Bunker Mulligan "Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry." ~Mark Twain

February 18, 2004

Women in Iraq

Filed under: International — Bunker @ 3:39 pm

Zeyad has a post regarding women in Iraq campaigning for equal rights. I’ve not seen anything on US television about it, or on any news organization web sites.

It isn’t news here because the women’s intent wasn’t for it to be news here. Take a look at the photos and you will see something very different from what we’ve grown accustomed to seeing. Yes, there are the standard march and chanting. No difference there. But look at the banners they’re carrying. All in Arabic. No English.

Obviously these are either very stupid women, none of whom could find anyone to put slogans in English on their banners, or they are very smart women, trying to make a real difference in their contry. In their language. I know what I believe.

Zeyad also has a link I visited for the first time today, Internet Infidels. I’ve read much regarding Islam, and view it in much the same way as I view Mormanism. Both believe the Bible is the basic historical core of their religion, and both believe the story of their faith continues through another phase, either the Book of Morman or Quran. Both were written by someone claiming divine inspiration. That inspiration is the core of their beliefs. That’s is a very simplistic explanation, but sets the tone.

I do not believe any of Mohammed’s writings are divine. In fact, most suras were written to rationalize some act or desire of his, or to establish his precedence as leader of all the desert tribes. Of course, there are millions around the world who disagree with my assessment. And they would claim my ignorance causes me to have this opinion. No, my ignorance would cause me to possibly believe in Islam. The fact I have read the Quran and several “official” explanations of its meaning is what gives me pause.

If you have an interest, Secular Islam will be a good starting point for you to learn more.

February 17, 2004

Alcoholic Democrats

Filed under: Society-Culture — Bunker @ 6:18 pm

I get frustrated not being able to read everything posted on the web. I look at Sarah’s latest post, which takes me to Annika’s site, which takes me to Danny O’Brien’s analysis of the Dean implosion. (Whew!)

Danny educates us with Kubler-Ross’s Five Stages Of Dying: A Case Study. The five stages are Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, and Acceptance. It fits.

I look at it beyond Dean, however. As I read this I couldn’t help but think of the entire Democratic Party. It’s demise would be a terrible thing for this country. But it is like an alcoholic who hasn’t yet hit rock bottom, and doesn’t know he needs to join AA.

Many people join AA, but aren’t quite ready for the personal commitment to make the program work. I’ve been very close to several people in AA, and have attended quite a few meetings with them. It is a commitment in physical and spiritual ways. The Democratic Party is almost there, and as an organization, must avoid the five stages and, instead, work on their own 12 steps.

Denial: This stage began in 2000. There are still remnants even today. In spite of numerous recounts in Florida which confirmed Bush’s win, some continue to believe he was “selected, not elected.”

Anger: Democrats have been in this stage almost from the beginning–probably since even before the 2000 election. Dean tapped into this.

Bargaining: Kerry’s war and anti-war record vs. Bush’s Air National Guard record. This hasn’t been an attack on Bush as much as it has been a bargaining chip. The sense I get from Democratic leadership is that “If you don’t bring it up, we won’t either” in regards to Vietnam.

Depression: This will come if Bush is reelected. There will be no hope left.

Acceptance: Here will be their best chance to fend off the Grim Reaper. They cannot simply accept defeat, but be willing to look at themselves honestly and ask, “Why?” Their own 12 steps.

I think Bill and Hillary already understand this. She will be ready to step in and bring the Party back toward reality. And they will be willing, oh so willing, to follow. The only question then will be whether she pushes them off the wagon.

The New Republic

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 5:43 pm

I check The New Republic each week for some of the best writing around. In fact, most of my adult life I’ve read both it and National Review.

TNR is a magazine written and edited by true liberal Democrats, not the screeching crows we’ve become accustomed to. There is always something good in it. And if you are truly interested in discourse rather than debate, you will find words there to challenge your opinions.

This week, Andrew Sullivan has an article on Kerry which expresses his disappointment. Kerry’s inability to answer direct questions is his greatest weakness. Although, I have to assume he doesn’t believe this. If he thought his decisions and opinions were his strength, he’d be happy to express them and support his record. He doesn’t. What else can I assume?

I don’t link to Andrew on my sidebar because he’s linked several places I visit each day. Perhaps I should, because he is one of the best.

There. He’s now on the list. That was easy!

Bureaucracies

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 3:36 pm

I just heard some wag on TV talk about “increasing resources” in some area regarding Homeland Security.

You know, I’ve never heard one of these folks, government employees or pundits, ever suggest what is done in the real world. How about adjusting resource priorities? Maybe move a few dollars from one area to another, more important, area? Shift personnel? Or is that impossible to do? I know, I know…everyone’s area is the most critical. We can’t ever change priorities. Someone might be offended or have their self-esteem injured.

Besides, it’s somebody else’s money, anyway.

Writing

Filed under: Society-Culture — Bunker @ 12:34 pm

Steven Den Beste is taking some time off. Writing can become work.

I thought about this in regards to my own writing this morning. I remember working on my book, and how much of a passion it was for me at the time. As it neared completion, and I began asking people to look at it, I got tired of all the advice. I incorporated some and ignored other. I think the entire thing suffered.

I’ve always written almost stream of consciousness, which means my prose sometimes gets wordy, sometimes curt, often incomprehensible. I seldom go back and edit. What you see is what goes through this thick skull. When I have written for publication, I’ve gone over text several times to try and get it right. Of course, editors have their own ideas. Air University Review did little cleaning up on what I wrote. Once, the thing they changed actually changed the sense I was trying to get across. Oh well. Airman Magazine did almost a complete rewrite of my article (the only one I ever submitted to them) and then praised me for my writing. The senior editor asked if I would be interested in joining their staff! Go figure.

I started this blog to write. Like Ted Kennedy, I have become incoherent, and think this is the best way to regain some of the skills I believe I once had. I’m constantly in awe of some of the writing in the blogosphere: SDB, John Jay, Wretchard, Sarah, Harry and Porphyrogenitus are but a few. This is not to slight the others I’ve linked to on my sidebar. In fact, I intentionally link to very few folks. These are the ones that give me inspiration to sit down at the keyboard and bang out a few words. And those links are there primarily for me. It makes it easy to jump over and check what Dave Barry or David Feherty has to say today. But if someone likes what I write, they can get further, often better information from the people I read.

Bogey told me to get back to writing things other than politics. He’s right. (He better be with that high-priced Cornell education in Communications!) Writing hasn’t become the chore it can be, and I hope the broad brush I use as a pen keeps it alive. As Sarah pointed out (and added a link as well) the daily journal becomes a habit and refuge. For me, someone who is definitely not a social butterfly, it gives me a community I can enter and leave at will. I like that.

February 16, 2004

Last Bush ANG post (hopefully)

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 7:41 pm

Over at The Mudville Gazette is the best explanation I’ve seen on the “Bush was AWOL” issue, along with a review of the President’s visit to Daytona.

This is a blog now on my daily list.

Visualization

Filed under: Golf — Bunker @ 5:51 pm

Golf is such a visual game. Instinctively, I don’t understand how blind people play, and some of them play well.

But visualization is a big issue, brought home to me this weekend. Two weeks ago I played two courses in California, both of which had many trees along the fairway. I hit about 80% of the fairways, even though these are very tough courses. This weekend, on my south Texas home course, I hit three fairways in two rounds.

On my course, missing the fairway puts you in the rough, but there aren’t a lot of obstacles. We have some palm trees which will eat a ball, and mesquites which grab a ball and throw it to the ground, but there isn’t a dense wall. I did manage to hit a eucalyptus today–the only one on the course. When you stand on the tee box and identify a target, there isn’t a lot of definition to tunnel your vision.

This applies on the green as well. I roll the ball best when I sense a good line for the ball to follow. I sometimes rush myself, and don’t put the focus on the hole as well as I should or on the path I want. When I do, I invariably hit the ball too softly or off line.

I’ve read two books recently, unrelated to golf, which enforce this concept. One is a book about the function of the brain. Another was on vision. Both said that the brain retains an image for about eight seconds, but can only recognize an image if it is visible for at least half a second. They both agree that the body wants to comply with a vision and mental picture. If the target is 150 yards away, and you dial that into your brain, the body will try to comply with a swing that hits the ball 150 yards. (Don’t try this with a sand wedge.) I’ve tried, and had some success, although I let my mind wander too much to really get it in focus during a round.

Maybe that’s what really separates the tour pros from the rest of us.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress