i don’t think i’ve mentioned this yet, but leo porte of tech tv fame is going to be in town on saturday and the 84online team is going to be with him and one of his co-hosts at the mall in st. matthews. i’m not real wild about going, but i know i should go and schmooze and greet and be interesting. we have done several live remotes and i don’t have a favorable opinion of them. when we did the show from the kentucky state fair, people stared at us as if we were zoo animals. i would wave at people and they would just stare in that same dumb, slack-jawed way that my cat looks at me when i talk to her. at least this meet-and-greet won’t be on the radio.


mt etna in sicily is erupting. cool satellite photo


so i’ve been reading a little about thomas jefferson and his confrontation with the barbary pirates. if you want to read a good overview, go here. basically, the barbary states (most of the nation-states in north africa) subsidized piracy in the med and held the crews and their ships for ransom. sometimes, when they captured a warship, they would convert it over for their own uses. until winning independence from england, the u.s. merchant fleet was protected by payments (tribute) that england, like the rest of europe, made to the pirates. after the revolutionary war, the u.s. senate, like the governments of europe, made payments. this ended with jefferson’s election in 1801. an on-and-off war ensued, with the pirates eventually signing a treaty (in 1815) saying that they were effeminate pansies and would leave american sailors alone. ok....just kidding about the pansy part.

here’s the interesting thing: most of europe continued to pay the tribute well into the 1830’s!!! does that strike anyone as insane? the british had the most powerful navy in the world at the beginning of the 19th century, but they wouldn’t go and face these guys? the u.s. did it with a tiny navy and a few marines (thus, “the shores of tripoli”). i am beginning to understand why europe looked the other way in the face of german aggression, soviet expansionism and, now, terrorism: reticence over the use of force in general. what no one seems to be saying is that history shows that this reticence does not prevent wars, but only makes them more costly when they are eventually fought. if britain had acted when churchill gave the call in the late 1930’s, world war two would’ve been a small regional thing completely forgotten by the children of today, like the crimean war or the boar war. but instead, 20 million russians, 6 million jews and millions of other people died in a war that spanned all of europe, north africa, asia and the pacific. good move there, all you peaceniks.

i was browing dlp's blog (see link at left) and i came across a link of a link of a link which i am not going to post here because i don't want to send any traffic to the site. the point of the site was to insinuate that george h.w. bush, the current president's father, bailed out of his navy torpedo plane and left his two crewmen to die because they didn't know that he had bailed out. in fact, the accusation goes, the plane wasn't even damaged that badly.


first, in case you didn't know, the senior bush was the youngest pilot in the navy when he got his wings in 1944. he flew the dauntless avenger, a big lug of a plane that had a crew of three: pilot, gunner and radioman. his plane was shot down over chi chi jima in 1944 or 45 and he was rescued by a u.s. submarine some time later. the other two crewmen died in the crash. if you have ever seen an interview with bush discussing this, he is still devastated by it. not clinton tears of convienence, but that kind of "here's what happened, now ask you're next question because i'm about to break down" kind of grief.


as a former sailor, i know that there is no more serious charge that can be leveled against a naval officer than cowardice under fire. this crackpot website produced a "witness" who claimed that bush's plane was not in danger of crashing when he bailed out. but, of course, the leftists who cower at the sight of a gun or a military uniform buy the lie hook, line and sinker.


of course, this is grist for the mill of the left: make the accusation and don't worry about the facts. facts are things that need to be shaped, cut and polished so that they fit the story of the bush family as a line of emporers who steal elections and kill babies with crude oil. it would be laughable if so many otherwise intelligent people didn't believe it. the left is dying to recreate the atmosphere that existed in the 60's: fight the man, make love not war, blah, blah, blah. here is the difference: the war on terrorism is not some contrived civil war taking place in a hellhole jungle that no one cares about. it's right here, right now and, if these morons keep their heads buried in the sand instead of understanding that summary action is now needed, they are going to get us all killed.

i finally figured out how to save streams of the radio show as mp3's. thank god for OS X; there are so many FREE utilities out there that it's mind numbing. there's a lot of windows stuff out there, too; however, experience has taught me that much of it is crap. but i digress.


so i had never heard myself on the radio until today. wow....i'm way too nasally and way too southern-sounding. kelli says no, but i don't know. i am trying to put together a demo CD to use in the pursuit of some voice-over work, so we shall see. i guess no one likes their own voice.


today (sunday) is kelli's birthday. she has been 21 for eleven years now, and is getting pretty good at it. love ya, dear.

over at my parents last night looking at old slides. my uncle gus was/is dean martin; i'm sure of it. and my aunt betty was, well, hot. there is not denying it. i mean, they're a nice-looking older couple now, but SHEESHH, i mean, WOW. my mom and dad were quite the hot couple, too, in their day. they were all poor as hell back then, but there they were, joking and smoking and making babies like there was no tommorrow. they trusted in something, i guess. maybe themselves, or god, or each other, but it's a something that i didn't get a piece of. i don't know.

today in 1944, the japanese used kamikaze pilots for the first time during the battle of leyte gulf. this tactic quickly proved to be effective against an american fleet that had never trained for anything like an onslaught on human-guided missles. many naval historians believe that, had the tactic been used earlier, the pacific war could have turned out very differently. however, it cost japan the last of her experienced pilots and many young men who were only taught to take off and point their planes at the nearest ship.


a factoid for you natives: the heavy cruiser uss louisville was hit by three kamikaze during the war, but survived all three hits (two of them happened at once) . by the way, don't confuse this ship with the current uss louisville, which is a los angeles-class attack submarine and fired the opening cruise missle salvo of the gulf war in 1991. i'm full of useless crap.

my brother ken and his wife are coming into town tonight for a long weekend. they are expecting a baby in the spring and the women in the family are having a baby shower on saturday for jeanne, my sister-in-law. they haven't been in town for quite some time, so it will be good to see them.


weekends like this are always hard on kelli. my family is very "big family, stay-at-home, active-at-church" and that's just not where we're at. children are just not a priority for us, and they probably never will be. it's a decision we've come to gradually for many reasons, none of which i am going to get into here. but i believe that, before you bring a child into the world, you need to take a long, hard look at your lifestyle and your desires. can you give up that lifestyle for a baby? can you divide your affections between your spouse and your child(ren)? these are questions that kelli and i answered for ourselves soon after we were married, but i don't think many people give thought to these things. to many, a child is just something you have because it's time or your friends have them. i cringe when i hear couples say things like "well, we want to have a baby by the time we're thirty-five and i finish grad school and get a promotion so we can afford it". yeah.....work it in after school but before the lake house.


i am honored to have two sisters who, in my opinion, are excellent parents. this is no to impune the skills of my brothers or their wives; i am just not as exposed to their lives. my sisters have had to sacrifice a great deal in order to be good parents. it's as if their lives are lived for their children, instead of their children being an accessory. i think that's admirable, but it's not a sacrifice kelli and i are willing to make. call us selfish, but honest. and until we are ready to make those sacrifices, there will be no children.

interesting statistic from the irs website: the top 25% of wage earners in this country (per household) pay 78% of the taxes. do you know what it takes to be in that top 25%? an income of $53,000 or more (household). folks, that ain't much cash to bring home in a year. but yet, you are considered 'rich' by liberals. welcome to easy street, where the livin's easy and you're part of the criminal corporate elite. we have met the enemy, and he is us.

the wife of a man i used to work with suffered a brain anurism (sp.) yesterday. she is clinically dead. she was probably 45 or so, a youngster by many standards. i knew her only in passing, mostly at christmas parties and the like. her husband and i worked together for four years and i knew him to be deeply in love with his wife. she leaves behind two daughters, both teenagers. i can't begin to imagine their sense of grief and loss.


it is times like this that the important things in life come into focus. at the last moment of our lives, none of us will wish we had made more money, lived in a bigger house or had a better job. i would like to think that our thoughts will be of the people we loved and the people we should have loved more. i have been thinking all day about things that are, ultimately, selfish: i need to lose weight, work out more often, eat better, use my time more efficiently. but i have also been thinking about the friends i have known in my life. some are gone from my life now, not because of conflict, but because of time, distance and differences in lifestyle. i think of most of them every day, wondering how they are and whether or not they are happy. for almost all of them, a simple phone call would close the distance, but, more often than not, the work of the day interferes. so for those of you who read this with whom i have known friendship, know that you are always in my thoughts, even if we don't talk as often as we should.


today has also had me thinking a great deal about marriage. a good relationship is very easy to take for granted. for many men, marriage is something they were roped into because they didn't see many other options at the time or they saw an advantage in not having to work as hard for sex. i can honestly say that my marriage is not about that and i thank whatever powers that be that i am married to the woman i am. she is kind, loving, loyal and, mysteriously, very in love with me. i can not imagine my life without her.


i read back through every post before i send it to the page, and i know this one is pretty sappy. but this is the mood i'm in right now, so it goes as is. it will seem pretty silly tommorrow.

the uss constitution was launched today in 1797. she is a 44-gun frigate and served as an active-duty warship until 1855 (definitely worth the money). she later served as a training vessel and then was retired to boston harbor, where she is still on display and still listed as a u.s. navy vessel.


the constitution was one of a class of vessels that were the first ships bought by the united states after the revolutionary war. before that, the navy had consisted of converted civilian ships and privateers. one of the constitution's sister ships, the philadelphia, was captured by the barbary pirates in 1804 and sailed to tripoli, their home base. navy lieutenant stephen decatur and a group of sailors rowed into tripoli harbor at night, snuck aboard the philadelphia, and set her on fire to keep the pirates from putting her to use (she was the equivalent of a battleship in her day). admiral nelson of the british navy, with perhaps the largest ego of any human being alive at the time, called this raid "the most daring act of the age".

today in 1781, general lord cornwalis surrendered his army at yorktown, virginia, which was surrounded by american and french troops. it effectively ended the revolutionary war. cornwalis, feigining illness, sent his second-in-command to do the surrendering for him.


the war actually went on another two years, mainly at sea, but peace negotiations started in 1782 and britain recognized a free united states the next year. despite what you learned in history, the british did not sue for peace because of the defeat at yorktown; the fact is, the war had just become too expensive for them. either way, we won.

dlp (see weblog link on the left) links to an interesting salon.com interview with retired marine corps general anthony zinni, state dept. envoy to the middle east. zinni is not wild about an iraqi invasion, although he does not rule out the possibility for some future date. he comes down pretty hard on the ‘hawks’ in the bush administration.


let me preface my comments by saying that i have a great deal of respect for the general. he was still active in the marine corps when i was in the navy, and he was very well-known and respected as a ‘marine’s marine’. ‘nuff said.


zinni is now an employee of the u.s. state department. as a loyal officer (even retired), he has been tasked with missions in the middle east that were, at best, difficult. the culture at the state department does not lend itself to promoting men of passion or prejudice (read: men who have had successful military careers). one only has to look at colin powell to see how much one has to temper one’s opinions in order to ‘go along to get along’ at the state department. know this: only special envoys, ambassadors and the secretary of state are appointed at the state department. everyone else (and that’s thousands of people) are long-term federal employees steeped in the traditions of washington slugishness. thus, i believe that, in order to maintain his position, zinni has had to ‘modify’ his thinking on many issues. does he believe what he says? possibly---leaders in the military are not paid to act on their convictions, only on their orders. we have no way of knowing what he thought while he was still in uniform.


zinni makes a good point in the article when his talks about the lack of goal-oriented fighting in korea and vietnam. the general is concerned with iraq becoming another long-term problem requiring a permanent occupying force, ala korea or a divided germany. his concerns are noteworthy, but i believe they are overstated and more in line with the thinking of his boss, colin powell.


another thing to consider is the traditional mistrust of civilian leadership by the military. soldiers do not start wars, but they certainly fight and die in them. zinni was witness to two of the biggest debacles in u.s. history: vietnam and somalia. both times, the situation was made worse by top-level interference from the white house. during vietnam, it was lyndon johnson’s micro-management of air strikes and ground offensives. in somalia, it was bill clinton’s lack on intestinal fortitude and a sound exit strategy. for a man who has lost comrades in combat due to civilian ineptitude, this is bound to be a front-burner issue. on that point, he will receive no condemnation here.



on another front, the first issue of ‘national geographic’ hit newsstands today in 1888, giving generations of american boys their first look at topless women.


today in 1978, president jimmy carter restore full citizenship to confederate president jefferson davis. i am going to assume that davis was dead by then. just a guess on my part.

just one thing about politics: hugh hewitt has an excellent column comparing the british parliment of the late '30's to the current democrats in washington. the parliment shied away from confronting hitler while his movement was still in its infancy. we see the same thing happening now in the name of political expediency. let there be no doubt: if the liberals prevail, they are going to get us all killed.

saddam hussein won 100 percent of the vote in iraq. evidently, he also won 30% of the vote in florida, the state that is now serving as the drain and sweaty armpit for the rest of the nation.

i’ve been reading over my posts for the last week, and i see that this blog has become increasingly political. this was never my intention, although politics holds a great deal of interest for me. i originally meant this as a replacement for the ‘dattilo’s this day in history’ e-mails so many of you received, but i have moved away from that. i will redouble my efforts to stick to history and the goings-on in my little corner of the world.


two very interesting (well, to me, anyway) things happened yesterday (the 14th) in history. in 1944, german general erwin rommel, the “desert fox” committed suicide. he had been implicated in the plot to kill hitler and was given the choice of a public trial for treason or swallowing cyanide tablets. he chose the latter and was given a state burial. his death was attributed to “war wounds” since, at the time of his arrest, he had been at home recovering from wounds received during a british air attack on his car. interestingly enough, rommel did not actually know that the plotters were intent on killing hitler; he believed that they were only going to overthrow the government and seek a truce with the allies. he liked hitler personally, although he did not consider him a good military strategist. by july of 1944 (when the failed assassination took place), rommel believed that germany stood no chance of winning the war. american and british troops had established a foothold in france, italy had switched sides in the war after an allied invasion in 1943 and the soviets were beating the nazis back through poland towards the german border. peace with the western allies (england, france and the u.s.) seemed the only alternative. but hitler was beginning to lose touch with reality and had surrounded himself with yes-men and his loyal s.s. troops, who would have fought on to the last man.


in his book ‘band of brothers’, stephen ambrose (who died over the weekend) talks about how impressed the men of the 101st airborne division were with the defeated regular german army. they were well-disciplined, loyal and proud, even in defeat. most of those men were not nazis; they were fighting to defend their homes, just like the allies were. the real fanatics were the men of the s.s., who acted like a group of criminals out on parole. many of them received their positions due to party loyalty, not ability or experience. many of them killed themselves at the end of the war; post-war germany was better off without them.


also on the 14th but in 1947, chuck yeager broke the sound barrier in the bell x-1 rocket plane. this feat was considered impossible by many who saw the sound barrier as unattainable due to the shock wave tearing the plane apart. once humans had achieved mach 1, mach 2 and even mach 3 were attained very soon afteward.


i got the chance to meet chuck yeager once. he was at an air show at the clark county airport, getting ready to do a fly-by in a p-51, the aircraft he flew in combat during world war two. he walked to the plane, shaking hands but not speaking. once he got to the aircraft, something wasn’t right (i never did find out what). he emitted several curses that were much too harsh for the young people present and then proceeded to publicly berate the man who was acting as his ground crewman. my first thought was, ‘jesus, chuck, you’re just doing a fly-by, not going to shoot down the hun.’ i believe that he had reached the age at which publicity was becoming too much for him.

i’ve been reading over my posts for the last week, and i see that this blog has become increasingly political. this was never my intention, although politics holds a great deal of interest for me. i originally meant this as a replacement for the ‘dattilo’s this day in history’ e-mails so many of you received, but i have moved away from that. i will redouble my efforts to stick to history and the goings-on in my little corner of the world.


two very interesting (well, to me, anyway) things happened yesterday (the 14th) in history. in 1944, german general erwin rommel, the “desert fox” committed suicide. he had been implicated in the plot to kill hitler and was given the choice of a public trial for treason or swallowing cyanide tablets. he chose the latter and was given a state burial. his death was attributed to “war wounds” since, at the time of his arrest, he had been at home recovering from wounds received during a british air attack on his car. interestingly enough, rommel did not actually know that the plotters were intent on killing hitler; he believed that they were only going to overthrow the government and seek a truce with the allies. he liked hitler personally, although he did not consider him a good military strategist. by july of 1944 (when the failed assassination took place), rommel believed that germany stood no chance of winning the war. american and british troops had established a foothold in france, italy had switched sides in the war after an allied invasion in 1943 and the soviets were beating the nazis back through poland towards the german border. peace with the western allies (england, france and the u.s.) seemed the only alternative. but hitler was beginning to lose touch with reality and had surrounded himself with yes-men and his loyal s.s. troops, who would have fought on to the last man.


in his book ‘band of brothers’, stephen ambrose (who died over the weekend) talks about how impressed the men of the 101st airborne division were with the defeated regular german army. they were well-disciplined, loyal and proud, even in defeat. most of those men were not nazis; they were fighting to defend their homes, just like the allies were. the real fanatics were the men of the s.s., who acted like a group of criminals out on parole. many of them received their positions due to party loyalty, not ability or experience. many of them killed themselves at the end of the war; post-war germany was better off without them.


also on the 14th but in 1947, chuck yeager broke the sound barrier in the bell x-1 rocket plane. this feat was considered impossible by many who saw the sound barrier as unattainable due to the shock wave tearing the plane apart. once humans had achieved mach 1, mach 2 and even mach 3 were attained very soon afteward.


i got the chance to meet chuck yeager once. he was at an air show at the clark county airport, getting ready to do a fly-by in a p-51, the aircraft he flew in combat during world war two. he walked to the plane, shaking hands but not speaking. once he got to the aircraft, something wasn’t right (i never did find out what). he emitted several curses that were much too harsh for the young people present and then proceeded to publicly berate the man who was acting as his ground crewman. my first thought was, ‘jesus, chuck, you’re just doing a fly-by, not going to shoot down the hun.’ i believe that he had reached the age at which publicity was becoming too much for him.

i was reluctant to post what i am about to say, for it will offend some of you a great deal. it will offend you because, dare i say it, it is the truth. but in reality, this blog is mine and i find it very theraputic to get things such as this off my chest.


the radio show i am on in louisville, 84online, has a chat room that is open during the show and from 8-10pm est every night. for the most part, the same cast of characters inhabit the room during the week. i drop in occasionally, mainly on nights that kelli is at school. we discuss politics quite a bit, and the exchange is lively and intelligent. but i had an epiphany of sorts last night concerning some of our more liberal cohorts, and liberalism in general.


since the election of 2000, and more recently during the debate over an iraqi invasion, the liberal democrats in congress have shown that they are incapable of making an argument. instead, they have resorted to questioning g.w.'s lack of active military service or his motivations for an invasion. in short, they have sought to demonize him, albeit in a stealthy way.


as a student of 20th century history, the recent (and not-so-recent) displays of liberal slander remind me of something far more sinister: facism in its prime. one only has to read 'mein kampf' to see how the jews of europe had to be demonized before they could be destroyed. no one would justify the death of neighbors and friends unless they could be viewed as sub-human and plotting to take over the world. today, conservatives are seen in the mainstream media and the hollyweird elite as dumb fanatics bent on world domination. g.w., their 'lucky sperm' leader, is one of them. he can not be seen as human, compassionate or intelligent for fear that he may be correct in his pronouncements and beliefs.


you may find my conclusion disturbing, but the facts are there. i have yet to argue with a liberal about our president without them resorting to call him 'stupid', 'george II', 'privileged' or whatever. never, never can they state true facts without pointing me to some whacked-out website put together by anarchists. to you democrats and fellow-travelers out there: is this what you want? a tyranny of the few? that is what you are creating; be careful what you wish for.

listening to the radio and a man calls in to complain about the economy. his wife, a water chemist, can not find work in her field and, therefore, things are tight. when the host suggested that she look for work outside her field, the man bristled. to top it all off, he said, both of our cars are almost ten years old. GASP!!!! TEN YEARS OLD!!!! how are they getting by? what are the neighbors saying? they might get kicked out of the country club with cars that old. the other soccer moms may laugh at them.


in my life, i have worked as a general laborer, package handler, truck driver and diesel mechanic. none of these positions were career-type jobs. but they paid the bills when they needed to, which is the point. there is waaaaayyyyy too much pride in this country and concern about keeping up with the jones for my taste.

jimmy carter got a nobel peace prize late last week. what a joke. here's the man who turned a blind eye to a radical regime in iran, gave away the panama canal and let our defense crumble. peace, for those of you on the emotional end of politics, is NOT the absence of war. learn it, live it, love it.

kelli and i took our two oldest nephews to dinner tonight. they are both freshmen in college (louisville speed school) and roommates to boot. it is very strange to sit at dinner with someone and remember going to the hospital when they were born. this is what happens when you are the youngest of five children: your siblings' children are not quite a generation younger than you, so you listen to much of the same music, etc.

if you have been following the news this week, you know that there is a sniper in the d.c. area killing people at random. i have read as much as i can get my hands on concerning this asshat, and here are my very unprofessional conclusions:


-his choice of ammunition is significant. it is a .223 (or 5.56 mm) round, which is probably being fired from an ar-15, the civilian version of the m-16. i believe there is a chinese rifle that fires this round as well, but i can't think of its designation offhand. this is not a great sniper round since it is very light. on the other hand, it is VERY difficult to do ballistics studies on a round that light because it gets mangled pretty bad. it is also a very easy round to buy in sporting goods stores. these things mean that the man is probably not a professional, i.e. former special forces of any country. if so, he would have trained with a much heavier weapon and would prefer such a rifle for these crimes.


-i don't believe he is a foreign terrorist. first, islamic terrorists don't leave 'death cards'. this also goes against their track record of mass-killing actions throughout the world. there is always the possibility that the tarot card was a feint, but i doubt it. the ragheads prefer owning up to their brutality; it gives them street cred with allah.


-when they find him, i believe he will match the profile of just about every serial killer ever arrested: white male, intelligent, middle-aged, etc. i believe he will also have an accomplice, someone who acted as his spotter, possibly a member of his family.


one thing i can't figure out though: almost all his shooting has been done from wooded areas. how many ex-special forces (seals, rangers, green berets, etc.) guys do you think live in this area? why not put out a call for volunteers from their ranks to look for this bastard? there are men of vietnam-era age who have experience tracking men under combat conditions in the worst jungles on the planet who would still be of tremendous use. i guess maybe law enforcement (always a possessive bunch) doesn't want to get shown up.



today in 1960, nikita kruschev did his famous shoe-hammering bit at the united nations. he was trying to drown out a speech by another delegate concerning russian treatment of eastern europe. the chairman at the time broke his gavel trying to get the soviet premier to shut the hell up.

kruschev was an old-school communist. born into poverty, he acheived his high rank within the party due to his ability to kill his opposition or shame them into silence. ahhhhh...mother russia, the worker's paradise.


in case you were comatose last night, the house and senate passed a resolution authorizing the president to order the use of force against iraq. this is a formality, for the president doesn't have to ask anyone to send troops overseas. problem is, congress has to approve the money to do so, so it's best to let them have their say.

i am appalled at the behaviour of democrats during the debate leading up to the debate. unable to put forth a sensible argument, they have attacked the president personally again and again. of course, this is typical of liberals: when in doubt, act like a child. it just further reinforces my opinion that the republican party is where the adults go when they're done playing.

vatican II started today in 1962. if you're catholic, you know what that means.


i keep having weird, weird things happening to me based around the number 11. i'm not a numerology guy, but it's gotten so common it's almost scary. if this is going to come to some kind of head, it will probaby be on november 11, i guess. call me weird.

today in 1985, the hijacking of the achille lauro came to an end. the lauro was an italian cruise ship that was taken over by a group from palestine who demanded the release of 50 of their bretheren from israeli prison. several days into the standoff, they killed one of the americans on board who was confined to a wheelchair. eventually, they left the ship in egypt in exchange for a promise of safe passage. they took off in any egyptian airliner and headed for tunis and the expectation of a clean getaway. waiting for them over the med were several squadrons of u.s. navy f-14s, searching in pairs for the plane in a very busy sky. two of the f-14s found the correct plane, shadowed it for several hundred miles, then rushed up alongside the plane and turned on all their lights. i imagine it was quite a sight to be flying along in darkness one second and blinded by lights the next. they escorted the plane to sicily, where the terrorists were arrested and transported to italy for trial.


i remember this incident vividly because ronald reagan made a point of thanking the two navy pilots who had located the plane, stating that the navy had buzzed "every plane in the med that night".

a while back, i promised a review of ann coulter's book slander: liberal lies about the american right. let me begin by saying that i am aware that ms. coulter wrote this book with an agenda in mind. she knew that she was going to find liberal bias in hollyweird and the mainstream media; these things are a given for people of thought. her goal, as i see it, was to point out the absurdity of liberalism as it exists in america today. her work is meticulously researched and footnoted, and to this date only one quote in the book has been publicly corrected. here is my summary of ms. coulter's conclusions:


1. the liberal establishment does not argue points; it attempts to destroy the arguer.


2. liberalism is considered 'normal' in media and entertainment circles; conservatism is associated with facism.


3. liberals are incapable of pointing to recent accomplishments to bolster their argument. they can only hold up dead democrats as examples. jfk, if he were alive today, would be considered conservative on anyone's scale.


4. the republican party is the party for adults; the democrats are the party of the whiner, victim and loser.


so did i like the book? let me say this: i read it at work in five-minute chunks. it is not well-written, but timely books rarely are. liberals will ignore it and conservatives will find nothing new except a good sense of humor. wait until it goes on sale.

kelli and i were married four years ago today. the whole day was a blur. in fact, i remember almost nothing from the reception. if you came, and i didn't get to talk to you, sorry. it was one of the only days in my life when every minute of the whole day was planned out for me months in advance. when the day finally came, i ended up with two hours of unaccounted time before the wedding. i had already moved all my stuff into our home (kelli had been living there since may), so all i could do was pace around my parent's house and wait. marriage is, without a doubt, the way to go. i love you will all my heart, kell.

the navy never gave me a credit card, and i’m pretty pissed off about it.


on a more serious note, our commander-in-chief laid down the law concerning iraq last night. for those of you not paying attention, allow me to summarize: the u.n. needs to pass a new inspection resolution and congress needs to have a vote approving military action against iraq. if hussein does not respond in a timely fashion, he will be ended by the united states and her allies.


i have been thinking a great deal about this coming battle (and i do think we will end up invading iraq) from several different perspectives and i have come to the conclusion that, in order for the united states to maintain any credibility in the world, we must end the current iraqi regime. i use history as my guide: in every modern war, our goal is to not only defeat an army on the battlefield, but also destroy the belligerent nation’s industrial capacity. while this may sound somewhat cruel, it is done in the name of minimizing allied casualties, which has the added benefit of limiting the enemy’s casualties as well.


as we are all aware, the terrorists are not a country and they have no industrial base. we will never face them on a field of battle with tanks and planes. however, they are supported by host nations with places to hide, money and, most importantly, the technology and ingredients necessary to make weapons that can be used against civilians. like the industrial targets in germany and japan, these nations must be made unable to support terrorism in any way. iraq is on the top of that list because they are the most likely to able to supply a terrorist group with the holy grail of terror weapons. on top of that, they have a demonstrated history of financial support for terrorism in places like israel (that’s why so many “palestinians” let their kids blow themselves up---iraq pays them $25,000 to go meet allah---by the way, the term “palestinian” is a sham; we’ll talk about that some other day). in the end, we have no choice but to go to baghdad. we go now or we go later. it’ll be much easier now.


by the way, for anyone in germany who is whining about our actions in iraq---four phrases: world war one, world war two, the marshall plan and the berlin airlift. now go shine your boots and invade france.

kelli bought me john mccain's new book as an anniversary present. his last book, 'faith of my fathers' was riveting. this one chronicles his life after vietnam and his journey into politics. i am not a huge fan of john mccain, senator; i think he enjoys the 'rebel' image despite what he says (and writes). but his is a fascinating life and one that is noteworthy for its courage.


oh, yes: the rise of the bubba. kelli and i were out this weekend doing some shopping. we shop regularly at target for household stuff, so it's not unusual to find us in there on a saturday night before we go to the movies or whatever. i was walking through the store when i spotted something that, to me, is unusual: a whole family with mullets. not the father and son, but the mom, too. a trio of mullets. now, i am not the most style-concious person on the planet, but this was a little too much. i made it a point to follow them (at a distance) through the store. it only took two aisles for the picture to complete itself: the son, a kid of about five, was grabbing everything in sight while his mother yelled at him incessantly. the father stopped at one point and threatened a spanking, which had no effect. none of this was said in hushed tones. ultimately, the parents ignored their little brat and went on their way.


i am beginning to see this more and more often. maybe it has to do with the fact that i do most of the grocery/household shopping now with kelli in school and so am in stores more often. however, i think the trend is getting worse and it's not just about parenting. it seems to be a general cluelessness about the world in general and our society in particular displayed by so many people. it's as if these people's central focus in life is their little world, arranged in a bubble that contributes nothing to the world. i can't pin it to religious or political leanings, although many of these people seem to use religion as an escape and know nothing about politics (thankfully, many of them do not vote, judging by the voting statistics). i call it bubbaism for lack of a better term. the term doesn't belong to any socio-economic group, either: plenty of suv-driving soccer parents have no more hint about life than poor folks struggling in trailer parks.


i have harped on this before, but i think it bears repeating: it goes back to a lack of parenting and loss of our sense of community. for many people, children were just another thing that had to be 'acquired' when the time was right and then became another burden to be added to the list. it's kind of like owning a boat or an r.v. our sense of community has been a long time in leaving: i think it began with the rise of the suburb. i don't think anyone wants to go back to pre-automotive days, but there was a price to be paid for advancement and i think that price is becoming greater and greater.


funny story about suburbs and automobiles. on saturday, the gang from the radio show had lunch at the hooter's in jeffersonville. kelli and i live in jeffersonville, so i thought it would be nice to walk to the restraurant (about eight blocks or so). it was beautiful fall day and i took a compilation cd i had just made. when i arrived at lunch, the assembled gang couldn't believe i had actually WALKED there. you would've thought i flew. when i told them it was only eight blocks that could easily be traversed in twenty minutes, you could've heard a pin drop. as we ate, i told art (the guy sitting across from me) that i would gladly give up both our vehicles if public transportation was better (a service i wouldn't mind paying a pretty penny for). to my mind, i continued, a car is an appliance, like a toaster or a refridgerator. art agreed with me, but i had the feeling that we were probably alone at the table.

this reminds me that i have a lot to say about the rise of bubbaism. maybe later today.

posted by Matt Dattilo @ 2:27 AM  

sorry i didn't post anything this weekend. i had the opportunity to buy a used/refurbished emac for pennies on the dollar and i jumped at the chance. it came on friday and we have spent the last two days rearranging our 'computer room' and setting up a home network. it took me until about two hours ago to get everything set up correctly since i have never used the new mac os 10.2 before. i still have to work out a printer sharing issue, but, other than that, i'm pretty proud of myself.


kelli is off this coming week (she gets three weeks of vacation; i only get two) so hopefully we will have a chance to spend more time together. our anniversary is wednesday. four years. it doesn't seem nearly that long.

in a different era, this woman would have been left on an ice floe.

for some reason, the archives of my blog have reappeared, one day after i received an e-mail from a woman i have never known asking me where my archives were. the internet god at work. looking through the archives, i realize that i have not been spending nearly as much time and thought with this blog as a i used to. i will do my best to correct that. one of the big differences is that i can no longer post at work. i used to make a pot of coffee and pour my heart while i waited for the nightly backups to finish. no more.


east and west germany were reunited today in 1990 after 45 years as seperate nations. it is now hard to imagine a europe with two germanys. immediately after world war two, the allies divided up germany, but that division soon became two halves: us and the soviets. ironically, the east germans had a more efficient foreign service than the soviets did.

after months of exhaustive study, i am ready to make some observations concerning rap/hip-hop videos. my lovely assistant kelli and i have come to the conclusion that there are five items that define a "classic" rap/hip-hop video:


1. undulating, barely-dressed women.

2. a "phat" ride (either classic, like a '64 impala, or something new, like a 600-series mercedes)

3. overt displays of cash (by this, we mean someone actually throwing or displaying currency)

4. overt displays of jewelry by males in the video

5. use of a power toy (yacht, helicopter, private jet) note: sometimes the power toy can be a road vehicle IF it is not a personal vehicle (limosuine, formula one car, etc.)


unfortunately, the classic rap/hip-hop video is becoming a thing of the past. what is sending it to its demise? the lack of #3 and #5 in newer videos. however, i have noticed an "old-school" revival of sorts among newer artists, so perhaps not all is lost. if you see any "classic" examples, please send word.

oct. 1, 1988. i had forgotten until just now. fourteen years and i still remember the date. i guess that's not very healthy. it's the only day in my entire life that i truly cried all night.

a long question for the assembled masses: about eight years ago, i saw a video entitled 'gate to the minds eye'. it was a collection of computer graphics demos set to music by thomas dolby. it was probably aimed at the lsd/ecstacy set, but it was pretty intruiging. is that kind of stuff still around? i know it's a real niche market, but i am hungering for something very visual and melodic with no dialogue or storyline. if anyone can make a recommendation, i'm all ears.

an incredibly sad and thought-provoking story about a state trooper who committed suicide when he realized that a small error he made allowed several bank robbers to get away and kill their hostages. the story brings forth two issues: the death penalty and suicide in the name of lost honor. i’m not going to get into the suicide issue because, although i understand the troopers’ emotional distress, he still had family responsibilities at home which he abdicated in the name of a quick exit. that’s not right in anyone’s book.


the four people charged in the bank robbery/murders will get the death penalty if convicted, and i don’t think they should. some of you who think you have me pegged as a right-leaning whacko are now pulling yourselves upright. it’s not about their crime---there’s no doubt in my mind that they are despicable a**holes who should never see the light of day. it’s about the death penalty.


i used to be a huge supporter of the death penalty. if someone constituted a real and demonstrated threat to our society, then, by god, whack ‘em. but two things have changed my thinking: dna evidence leading to more than 70 people on death row being found innocent and the o.j. trial.


i know, i know----o.j. has been done to death. but the one salient thing that keeps coming to my mind is my belief that if the juice had been a poor black kid from compton instead of an ex-nfl player with money, he would be on death row right now. his money bought his innocence. would we be so lucky in his shoes? can we put people to death because they couldn’t afford johnny cochran?


none of us can place a value on life. it can be argued that, once you murder someone, your life is not worth as much as an innocent person’s life. i don’t necessarily agree with that, but i understand the sentiment. but putting someone to death for a crime removes the possibility of true redemption and penance from their lives. and i don’t believe that should be taken from anyone.


ok, throw the examples at me: if hitler had lived, should he have been put to death by the nuremburg court? no. you’re shocked, aren’t you? here’s why he should have lived: a shriveled-up old hitler living his last days in a cell in someplace like, say, tel aviv would have been a fate worse than death for a man who considered himself the savior of all the germanic peoples. read ‘the rise and fall of the third reich’ by shirer and you will know what i mean.


i know the next one: matt, you’ve never had a family member murdered. that right; i haven’t. however, laws are not (or should not) be made with vengeance in mind. laws exist in civilized society so that there will be order, not to make everything fair (i know you liberals are crushed at this thought; sorry). fairness comes from equal enforcement of law, not from content. if someone wants to hunt down and kill someone who killed a family member, well, then there are laws for that. you don’t have to rob a bank to know it’s wrong.


the death penalty in this country is going to become a hindrance to our war on terror. there are many nations that will not turn over suspected terrorists to us because of our federal death penalty statutes. agree or not, this is a fact. and something to think about.