The Recovering Cynic

Temperature Rising...

2004-08-07T00:44:00.000-07:00

You've really gotta hand it to Cuba - they, like Hezbolla before them, really know quality when they see it.

-TRC

Precious Memories

2004-08-06T23:23:00.000-07:00

I was absolutely appalled when I heard about John F. Kerry's grab, glow, throw, and go performance at Wendy's last week. For those of you who didn't get the news, here's the gist of the story from NewsMax:

When John Kerry, John Edwards and their wives descended on a Newburgh, N.Y., Wendy's restaurant on Friday for a "light" lunch with the common people, it was all just a photo op.

Team Kerry-Edwards had already ordered their real lunches - consisting of five-star gourmet food from a tony local restaurant - with instructions to have the haute cuisine ready for pickup after the top Democrats ditched Wendy's.

It goes on:

After tossing out their cheeseburgers and chili, Kerry and Edwards feasted on shrimp vindallo, grilled diver sea scallops, prosciutto, wrapped stuffed chicken and steak salad.

The meals came to about $200, MidHudson News said.

Now, contrast Kerry's snobbery with President Bush's Thanksgiving feast last November. He slid out of Washington without a single photo-op, put his life at risk by entering an extremely hostile war zone, personally served our troops their dinner, and was back in the U.S. before the New York Times could tip off Al Qaeda.

Remember this picture?

Or how about this one?

And yet another:

Interesting comparison, No?

-TRC

Keeping The Tradition Alive

2004-08-06T21:59:00.000-07:00

Curtis seems to have abandoned his weekly quiz, so in the meantime I'll be taking over for him. This one, the mage quiz, also comes from Muted Faith. I used to play Role Playing Games back in the day, so this holds some nostalgic appeal for me:

find your element
at mutedfaith.com.

Accurate? You be the judge.

-TRC

Debunking The Body Count Myth

2004-08-05T23:33:00.000-07:00

Here's one that I've been waiting to address for a long time:

Back when Fahrenheit Fact still had a comments section, one of our more colorful visitors claimed that the Coalition was just as bad as Saddam because we've murdered over 10,000 Iraqi civilians. His source? Iraq Body Count, a website dedicated to (in its own words) "[establishing] an independent and comprehensive public database of media-reported civilian deaths in Iraq resulting directly from military action by the USA and its allies." Their online tally is up to 11,429 (as of Aug 5), and shows no sign of slowing down.

Now of all the distorting websites maintained by anti-war activists, I've always found those like Iraq Body Count to be the most distasteful and ill-conceived. By using pretty graphics, bold-type fonts, and professional-looking charts, IBC (like Time before it) hopes to divert attention from its specious reasoning and conjure a case from Ethos and Pathos. Don't believe me? Lets deconstruct:

The first false premise advanced by IBC relates to the nature of our military intervention in Iraq. By saying that their death tally "[resulted] directly from military action by the USA and its allies," the webmasters of Iraq Body Count are implying that every Coalition soldier, whether passive or active, is responsible for every Iraqi death listed on their site. It doesn't matter whether one of our soldiers actually pulled the trigger or fired the rocket - our military destabilized the region, and therefore every death that results is directly their fault.

Examples of this twisted reasoning are peppered throughout IBC's database. Take incidents # k022 and k023 for example, where 188 civilians en route to Shiite shrines were killed by "suicide bombers carrying explosives." Now, I'm a bit confused - is IBC saying that our soldiers strapped C4 onto their Kevlar vests and detonated themselves in the midst of these sojourners, or are they blaming us for failing to precognitively evacuate every pilgrim prior to the bombing? Neither - by virtue of our presence in Iraq, our troops were directly responsible for the violent actions of Moore's "minutemen".

Let's hypothetically suppose that Iraqi sovereignty never succeeds and violence in Iraq continues to escalate. Would IBC continue to blame the coalition for civilian deaths 10, 20, or even 50 years down the line? We've already determined that Coalition troops, not insurgents, are resonsible for every suicide bombing and civil disturbance - when will Western responsibility cease?

Interestingly, we can generalize IBC's implicit reasoning to conclude that the United Nations is directly responsible for the bombing-related deaths of 11 recent attendees at an Israeli Bar Mitzvah. After all, by supporting the Jewish relocation to Israel back in the 40's, the UN helped created a climate of "instability." The suicide bomber who blew the Israelis to pieces wasn't directly responsible for his actions - the world community was, for antagonizing him to act the way he did.

Furthermore, I'm disinclined to trust IBC's definition of a "civilian". In this new era of faceless terrorism, our enemies do not wear clearly marked uniforms or carry bright, colorful banners into battle. They are often plainclothes citizens who snipe from rooftops, knife soldiers in alleyways, or detonate bombs while operating moving vehicles. When a so-called "civilian" is found dead from what IBC innocuously terms "gunfire," how do they determine that he wasn't a threat to our troops? Perhaps U.S. soldiers were firing in self defense, or maybe a coalition-loyal Iraqi put a bullet in his neighbor Ahmir because he knew his fellow had a concealed gun. Aside from the now-defunct Republican Guard, there have been very few militant Iraqis who bother to clearly identify themselves as such.

But perhaps I'm being a bit too harsh. After all, some entries like x231 clearly show that Coalition forces killed 9 civilians by utilizing "'500lb laser-guided bombs' and Cobra attack helicopters". Surely the majority of Iraqi casualties were unambiguously identified in the following way. Right?

Wrong.

Even though there are several instances of "airstrike" and "bombings" on the website, the vast majority of the deaths on Iraq Body Count are almost impossible to trace (let alone identify as the Coalition's direct responsibility). I culled the following chart of the largest death toll entries on IBC in order to show how it "strains the gnat and swallows the camel." Observe:

Code	Date	Location	Weapons	Reptd. Min. Deaths	Reptd. Max. Deaths	Sources
x079	20 Mar 2003 - 24 Apr 2003	Municipality of Baghdad	-	778	1213	LAT 18 May CO 18 May
x096	20 Mar 2003 - 20 Apr 2003	Hospitals in Najaf, Karbala, Mosul, Samawa, Madain, Diwaniyah, Kut, Tikrit	various	484	445	AP 10 June BG 11 June
x038b	20 Mar 2003 - 06 Apr 2003	Nassiriya	various	633	633	CSM 22 May GDN 18 May Times 14 Apr CNN 06 Apr
x044	20 Mar 2003 - 09 Apr 2003	Basra Teaching Hospital	-	142	200	GUA 09 Apr AP 09 Apr AFP 09 Apr
x078	20 Apr 2003 - 15 May 2003	Baghdad	shootings	194	216	Ind 16 May CP 16 May
x132	14 Apr 2003 - 31 Aug 2003	Violent deaths recorded at Baghdad city morgue	60 per cent from gunshot wounds	1214	1297	KR 21 May IND 16 May CSM 16 May IWPR 06 Jun BG 03 Sep NYT 16 Sep LAT 16 Sep
x172	01 Sep 2003 - 30 Sep 2003	Violent deaths recorded at Baghdad city morgue	Over 55% by gunfire	362	367	IT 10 Oct Newsday 12 Oct
x334	01 Oct 2003 - 31 Mar 2004	Violent deaths recorded at Baghdad city morgue	Deaths from gunfire, explosions, etc. - 'excludes trauma deaths from accidents'	1605	1666	AP 23 May CBS 24 May
Minimum Ambiguously Reported Casualties: 5412 Maximum Ambiguously Reported Casualties: 6037 Conclusion: Of the casualties reported by iraqbodycount.net, almost one half (both minimum and maximum) of the reports are grouped en-masse and cannot be reliably traced back to coalition forces.

...and that's without including the suicide bombings and instances of infighting that pepper the entries on IBC's chart! I don't know about you, but I think citing 11,429 civilian deaths using the above methods is sloppy at best and deceitful at worst. With all the twisted logic and sketchy numbers employed by IBC, I almost feel sorry for its creators. They spent countless hours shoring up numbers from Reuters, AP, and other worldwide networks and combining them into neatly symmetrical charts, only to have their conclusions seriously shaken by a cursory examination of their hard-sought "facts."

Now don't get me wrong here - I'm not denying that Coalition bombs can go astray or that careless fire costs innocent lives. Every civilian killed in this conflict is a grievous loss that can never be replaced. I'm merely trying to point out how the presumptions and numbers employed by Iraq Body Count are serving to propogate lies and reenforce false assumptions about the character of our troops and the reality of this conflict.

If you have any comments to make on this post, feel free to post below. I'd love to hear some other perspectives on this issue as well.

-TRC

Sharing The Wealth...

2004-08-05T21:43:00.000-07:00

As much as I want to get my deconstructionist post up about Iraq Body Count, I might be stuck here at my radio station for awhile watching my history class videos on our T1 connection. Fortunately this is my final week of homework, so my critical paper on the James Ossuary notwithstanding I'll be able to push towards the big 5-0 on Fahrenheit Fact.

Incidentally, if you're ever in the mood for an excellent history series on America, go to PBS' website for The Biography of America. These are the films that I've been watching all semester for my U.S. History Since 1877 course and they're extremely well done. A few even include cameos from Stephen Ambrose, the author of Band of Brothers and arguably the most prolific historical writer to emerge in the last two generations.

So, if you're ignorant of the basic history of the American nation (or want to pass your citizenship test with flying colors), check it out. Registration is free, and highly recommended.

Well, I'm off to watch the video about Reconstruction. I'll hopefully get my other post up when I'm done.

-TRC

I Don't Know How I Missed This...

2004-08-01T01:12:00.000-07:00

...but I'm making up for it right now. Dr. Kelton Rhoads, a psychological pundit, studious fact-checker, and intelligent member of the human race, has had his own take on Fahrenheit 9/11 up for a little while. In it, he deconstructs the propogandistic tools Moore uses and does a bit of independant research to battle back the Round Mound of Nothing Profound (as Knight of the Mind is wont to refer to him). Methinks Curtis and I have a new source to play with - expect some new Facts very soon.

-TRC

Out Of Left Field...

2004-07-31T00:15:00.000-07:00

If I'd known about Curtis' ill-timed (but much appreciated) endorsement, I wouldn't have focused on schoolwork this weekend. I sometimes wish opportunity would beat down the door instead of waiting for me to log onto my website (yeah yeah, Carpe diem and all that).

In lieu of any new analysis or witty commentary at this 11th (more like 12th) hour, I'll just link to a Cox and Forkum cartoon that I've always loved:

In our short-sighted-9-5-order-online-"feed-me-now"-consumer-culture, its growing increasingly difficult to remind the majority of Americans that simply replacing the man behind the curtain isn't going to quash the hatred of those who revel in our grief. We need to constantly remind our soldiers and citizens about the lessons of the past, because although our leaders may bear the brunt of the world's intellectual and political assault, its going to take the sacrifice and dedication of our men and women in uniform to stem the tide of terrorist aggression on the front lines and make the world safe for representative democracy.

So for the sake of our soldiers, please spread the word about Fahrenheit Fact. General Montgomery once said: "The morale of the soldier is the greatest single factor in war." The resolution of our troops should never be shaken flippantly and without need, and we should never passively grant that power to a man who calls radical Islamic insurgents "minutemen." Regardless of what you think about Bush, Moore's lies and misrepresentations are helping to destroy our brothers and sisters on the front lines, and it is up to you to ensure that they understand the truth about the cause for which they fight.

On a lighter note, I'm going to be heading back to college in just a few weeks, and I'm positively stoked to see my friends and sometime-colleagues once more. I'm slated to become news director for my college station ("what news?" is one of the many comments I will grudgingly accept), which means that I'd better start blogging more vociferously. Radio journalism, even moreso than print sometimes, is a hungry beast, and as a future zookeeper I need to get in the habit of filling its dish.

Also, I had failed to mention that one of my future roommates, Rick Toboz, has a nifty (and sometimes quite insightful) live journal. Visit him if you're in the mood for mental voyeurism, or if you're one of those consistent post-moderns who tries to understand the viewpoint of EVERY cultural group ("tolerance for all" shouldn't exclude the majority).

Incidentally, only two more weeks until I can put this up on my door:

We'll see how the anti-war activists on campus respond (compliments to Protest Warrior).

Well, my bed awaits, and I'm one sleepy little pundit-in-training. Goodnight, and I'll be putting up more posts as work and summer school allow.

-TRC

My Interview With Lt. Chastain

2004-07-29T00:04:00.000-07:00

Welcome to all of you who are visiting from Fahrenheit Fact! Here is the full transcipt of my conversation with Lt. Glenn Chastain. Remember, requests for audio should be submitted to fahrenheitfact@yahoo.com. Due to the size of the interview .mp3 and my abysmally-slow 56k, segments will be provided only to those with valid (reasearch-oriented) requests. Once again, thanks for visiting, and remember to return to The Recovering Cynic and a-sdf for election coverage and commentary as we edge closer to the national November showdown.

-TRC

Transcript of Telephone Interview

Time of Call: Approx. 3:30 p.m. Mountain Time on July 26

Party 1: Grant Libby (a.k.a. “The Recovering Cynic”)

Party 2: Lieutenant Glenn Chastain of the Oregon State Police (commission number: 750).

[Note: This conversation has been edited for clarity. Pauses, interpolated vocal sounds, and colloquialisms have been removed. To obtain an .mp3 copy of all or part of this conversation, please email Fahrenheitfact@yahoo.com with your request.]

Grant: Grant Libby.

Lieutenant Chastain: Grant, this is Lieutenant Glenn Chastain from the state police of Oregon returning your call.

Grant: Hey, how are you doing today Glenn?

Chastain: I’m doing ok. How are you?

Grant: Doing quite well. Thanks for returning [my call], by the way.

Chastain: Not a problem.

Grant: I had a couple of questions for you, regarding [trooper] deployment in Oregon.

Chastain: Yes…

Grant: Currently, how many [troopers] do you have guarding the west coast against terrorist attack or any other kind of incursion?

Chastain: Well, in Oregon…I can’t speak for the entire west coast, because I have no idea what Washington and California has…

Grant: Uh huh…

Chastain: But Oregon, we have got currently…24 patrol troopers whose primary responsibility is highway and transportation safety, and we have 20 fish and wildlife troopers whose primary responsibility is fish and wildlife and natural resource preservation…

Grant: Hmm. Now, have you had the opportunity to see Michael Moore’s new movie?

Chastain: I have not.

Grant: Ok. Well, in it he makes the assertion that there are only two troops who are guarding a probably 40 or 50 mile stretch of coastline in Oregon… [I was at work at the time, and didn't have access to the movie transcript]

Chastain: Um, there are times when there’s none. (laughs)

Grant: There are times when there’s none? Ahh…

Chastain: We don’t have 24 hour coverage, we’ve [had] budget cuts for the last 30 years, and we used to have 665 patrol troopers, today we’ve got 329.

Grant: Hmm…

Chastain: Like I said, the entire Oregon coast is 300 + miles [and] only has 24 people, and we split that between couple of shifts, throw in some training, some other mandatory things, time off for vacation or sick leave, [and that leaves] 24 people for that much highway. There could have only been two people on the coast at that time.

Grant: Hmm. Now that’s interesting. Now, is it the responsibility of the federal government or the state of Oregon to make sure that the funds are allocated correctly?

Chastain: Our budget is funded through the state…

Grant: The state…

Chastain: We do get some federal grant funds, but federal grant funds usually have some strings attached to them. Usually we can use that for equipment and training and not for funding of people. So our money comes directly from the state government, it is recommended by the governor, and then it is passed out of the legislature by the Oregon legislature. We’re funded predominately through general funds, so we’re in direct competition with schools and with nursing homes and other human services and all the other services that the state provides through general fund dollars…

Grant: Why do you think the PD’s [have] been taking quite a hit?

Chastain: The “PD’s”?

Grant: The PD. Police department.

Chastain: I have no idea about [other] police departments. Our agency used to be funded through the Oregon highway fund, which is gasoline taxes predominately, and about 25 years ago we were removed out of that and we were placed in the general fund, so we became [direct competitors] for the same dollars for education and other human services, so, our funding has just, over the last 25 years, been stripped and stripped and stripped, and predominately our funding funds positions. We don’t have a lot of pass-through dollars and those things that other agencies can cut. We have to cut people.

Grant: Hmm. Interesting. Now, how much control would you say that the Homeland Security Department has over the police department? I mean, do they have the ability to make any significant decisions about what you guys do or do they recommend things?

Chastain: They make recommendations. And we do have some people who are in place who work in our office of homeland security in Oregon, which are in direct contact with the federal government’s homeland security office.

Grant: Is security in the west coast a significant issue to address in the future?

Chastain: Here again, I can’t speak for the entire west coast, I can talk about Oregon’s coast…

Grant: Oh, yes. Oregon’s coast. Excuse me.

Chastain: Well, we have some ports here in Oregon, and obviously if there’s going to be some kind of a problem that would be one area, there’s multiple areas that could be problems, so I wouldn’t call it any more problematic than anything else.

Grant: Um hum. Now what is the role of the Oregon state coast guard in protecting the coast?

Chastain: You’d have to check with the coast guard, they’re a federal agency and I do not know what their primary responsibility is.

Grant: Ok, excellent. Well, thank you very much for talking with me today.

Chastain: You’re very welcome, Grant. Anytime.

Grant: I just wanted to let you know first of all that this conversation was recorded…

Chastain: I knew that. I got that information from the cadet that took the number from you.

Grant: Ok. I will be putting this up online, or excerpts of this up online, if that’s alright with you.

Chastain: That’s perfectly fine.

Grant: Alright. And I also wanted to let you know that I greatly appreciate this, and that if you’d like to visit our website, I’ll probably be putting this up within the next few days. Basically, I’m, along with another friend of mine, the webmaster of a site called Fahrenheit Fact. We’re trying to deconstruct Michael Moore’s new movie and show people where there are factual misrepresentations and give them ammunition to fight the people on the left who are going to uphold it without thinking…

Chastain: And, like I said before, when Michael Moore, I don’t know if it was his quote, (I can’t believe he had some of our troopers in the movie also), I think what they were talking about was how many troopers were on the coast [at that time] or how many [are based out of] our Florence patrol office. [There are] only two patrol troopers out of that Florence patrol office. So, I’m not sure what context it was actually in, [whether Moore ] was talking about […] the entire Oregon coast, or specifically about the Florence office [… but] in fact, there were only two troopers assigned out of that office. [edited for clarity]

Grant: Hmm. You know, I have to check on [how many miles of coast Moore alleged] – basically he was using that one sole example of inadequate policing along the coast to say that homeland security is a sham because we’re not serious about guarding the coast of Oregon […] I thought it was a rather gross misrepresentation.

Chastain: Well yeah, because there are so many entities that provide security and in different roles. Like I said, our patrol division’s primary responsibility would be for transportation safety, and safety along highway 101, which runs all the way up the Oregon coast. So, their primary responsibility is transportation safety on that highway, and we also have our fish and wildlife troopers, which are also state troopers, and they’re the ones who primarily do natural resource protection, but they are on the beaches, they are checking people who are angling, fishing, clamming, crabbing, so they’re out there on boats […], they usually have four-wheel drive vehicles, so there are a lot of people who are out there doing other things, but there are also police officers…

Grant: Hmm…

Chastain: So, a little bit of misrepresentation, but that was the story he was trying to portray. Well, you can spin numbers out however you want. You know that. (laughs)

Grant: (also laughing) Yes, that’s what politics is all about.

[At this point, the conversation moved off topic. I asked Lt. Chastain to try and look up some Coast Guard numbers for me, but after about a minute of searching I decided to draw the conversation to a close and finalize my thanks]

Perhaps We Will Have That Party...

2004-07-27T20:27:00.000-07:00

I logged on to Fahrenheit Fact today, and discovered (to my great approbation) that we've surpassed 200,000 hits on our counter! If you're reading this Curtis, you know a party is inevitable. You just need to name the time and the place.

-TRC

P.S. I recently did a little bit of investagative journalism, and I came up with material sufficient to support another Fact. I'll have it posted within the next day. Keep checking our site!

Forget Blair College - Here's Your Economics Training

2004-07-24T10:51:00.000-07:00

I was unaware that there was a mock stock market for blogs. As of this post, Fahrenheit Fact is worth a whopping $66,619.48 blog bucks, which comes as no surprise given the fact that we were linked by E-baums world (I was planning to throw a party when we reached 100,000 hits, but I got mauled by homework and relationship concerns).

This site comes in at $19,851.38, which is a surprise considering my recent lack of updates. I wonder if Curtis knows he's worth a cool 22 grand?

-TRC

I Had Always Suspected.

2004-07-24T01:09:00.000-07:00

Curtis sent me a link to a rather neat little quiz. Now, I'm not usually the type to take these sorts of things (without a full meal and at least an hour of stretching), but I just had to see how I stacked up against his Supervillain.

Now, I know:

What Type of Villain are You?

mutedfaith.com.

-TRC

Ronstadt's Ruckus

2004-07-21T00:14:00.000-07:00

I was just about to crash and I figured that I'd give the ol' blog an update (which is becoming a bi-weekly event, thanks to my work schedule and general lack of free time).

I hopped over to Yahoo News and saw something that really brightened my day. As virtually everyone else has already pointed out, Linda Ronstadt, 10 time Grammy Winner and liberal lackey extraordinare, praised Michael Moore during a recent concert. As a result, many patrons stormed out, and the Aladdin Resort (where she was performing) also showed her the door.

As was to be expected, Moore came right back on the attack:

"What country do you live in?," Moore asked in the letter. "Last time I checked, Las Vegas is still in the United States. And in the United States, we have something called 'The First Amendment'" which guarantees the right to free speech.

"For you to throw Linda Ronstadt off the premises because she dared to say a few words in support of me and my film, is simply stupid and Un-American," Moore continued."

Yes, that may be true Michael. But in our country, freedom of speech bites both ways. I think the Aladdin's response sumed it up nicely:

"Ms Ronstadt was hired to entertain the guests of the Aladdin, not to espouse her political views. In an effort to defuse the situation, Linda Ronstadt was asked to leave the property immediately following her performance [...]"

You have the freedom to say what you want, Linda, but people aren't required to respect you for it.

UPDATE: Oops, she did it again! The Contra Costa Times reports:

What had been a mellow evening at Wente Vineyards, with the crowd even serenading [Linda] with "Happy Birthday" at one point, turned into a rush for the exits by some fans angry by her encore tribute to filmmaker Michael Moore.

"She just had to do it," one fan steamed as he headed for the parking lot. "It was good until the end," another yelled to TV crews waiting outside the concert.

"She's getting out of line; it's ridiculous," said Cindy Williams of Livermore, as she left during the last song of the evening.

Perhaps the reaction wasn't as vehement (or as effective) as last time, but it certainly restores my faith in the good judgment of a minority of the American people.

-TRC

Heroes, Curtis. You Meant To Say Heroes.

2004-07-07T23:40:00.000-07:00

Fahrenheit Fact co-founder and blogger-at-large a-sdf recently posted a link to this rather interesting news story. And man, is he irate!

Be prepared for something so mind-numblingly stupid, so offensively, repugnantly full of idiocy posing as righteousness that you may indeed cease all rational thought for a few seconds as your mind tries- and fails- to grasp completely the stupendous heights of arrogance and utter inanity that is found there. It is highly likely that you may suffer from some sort of neurological damage resultant from such lunacy. These politicians need to be impeached and imprisoned now- they clearly pose a danger to both themselves and others.

Woah! Restrain yourself, Curtis! I don't think there's anything to be angry about. After all, the UN is clearly a competent and unbiased organization that only looks out for the good of communities all around the world. With their flawless track record for inspection and ceaseless perseverance, I think they would be the ideal organization to spearhead the regeneration of America along bi-partisan lines.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll just reach down and take the "Recovering" out of my title line. With congresspeople like these, I won't be needing it anymore.

-TC

Moore For You To Digest...

2004-07-07T22:55:00.000-07:00

I know that its been said time and again, but let me repeat: Michael Moore is one of the most reactionary, bigoted, and ignorant people in America.

Don't believe me? Visit the following site and watch the flash film. Although I don't agree with the conclusions the film makes at the end (or some of the other statements that the director makes on his website), I do feel that Mike's own words are far more incriminating than any critique could ever be (and with gems like this, that's saying quite a bit).

-TRC

An Attempted Return...

2004-07-07T17:23:00.000-07:00

Well, I'm going to give this personal blogging thing another go. Recent work overloads and social pressures have forced me to focus most of the little time I have on Fahrenheit Fact (and considering that it has a good 89,000 more hits than my site, I figure that getting it updated is much more important than making my own little snide remarks). So, for all those who support this site in spite of its infrequent updates, I thank you. Real life is more important than blogging, and if I'm to continue going to college it must remain so.

First, an update on the North Korea articles. Yes, I know I'm late. In fact, I'm horrendously late, as the Ubiquitous They might say - and who can honestly disagree with Them? I've just been so blasted swamped with outside work that my hobbies have taken a screaming roundhouse kick of death onto the back-burner of life. It usually takes me quite awhile to write anything (especially when I want to ensure the accuracy of the things that I post), so I'm afraid I'm just going to have post them as I finish them. Could be days, could be weeks.

Second, regarding the WMD discussions with Pulse. For all those who want a definitive response to the entire situation, I would refer them to this blog posting from Sound Fury. It summarizes the situation much better than I can in my current state of mental lethargy, as it happens to be the best argument that I've read thus far regarding our reasons for going to war.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I must go take a mid-term for my online U.S. History class. After I finish that up, I'll try to post another Fahrenheit Fact and link to a few stories that have interested me of late. Ciao!

-TRC

Apologies...

2004-06-28T23:50:00.000-07:00

Well, one more day of June has come and gone, and yet the long-awaited NK article has yet to be posted. But this time, I actually have an excuse: I just went with a-sdf to view Michael Moore's newest travesty, and although I've formed a few cogent arguments against this latest outrage, I'm still letting many of my idle thoughts skim around my cerebellum before they are lassoed, fed through my worldview grinder, and formed into tiny little perceptual patties to feed a growingly Moore-hostile worldview.

One of the most enlightening moments for me was when Michael, after having "developed" his lengthy and convoluted diatribe against the Bush administration, capitalism, our overseas "imperialism", and oh-so-fluffy kittens, proceeded to spout off a rather pithy little quote from George Orwell's book, 1984. He smugly intones the following:

"In accordance with the principles of double-think it does not matter if the war is not real. For when it is, victory is not possible. The war is not meant to be won, but it is meant to be continuous."

You know, it's ironic that Moore decided to use Orwell - I felt that his movie was the closest we've ever come in this country to the "Two Minutes Hate." Not only does he continually bombard us with one-sided images of George W. Goldstein that are designed to shock our senses and inflame feelings of righteous indignation, he also presents us with "an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a child should have been able to see through it."

For example, he initially portrays American soldiers as gung-ho killing machines who spin Drowning Pool tunes while they revel in the death of Iraqi combatants. However, twenty minutes later, we find him soberly narrating the tragic story of a mother whose son was slain in combat, and tells us that all American troops are basically "good guys" thrust into a situation that is far beyond their control. So which is it: slavering murderers, or innocent victims?

It really doesn't matter, because the distillation of truth is priority two. Unbridled hatred and brainless Bush-bashing are the order of the day, and seldom do the images that Big Brother feeds us depart from this rigidly-defined framework of fallacy. If we love the troops, we ought hate Bush. If we hate the troops, we ought hate Bush. Is our security too lax? Hate Bush. Is our security lax? Hate Bush. This is the fundamental message of The Gospel of Moore - "Whether we eat or drink or whatever we do, we do it all for the hatred of Bush."

Its no wonder why conservative writers like Jonah Goldberg have stated that their respect for people is inversely proportional to how much they defend this movie - anyone taken in by this character assassination masquerading as a objective fact has not been persuaded by airtight logic or clever reasoning, but rather have succumbed to the acute amotional manipulation and creative editing that has become the "Two Hours Hate."

I'm sorry Mr. Moore, but snappily-phrased snide remarks and vaguely-constructed inferences do not a documentary make. If you had a shred of journalistic credibility, you would have at least included a few pictures of naked, tortured, dying Iraqis alongside of the happy smiling faces that characterized your pre-war wonderland. You once characterized Islamic terrorists as "minutemen" while calling the American people "ignorant." You're the "Axis Sally" of Generation Y.

But all indignation aside, let me apologize to the loyal few who have come back time and time again to The Recovering Cynic expecting to find my deconstruction of Kim Jung Il and his pappy's nuclear nepotism - sometime within the next week or so, your perseverence will be rewarded. For now, I'm focusing on deconstructing the lies intrinsic to the biggest peice of propogandistic filth since Bowling for Columbine. Tell your friends and acquaintances about Fahrenheit Fact - the reality this movie misrepresents must be made known.

-TRC

North Korea Post Up Tomorrow...

2004-06-27T23:16:00.000-07:00

For those waiting for my North Korea evaluation:

I have decided to post part 1 of 3 tomorrow instead of today. I just got in from Sacramento, California after visiting K-LOVE with my work, and I'm absolutely shot.

Check back sometime in the late afternoon --> early evening. As of right now, I'm going to crash. Later.

My WMD Discussions With Pulse...

2004-06-27T23:14:00.000-07:00

For those interested, I've had a running debate going with a guy named Pulse on Fahrenheit Fact regarding Iraqs purported Weapons of Mass Destruction. I'm moving all of our previous posts to the "comments" segment under this post so we can continue to discuss this issue. Feel free to contribute as you see fit.

-TRC

North Korea: The Most Dangerous Nation On Earth (Prologue)

2004-06-26T11:12:00.000-07:00

Frequent visitors to The Recovering Cynic have noticed that it’s been a good two or three days since I’ve posted anything of groundbreaking importance. This is partly due to my work schedule (which has grown a bit more rigid as of late), but I've also been squirreling away time to research a few topics that will be of crucial importance in the next few months. Although I've been sleuthing for Fahrenheit Fact (my joint blogging project with a-sdf), my primary focus has been to ferret out information on one of the most overlooked and dangerous nations to enter the Nuclear playground, North Korea.

When I first set out to obtain information about Kim Jung Il's "little shop of horrors," I was expecting to encounter information of the caliber that characterized most of the pre-war analyses on Iraq (i.e. highly editorialized, speculative, and journalistically suspect). Two hours and twenty-odd links later, I was appalled to find this was not the case. At website after glorious website, I found little controversy and almost complete consensus about the nature of the North Korean problem. With the sole exception of ABC, 9 out of 10 sources agreed that Kim Jung Il “Takes their food, strips ‘em nude, and can’t be sued!”

Despite such widespread commonality of analysis, however, there seems to be precious little saturation of these key messages. With the news media distracted by the Iraqi sovereignty transfer and the upcoming Presidential slugfest, Kim Jung Il has more breathing space than ever to continue making plans that will eventually affect the destiny of the entire western world. This is a man with a nuclear capacity at least 10 years beyond what Iran possesses and total control of a corrupt and Godless nation. Furthermore, his links to terror and his intense personal character flaws make his rule analogous to the brutal dictatorship of "you-know-who."

That's why I'm dedicating the next three days here on The Recovering Cynic to the deconstruction of the growing crisis in middle-Asia. In the next 52 hours, I hope to fully convince every skeptic out there that North Korea is one of the most repressed and dangerous nations on earth. Watch this space...

-TRC

Michael Moore: A Study In Irresponsbility

2004-06-26T01:05:00.000-07:00

As those who have followed his directing career know, Michael Moore has about as much integrity as an "o ring" on the Challenger. So, this story from MSNBC is merely one more into the breach. Despite his newest film's "R" rating,

Moore urged younger teenagers to go see the film anyway. "I encourage all teenagers to come see my movie, by any means necessary. If you need me to sneak you in, let me know," he said.

Now THERE'S an idea! Hey Mike, why don't you take the kids out back afterwards to "bogart" a coupla' doobies? Whip out a few of your dad's old Playboys while you're at it! That'll get you a seat at the popular table for sure...

-TRC

Finally, Some Good News On F-9/11

2004-06-22T17:35:00.000-07:00

I just got in from my work, and man, I'm shot. I had to do a quick fill-in for an announcer friend of mine who was out on vacation. It's fun, but on-air work can really drain me if I haven't had time to prepare. Well, on to the blogging.

First, I discovered this encouraging bit of news on Yahoo. It turns out that Motion Picture Association of America decided to reject Moore's appeals to have his film lowered to PG-13 status. His distributors, Lions Gate and IFC, are frustrated with the decision:

It is a shame that `Fahrenheit 9/11' will become inaccessible to a segment of the American population to whom this film has a great deal of relevance.

Phht. As a broadcasting major, I can tell you he doesn't give a rat's hindquarters about attracting a younger audience to the truth - it's all about the MONAY! You see, a PG-13 rating ensures quite a larger audience than an R - and not just because children can see it without ID. People tend to feel less guilty about seeing a PG-13 because its easier to rationalize. "Yeah, it's bad," they say, "but at least its not THAT bad." That's why movies like Titanic and The Fifth Element, which almost certainly deserved an R because of the breast nudity, snuck by with a PG-13. Directors and distributors seldom care about the real purpose of ratings: namely, preventing children from seeing things that ought not to be dealt with before they leave elementary school (it happens - two years ago, I was appalled to see a 6-year-old attending Black Hawk Down).

All this to say that I heartily applaud the decision to maintain the "R" rating, especially with some of the brutal scenes that are portrayed in Moore's film. A public beheading, napalm burns, and images of a dead baby being flung onto a truck bed are more than any teen should be allowed to see without parental supervision (or an older friend to sneak in with them). Furthermore, the rating ensures that less money will be pouring in for the leftist propaganda machine. It's win-win all around.

As for the "documentary" itself, Curtis and I have started a joint project called Fahrenheit: Fact designed to combat Moore's factual errors and blatant misrepresentations. It's already been linked by Moorelies, and hopefully will attract a wider readership as the debate over F-9/11 kicks into full gear this week.

-TRC

Oh, This Is Rich!

2004-06-22T00:05:00.000-07:00

According to Yahoo News, Kerry recently attacked Bush for founding his scientific program on ideology instead of practicality. He lambasted the president for failing to aggressively pursue stem cell research:

We need a president who will once again embrace our tradition of looking toward the future and new discoveries with hope based on scientific facts, not fear [...]

I don't know about you, but I for one think we ought to give Kerry's Brave New World a chance. After all, you've got to respect a man who can say the following with a straight face:

I have full faith that our scientists will go forward with a moral compass--with humane values and sound ethics guiding the way.

Seems Mr. Kerry hasn't been reading his news.

Also, it appears Citizen Kerry is going to be visiting my home state as part of his campaign tour. Apparently, his toadies are telling him that Colorado could swing to the Democrats in the upcoming election. Perhaps I'll take him out to the Waffle House when he arrives. Coloradans just LOVE waffles.

-TRC

I Weep For My Brother

2004-06-21T21:36:00.000-07:00

As an evangelical Protestant, you can imagine how surprised I was to find out that terrorist hostage Kim Sun-Il is actually a devout Christian. According to Christianity Today, he was using his position as a translator with the United States army as a context for witnessing. The Korea Times adds the following:

Kim's family said that he dreamed of conducting missionary work in Arab countries and was soon to be ordained as a minister.

Now that is something I wholeheartedly approve of. I too have felt a personal calling to missions work sometime in the future, and its great to see more people with aspirations to enter the 10/40 window. Its a shame that his Christian tendencies likely contributed to the terrorists' decision to nab him. I prayed for him today at work, but its looking more and more likely that he won't make it.

His captors gave South Korea 24 hours after Iraqi sundown yesterday to rescind its plans to deploy to Iraq, but his government is refusing to back down. As hard as it is to say, I agree with their decision. There can be no negotiating with terrorists, even if it means the loss of such a promising life as Kim's. Make no mistake--extremists in the Arab world will not cease to hate us. The attacks of two and a half years ago were brutal and completely unprovoked, and could easily be repeated on an even grander scale in the future. If the world community ignores the threat of terrorism and flees every time a hostage is taken, Al Quaeda will be given the breathing space they need to plan more attacks on the scale of September 11th.

According to the aforementioned Fox News article, Kim pled for his life on videotape. Some may scoff at his lack of courage, but none of us truly knows firsthand the horror of inevitable (and brutal) decapitation. It's likely that Kim saw the photos and read the stories of Paul Johnson and Nick Berg, so he knows what's in store should his government fail to find and rescue him.

If he is truly marked for martyrdom, I pray that God will grant him resolve and courage to face the inevitable. One of the key differences between Radical Islam and Christianity is that the former sends its martyrs to slaughter as many as they can before they die, whereas the latter commands its martyrs to love their enemies to the end, even in the face of unspeakable atrocities.

Which takes more inner strength: vengeful hatred, or unconditional love?

-TRC

Steamboat Willy

2004-06-21T21:22:00.000-07:00

Whew! The latest news from the Drudge Report comes as quite a surprise.

Apparently, during an interview with David Dimbleby on BBC television, Bill Clinton blew his stack when asked if he was truly penitent over the whole Lewinski affair. And it wasn't just a short stint of rage, either:

One BBC executive who has seen the interview, which took place in a New York hotel last Wednesday, said: "He [was] visibly angry with Dimbleby's line of questioning and some of that anger [got] directed at Dimbleby himself. As outbursts go, it [wasn't] just some flash that [was] over in an instant. It [was] something substantial and sustained.

They're still planning on airing it, of course. Heck, I'm surprised they didn't rent out a theater. Its not everyday that people get to see one of the most famous perjurers in history finally display an emotion besides TV-inspired remorse.

-TRC

Everyone Loves Labeling

2004-06-21T18:48:00.000-07:00

The Christian Science Monitor posted an interesting little quiz that seeks to identify your political worldview. They identified me as a "realist," but then again, I thought some of the Neo-conservative answers were unnecessarily belligerent. Does that make me a traitor? Take the quiz yourself and find out.

-TRC

For Those With Highly Developed Worldviews

2004-06-21T18:33:00.000-07:00

Check out the following test. I managed to get through it with only one bullet bitten, but I felt that my "stumbling point" was anything but:

You don't think that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction. But in the previous question you rejected evolutionary theory when the vast majority of scientists think both that the evidence points to its truth and that there is no evidence which falsifies it. Of course, many creationists claim that the evidential case for evolution is by no means conclusive. But in doing so, they go against scientific orthodoxy. So you've got to make a choice:

Bite the bullet and say there is evidence that evolution is not true, despite what the scientists say.

Most scientists hold to evolutionary theory not because of overwhelming evidence in favor of it, but because there is no other system without God that makes even a shred of sense. If there's so much "evidence" for evolution, my question is "Where is it?" The number of transitional forms ("missing link" animals that represent the shifting between the species) that we've found is slim to nill, even though if a widespread trans-species evolution occured there should be cogs and dats alongside dogs and cats in the fossil record.

Aside from the possibility of the Archaeoptrix, I haven't seen any evidence. Perhaps you can provide me with some?

-TRC

Scientific Researchers Are The Bravest People In The World

2004-06-21T18:01:00.000-07:00

Good heavens, but this is HORRIBLE.

The one that I was rather surprised to see was Astronaut. I remember waddling up to my mom on my 4th birthday and bravely declaring that I was going into space someday. I thought aliens were the worst menace I would potentially face. I've never been so relieved to be wrong...

Is A "Tolerant" USA Destined To Die?

2004-06-20T20:51:00.000-07:00

Surfing the web a few months ago, I came across a rather under-appreciated site called "When Nations Die". This intriguing little page summarizes a radio program by Probe Ministries entitled The Decline of a Nation. Its fundamental premise is that many of the things that caused the societies of Ancient Carthage and Rome to fall are being repeated in America. Take a look at what's at the top of the list:

There are many reasons for the decline and fall of a nation, but an important (and often overlooked) reason is its abandonment of religion. Russell Kirk has said that the roots of "culture" come from the "cult." In other words, culture (cult-ure) is based upon some form of religious or spiritual worldview. Egypt was a religious society founded on the worship of nature gods and goddesses. Greece and Rome had their pantheon of pagan deities. And the list of nations in India, China, and other parts of the globe all demonstrate the principle that civilization arises from religion.

I couldn't agree more. The fundamental reason this is so stems from a little thing called "morality." Without the concept of an outside creative force that has established certain things as "right" and others "wrong," our nation would completely fall apart. The decline of America today can be attributed more to Godlessness and Relativism than any other force.

But lest I get my head prematurely stuck under the guillotine of Post-Modern social opinion, let me explain:

The basic freedoms that our government is established to protect in the Declaration of independence (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness) are specifically said to have been granted by a "creator." To say that such things are "inalienable" and that all human beings possess them is to make value judgments about humanity and society. What are a few of the values being expressed here? 1. Human beings are intrinsically equal; 2. Everyone has a right to life; 3. Every person has the right to be free from tyrannical control (not all control--otherwise, why does government exist?) These three principles directly contradict the worldview of the atheist.

Lets explore: what is the foundation that atheists propose for creation and society? Evolution. What is the primary driving force of life in Darwinian thought? The survival of the fittest (the belief that some species thrive and go on to evolve to a higher form, while lesser beings falter and die). The better life forms devour the lesser: that is the rule of nature. Because atheists believe that matter is the only eternal object (and that God cannot exist), the only value that they can consistantly derive from life is that of dominance and subversion.

This was the rule practiced by the aristocracy in Europe prior to the Revolution, and it was exactly this that the Founding Fathers set out to refute. They insisted that no human being could call itself "greater" than another and that all people had rights drawn from an "inalienable" foundation. They knew their system of equality and freedom required a creator God, because the "oughts" and "shoulds" that they expressed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights had no basis in the outwardly observable "rule of nature." Even Thomas Jefferson, who was a staunch deist and rationalist, was loath to abandon God because he understood the truth expressed by Dostoevsky a century later in The Brothers Karamazov: "Without God, everything is permissible." Thus, in order to live the American ideal, we MUST believe that a God exists and that he/she has given us a value greater and more eternal than "survival of the fittest."

I had also mentioned that relativists were equally culpable for the destruction of this nation, and ironically, theirs is an even easier viewpoint to destroy than atheism. Relativists say that every religion is "true," and that all religions extend from the same "God-figure", but they blatantly ignore the contradictions inherent in almost every world religion.

For example, Christians say that every human being is just as valuable as every other--Hindus disagree. Their belief in a rigid karmaic caste system has led to one of the largest unpublished oppressive regimes in the world. Did you know that "untouchables" (members of the lowest caste) have been lynched, gunned down, and humiliated for something as minor entering a romantic relationship with a higher case member? (its true).

Furthermore, some forms of life (like cows) are higher than others, and often get special priviliges and protection from the Indian government (I've talked with people from India--poor and dying human beings are treated like so much refuse while cows are allowed to wander where they will and do virtually whatever they want).

Such views and actions are irreconcilable with an American system of government, whose primary documents largely draw their principles from Protestant morality. In spite of this, relativists continue to insist that all world beliefs are the same, and that all religious tenants are interchangeable. Bull. (no offense, Mr. Gandhi) If anyone truly tried to live the relativist worldview, their existence would be a living nightmare of contradictions and inconsistencies that would even surpass the horror of completely consistent atheism (where at least people would be confident about their right to impinge upon the rights of other human beings [as Nietzsche was]).

Do I believe that America should go back to a system in which church and state are synonymous? Absolutely not. However, it is my heartfelt conviction that while no one denomination should be set up as the standard in America, the core teachings of Christianity upon which this country were founded should be the creed of the majority of legislators, judges, and executive officers (as they once were). Only then, I'm convinced, can our American nation save itself from its current downward plummet into the abyss of moral depravity and historical obsolescence.

-TRC

Moore Than The Documentary Will Tell You...

2004-06-20T18:47:00.000-07:00

My friend Curtis and I are gearing up for the release of Farenheit 9/11, and so far it looks like its going to be one of the biggest peices of Moore-vomited filth since Bowling for Columbine.

Why, you ask? Check this out, and get back to me.

ADDENDUM: I forgot to mention Curtis' "improvement" to the F9/11 movie poster. Two Thumbs Down...heh.

-TRC

Clinton, WMD's, and Some Assorted Dead Men...

2004-06-20T17:36:00.000-07:00

It's a lazy Sunday here at Casa-De-Cynic, and I've been sitting here watching the anticipated CBS interview with Bill Clinton. Despite my intense personal distaste for the man and his wife, Billary, I do feel pity for him regarding his past. Apparently, his mother had been married 5(!) times over the course of her life (three deaths, one re-marriage to an abusive father) and he didn't find out that his biological father was three-times wed until after his election. I remember reading in my Intro to Psycology class that nature is a much more powerful determinor of a person's future than nurture. Nothing excuses his adulterous relationship with "that Lewinski woman," but his genes certainly didn't give him any help.

Well, all prior-President bashing aside, here is a collection of links to websites relating to the current WMD question in Iraq. I feel that these facts have been inexcusably under-represented in the mass media, especially since they undermine the public's erroneous perception that President Bush acted on faulty intelligence. I would have blogged these awhile ago, but that was before I gave up trying to HTML code my own unique blog template (But I don't feel too cheated thanks to the Blogger re-design...)

This is the story that should have been on the front page of every newspaper in America. According to my good friend and fellow blogger Curtis, it's also one of the most blogged stories in internet history. I winged out an email to all of my friends and acquaintances the second I saw this on the Drudge Report. It's pure gold.

This article starts with one of the most hilarious quotes I've ever read: "As good logicians are wont to note, the existence of a thing is indisputable proof of its possibility." This is one of the better critiques about WMD's that I've seen in recent history. If you visit any two links in this entry, make this one of them.

Here is an amusing little reminder of the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party's leadership. Although we've all seen something like this in one form or another, the sheer quantity of the quotes collected here is overwhelming. Especially damning are the testimonies of the former U.N. weapons inspector and William Cohen, former President Clinton's secretary of defense. Tell your friends about this site--it deserves the publicity.

This article is a quick rehash of some of the unanswered questions regarding the WMD fiasco. One of the biggest unreported mysteries is the killing of former Iraqi weapons scientists. I'll see if I can dig up more on that...

Well, back to reading one of the numerous volumes of Plutarch's Lives. I picked up a 1909 copy at a recent conference I attended, and I've been arduously picking through the antiquated turns of phrase and lack of translation notes. Fortunately, the men chosen in this volume (Caesar, Antony, Alcibiades, and Themistocles) are so interesting that the pages practically turn themselves. More information about my pseudo-Classical interests in a future post...

-TRC

Capitulation...

2004-06-20T01:59:00.000-07:00

Yes, that's right. I finally broke down and obtained what Jonah Goldberg of National Review calls "The Driver's Licence of the Internet" - a blog. Because #1 never seems to live up to expectations (see David Letterman's Top 10 list), lets skip anything meaningful and philosophical for now and move right on to the next one.

-TRC