

In general. Things that came to mind as I was putting this post together, and also by this widely remarked-upon David Brooks piece. These thoughts are entirely theoretical because when it comes to marriage, I've never had the pleasure. Brooks starts off:

Anybody who has several sexual partners in a year is committing spiritual suicide. He or she is ripping the veil from all that is private and delicate in oneself, and pulverizing it in an assembly line of selfish sensations.

Few of us work as hard at the vocation of marriage as we should. But marriage makes us better than we deserve to be. Even in the chores of daily life, married couples find themselves, over the years, coming closer together, fusing into one flesh. Married people who remain committed to each other find that they reorganize and deepen each other's lives. They may eventually come to the point when they can say to each other: "Love you? I am you."

So yesterday I said I'd write up a post on my opinion regarding the issue of Gay Marriage. I know with absolute certainty that whatever I say, people are going to disagree strongly, because opinion is sharply divided and deeply held. So that means that, as usual, I'm just going to say what I really think and let the dice fall where they may. You can't please everyone, so you've gotta please yourself, as the song goes (isn't that another topic for another time, though? Yah).

Well, it turns out that being the EU's "core", as France & Germany like to think of themselves, or their "vanguard" means, as I've written before, that the rules you make are intended to constrain others, not so much to apply to yourselves. You need flexibility.

Is brought to you by the Mamas & the Papas. If you're not keen on the song lyric postings, well, I'm lyrically minded this week but you can thank yourself that it's a short week. I most likely won't be posting tomorrow through Sunday. There may be some posting over the Thanksgiving Holiday, but don't count on it. You shouldn't be reading blogs then, anyhow (I probably will have a "Thanksgiving" post, though, but I'll write it later today or tonight). And I obviously need a break ("the ol' boy's lost it. He's got the Space Madness - or Blog Madness, or whatever" is probably what a lot of readers are thinking. Don't blame 'em if they are, myself).

Oh, and yah: these are all older songs for a reason. Mostly, I think today's music reeks of suckitude. Mostly. They can't hold a candle to songwriting like this, whether you find the embedded message agreeable or wrong. Anyhow, I heard this on the oldies channel I listen to when I cut out of the BBC World Service for a bit. It was kinda catchy:

Words of love, so soft and tender
Won't win a girls heart anymore
If you love her then you must send her
Somewhere where she's never been before
Worn out phrases and longing gazes
Won't get you where you want to go, no!
Words of love, soft and tender
Won't win her

You oughta know by now
You oughta know, you oughta know by now
Words of love, soft and tender
Won't win her anymore

You oughta know by now
You oughta know, you oughta know by now
Words of love, soft and tender
Won't win a girls heart anymore
If you love her then you must send her
Somewhere where she's never been before
Worn out phrases and longing gazes
Won't get you where you want to go

Words of love, soft and tender
Won't win her anymore, anymore

A good Daniel Pipes piece, well worth checkin out (via LGF, which adds one more).

Update: See also this Christopher Hitchens piece.

Because they want to repeat it. Check out this interview with the authors of the book In Denial if you haven't already, for insight into how Western historians are willfully blind to things they don't care to see.

Yep, when I wrote this post I said that if I knew what was good for me, I wouldn't get into it. But I'm stubborn and willful. Anne Cunningham has replied in a fashion that shows she did not understand the post. (Oh-oh. No one understands me! My life has no value!)

If we know what's good for us, but we're stubborn and willful, so here we go. Lets, for the sake of argument, look at this post (if the links are bloggered, as they say, go to One-Sided Wonder and scroll to Friday, Nov. 22, the post on "the consolations of philosophy").

I was writing about money, happiness, and the connection between the two (presenting my thoughts here and a counter-argument here)

In the essay "Consolation for Not Having Enough Money," de Botton presents the philosophy of Epicurus, who, contrary to popular opinion, was not an advocate of hedonism, but a believer in simple pleasures. Pleasures which, crucially, are not very expensive.

According to Epicurus, there were three main components of happiness. The first of these is friendship. As Epicurus put it:

"Of all the things that wisdom provides to help one live one's entire life in happiness, the greatest by far is the possession of friendship."

Reacting as well as can be expected to yesterday's Roll Out the Barrel post, Ray Phelps writes, via e-mail:

Well, the Republicans went ahead and did it. They probably just lost THEMSELVES a Republican voter. I can no longer in good conscience vote for the party of SMALL government.

And to lose this vote is such tragedy. They have basically eschewed their long term constituency for the sake of votes in the 2004 election. Why do I say this? In my opinion, the Seniors demographic is lock step part of the Democrats, long term. I think the AARP will turn on the Repubs at the earliest possible convenience. They may vote for the Repubs in this election as payback for the Scooby snack, but what about long term? Who benefits from this legislation, Repubs or Dems?

I think its the Dems. Starting around the 2008 election cycle when Hillary is running for President, we'll start seeing the new arrow in the Dems Mediscare quiver. The Dems will want to pile on all sorts of new spending onto the Prescription drug program while if the Repubs try to hold the line (as if at this point that would happen), they'll be accused of taking Seniors pills away that they are rightfully entitled to. We'll have Seniors dying slow, painful, unnecessary deaths in the streets. We'll be backing to starving school kids and kicking Seniors out of their
homes again.

This is a no win for the Repubs. They've handed the Dems a silver bullet for future use and they've basically told their own small government constituency (a major part of the Repub party I would think) that they can't be trusted with the reigns of fiscal responsibility.

If he's not showing public happiness now, Teddy Kennedy must be downright giddy on the inside.

In the ballpark, Teddy Kennedy is strolling up to the plate with Wonderboy^tm strongly nestled into his hands. He looks to the mound at the spineless Republican pitcher with faux confidence in his eyes, trying to hide the hopefulness that his weak slider will rule the day. But Teddy knows better. He steps up to the plate and with a smile on his face, he says, 'I'm BACK in the game.'

And so he/they are.

The countdown to Atlas shrugging just picked up the pace.

Lets take a look at this multilateral agreement on how to solve a problem, within the context of some debates we had here a couple weeks ago:

The deal breaks an impasse between the United States and France, Germany and Britain over how to balance support for Iran's recent willingness to reveal 18 years of clandestine nuclear activities with the threat of sanctions for what the United States describes as a nuclear weapons program. The Europeans, who had persuaded the Iranians to submit to stricter inspections, sought a milder resolution by the International Atomic Energy Agency, a U.N. agency. But the United States pushed for immediate consideration by the Security Council.

Hundreds of party hack newspapers circle the bowl in China. Now, if only we could do something about the NYT (speaking of party organs). Comes on the heels of good election results in Hong Kong which crushed the parties of servility.

Britain might just say 'no' to the EU Constitution (see my "A Constitution for Bureaucratopia" series for why this would be a good idea. Just enter Bureaucratopia into the search engine, located screen left, if you're interested).

Japanese banks seem to be coming back into the black.

In more dubious, mixed news, more on what's looking more and more like a a brewing trade war between China & the U.S. I'm still not sure this is a good idea, but this observation:

The US also accuses China of keeping its currency artificially low.

The long national nightmare continues.

Oh, one or two more things, since I brought up the subject of my TV viewing habits, I want to say, just in case a TV person or two is reading this, that any time Michael Jackson's grim visage comes on my TV now, I turn it off. Every time the Scott Peterson or Kobe Bryant case comes up, I'm reaching for the clicker. Every time I see a promo mentioning this or that show is going to have a segment on any of these "Court Dramas", I make sure to make plans to not watch that show.

I've commented before, usually when one of them makes a pretty elementary error, that media types are bad at math. As with much else, I used to be amazingly good at math in some ways, though only within a narrow parameter. Higher math didn't take very well for me, but on the other hand I could play "beat the calculator" with friends, multiplying or dividing (usually multiplying) long number strings in my head before they could pick up the calculator, enter the number(s), and get the result. (I know, sounds kinda lame put this way: we didn't do this as a "game" in and of itself, but it came up surprisingly often when doing other things and normally I beat 'em. I had a mental trick). Addition & subtraction likewise. Note I said used to be - that skill has atrophied. So, with that in mind, here is something Joe Willingham sent in which might help us fuzzy-headed humanities-types get up to speed with arithmetic, and even prep for the future:

Teaching Math in 1950

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?

Teaching Math in 1960

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?

Teaching Math in 1970

A logger exchanges a set "L" of lumber for a set "M" of money. The cardinality of set "M" is 100. Each element is worth one dollar. Make 100 dots representing the elements of the set "M." The set "C," the cost of production contains 20 fewer points than set "M." Represent the set "C" as subset of set "M" and answer the following question: What is the cardinality of the set "P" of profits?

Teaching Math in 1980

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.

Teaching Math in 1990

By cutting down beautiful forest trees, the logger makes $20. What do
you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the forest birds and squirrels "feel" as the logger cut down the trees? There are no wrong answers.

Teaching Math in 2002

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $120. How does Arthur Andersen determine that his profit margin is $60? (will the volume of sales keep him in business?)

Teaching Math in 2010

Un hachero vende un camión carga por $100. La producción cuesta . . .

Regarding this post, Lucas Moody wrote, via e-mail, to ask what it was I didn't agree with in his mail. In that post I didn't think where I differed was important to the post, but as I wrote a reply I thought it might be worth a post. Two of my answers may be of general interest, while what became the third is of narrow (or peculiar) interest, and for most people it'll just make your lives more surreal (read: be incomprehensible). But you'll just have to roll with the deck. The pertinent section from his mail is this, with the areas of my disagreement in bold:

A little background, I grew up in a military family where generally both of my parents did work, my father being in the Navy and my mother doing electronics work. I was left to my own devices often enough growing up mostly when I was older. I grew up reading Sci-Fi and Fantasy books; I did not watch much T.V. I was an active kid playing generally at least one sport sometimes two or three at once. And I am generally considered intelligent. All that being said, I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat, I am very neutral, not in my beliefs, but in that one must vote with the needs of the country.

Saying all this I do not particularly care what Bush's economic policy is as long as the economy is moving forward and not backward, perhaps that is naive, but as long as the economy is growing and the government is not regulating it to death I generally find things to be well with the world. What I do not believe in is regulation, tariffs annoy me, but sometimes they must be used even when they hurt, why, well China is a case in point, do I like what’s going on, nope, do I think there is a possibility it could build into a full scale trade war, maybe, do I wish there was something other we could do certainly, but am I going to bad mouth the President over it not a bit. Why? All I can say is it is the best of a poor set of options.

. . .But if the President had not put the tariffs on steel, I doubt that we would have had the votes to pass the bill giving him 'fast-track' authority to negotiate trade deals. Without that, we wouldn't have had a Singapore free trade agreement, we wouldn't have had a Chile free trade agreement, we wouldn't have the other six that are on the way.

Metrosexuality has even conquered Middle America -- in a recent hilarious episode of SOUTH PARK, all the town's males turn metrosexual after watching an episode of QUEER EYE.

Like I've been saying, though, that dude is dead.

Well, *Arthur Carleson voice*, as God is my witness, I hoped this turkey would die.

Well, not this one, but this one. Since I blathered on here where readers could read it, I should let them know not to take what I say when I'm in a dark mood too seriously. The moods tend to break suddenly anyhow.

Taking one small step towards catching up with my backlog of posting ideers ("One giant leap for blogkind" it ain't, but it's not like this blog is the moon landing or nothin'), I've been meaning to plug this City Journal article by Theodore Dalrymple:

Her coarse behavior ultimately results from a cultural switch engineered by intellectuals over the last few decades: what was once considered laudable and comme il faut is now seen as ridiculous and even harmful, while what was once considered degraded and despicable is now seen as laudable and healthy. So, for example, the polite reserve, tinged with irony, once held to be the mark of a gentleman or lady have come under remorseless attack from people intolerant of restraint upon their own behavior—as have the very terms “gentleman” and “lady.” Gentlemanly conduct also became suspect for political reasons, since the intellectuals deemed it characteristic of the upper and upper-middle classes—and therefore reactionary.

Moreover, the spread of sub-psychotherapeutic ideas, according to which it is dangerous not to express one’s innermost being, regardless of the form the expression takes, has also had a disinhibiting effect. For many, an impulse not acted upon is now like an undrained abscess: it will eventually turn inward and cause septicemia. . .

But multiculturalism is more ambivalent in its logical consequences than one might imagine. If it imposes the duty to accept others as they are, it equally imposes on others the duty to accept one as one is. No accommodation to the feelings of others is therefore necessary. And the girl in question probably also thought that she stood in relation to Greece as a customer does to a shop—that is to say, of never being in the wrong. She was doubly disinclined, therefore, to consider the feelings of others when she took off her shirt.

Civilized people have always recognized that they should avoid gratuitously giving offense, and that travel abroad requires more, not less, tact. The behavior of the young British tourist was a failure not of multiculturalism but of culture.

At least someone is making an emotional connection (if the link is bloggered go to Iraqnow and scroll to "The Wierdest Book Review Ever").

Trust me, it'll be worth it.

Some are wondering what Porphy is babbling about in some of the vague non-sequiturs in some recent posts. Those are vague for a reason.