And so, Mr Putin, you're a bad one, but you're not the only one

We should remember that Putin does not operate in a vacuum, nor does he wield sole authority in Russia, and while he is powerful, his enablers have nearly equal authority. The man will retire soon, and his replacement will exercise even more power.

The United States operates from a very different platform, and considering today's political climate, our system is ill-equipped to deal with terrorism as effectively as Russia does. Their opposition risks personal death with the slightest objection. Our opposition risks civilization.

Indeed, the delicate balance between opposition and efficacy in this country is at once lifeline and tripwire. Lifeline upon which future freedom depends, tripwire with which to Claymore liberal democracy into oblivion.

The United States, curiously, can only count on other English speaking countries and a few lately liberated other countries with vibrant and vital Christian populations as soul sisters in conflict. The rest are merely remoras that grudgingly attach themselves for a short and convenient period to gain points for future trade-offs.

The world's organizational status is in upheaval after a brief respite. Things have changed. One might remember the elecrtic light bulb and its eventual impact on darkness. WTC was a major move in the opposite direction.

This war was never an option like some two-bit prize fight on a Thursday night. It is a more serious business than World War II.

Our job, as the thinkers and ponderers of this new age, is to forego linear thinking, to engulf this era with supreme lateral examination so that we may place Putin, et al, in proper perspective and against a backdrop of three dimensional history.

History right now is not a snapshot of one individual, nor is it a group shot of a graduating class. It is cinema 360, going on all around us, and we should hold tight the truth that we are not on the screen, we are on the focal point smack in the center.

Odd, though. This may be as alive as we ever get to be.

What does the NYT know, and when did they know it?

NYT knows something. Read their editorial on Pelosi this morning. It went from lukewarm two days ago to frigid today. Beginning from the exposure of nuclear plans seized from Iragi government and put up on the website and culminating with their clean and cutting editorials of the last week or so, these indicate to me that the editorial board is scared spitless about something....what they know they have not deigned to share, but they know something.

This shift is taking place throughout the Dem hierarchy. Hoyer's win by such a margin was concrete affirmation that the liberals finally get it.

It is a very spooky moment. If NYT makes a move toward a semblance of apology to Bush and his team, it will be in the form of criticism about not doing enough with Damascus and Teheran.

On the up side, it's good that NYT woke up; on the bad side, their sleep enhanced the danger by giving the bad guys valuable time to get their nuclear act together.

I see an attack here, which will totally discredit the liberals. Then, I see them jumping on board with a clamor for pre-emptive attacks on Syria and Iran.

The only thing that can save this situation is for an attack on Russia by Islamists spur Putin or his successor into an alliance with us, but don't bet on it. The crap table has better odds.

How Good Was Rumsfeld

Rumsfeld was as effective as he was allowed to be.

Same goes for Rice.

Remember when Kissinger displayed such stunning eclat with the "shuttle
diplomacy?" Afterward, he was not so effective....why?

When Henry the K was on the move in the shuttle, he was working for,
and backed up by, RMN, who everybody thought would pull the trigger
on a nuke if piqued.

Bush 42 is a good guy, but nobody thinks he's crazy, so they think he can
be pushed.....Democrats included.

If on 9/12/01, Bush had looked less like a Dad, and more like the Tasmanian
Devil, he would have been taken more seriously, and the Republicans would still be
in control of Congress because they would have been seriously afraid to cross him,
as well.

It's a scary world out there. Sometimes it's better to look like a demented pit bull
than a guard trained retriever.

Retirement of a Giant

There have always been men who do our hard jobs for us, the thankless, but necessary, tasks that require keen insight, yea, even prescience. It is not rare that these visionaries are vilified, nor is it uncommon that their achievements are belittled by lesser individuals, but the truth is that genius is rarely recognized by its contemporaries.

Mr. Rumsfeld did not need the job, he had a good one. He did not need a pinnacle to crown off his legacy, he'd already served many times and well. And, as we were reminded daily by the press and the liberals, the Secretary didn't need the aggrandizement for his ego, he was well supplied in that category.

He took the job for the challenge, certainly, but the overriding reason this terrifically talented guy spent his energy, intellect, stamina, and courage was because he knew it was his duty.

Duty is an underused word of late because so few can be bothered with such mundane matters....probably the reason our troops in the field know why they're there and the reason the critics don't get it.

Mr. Rumsfeld understands what his grunts understand...duty...that's why he was good at it. We owe him.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. When it counted, you did your duty.