Monday, September 26, 2005

My Sandmen Anniversary...


In all of the turmoil of this last month of the Summer of 2005 - Katrina, Rita, Exams and Vacation - I nearly forgot that we here at My Sandmen have an anniversary to celebrate. Only as I read the freshman recollections of a suberb fellow blogger over at Okie on the Lam, did it occur to me that we too have been at this for one year... at least Dueler and I have been at this station for that long. Major Mike joined us not long ago from his own accomplished site. Yet we are all Hugh Hewitt inspired bloggers determined in our own way to be In But Not Of the culture of contemporary depravity. In the midst of a brutal Presidential election season, Dueler 88 and I were inspired to bring our insights and sensibilities to the broiling battlefield of philosophical discourse... pickets in a stand against rampaging stupidity. And this is how it began, September 10th, 2004.

    Mice and Men...

    All is fair in love and war … and politics. But, what is fair is not necessarily moral, and it is often far from the metal of Men. During a time of crisis, Mr. Kerry - wings melted, spiraling out of control on his own Icarus-like plunge to Earth - continues to hurl rhetorical obscenities upon the American nation in the form of attacks and accusations against the sitting Commander-in-Chief. Politics being as they are, one might expect strong expressions of disagreement with procedure and policy. It is afterall, necessary for candidates to distinguish themselves for the people in advance of an election. But, these are extraordinary times and this election is far from an ordinary event. The nation, and indeed the entirety of Western Civilization, is engaged in a brutal struggle for its very survival. The President is the Nation’s Executive representative among the community of nations and against the barbarian hordes that are its mortal enemy. Openly undermining that authority is not merely foolish, it is blatantly suicidal. And it is wholely unnecessary. A Man should be able to tell you who he is without resorting to the demonization of the Man he’s not. One might expect a display of the meritoriuos qualities of personal character that inspire respect and admiration, rather than a pandering to the malevolence of misfits to encourage scorn and loathing. A Leader might have chosen to unite a beleagured nation. Such a Man would certainly not resort to expedient political strategy that cut the lacerations deeper, devastating the nation’s moral resolve, demoralizing her defenders while emboldening and reinforcing an enemy of butchers.

    This is John Kerry… 2004 Candidate for President of the United States?

    This is the same John Kerry that returned from valorous service in the Vietnam conflict, joined with anti-war radicals and proceeded to destroy the character of his fellow soldiers, impugn the integrity of leadership, and undermine the effort to liberate a people from another horde of butchers. The result of those actions was, one nation hopelessly divided and demoralized, and another surrendered to the brutality and the killing fields of a vindictive menace from which tens of thousands fled.

    This is John Kerry… Navy Lieutenant?

    This is the same John Kerry who was first elected to the US Senate from the State of Massachusetts in 1985. Whatever the history there, it seems wholly irrelevant in light of the fact that the Candidate neglects to discuss, much less defend his record there. During his nineteen years in Congress, Kerry may have adequately represented his constituents, but the nation is comprised of 49 other states, each unique of Massachusetts, all deserving to know the product that is being marketed to them in the form of a National leader. Kerry’s tendency toward Socialist democracy and conciliatory pacifism is a legitimate subject of discussion and debate. The query hardly qualifies as ‘dirty’ politics, ‘smear,’ or as an inquisition of the man’s patriotism. And yet he is hiding behind a barrier of such rhetoric emanating from his party, his staff, his supporters, and even the mainstream media. Mr. Kerry has a record that he should be proud of. So, why is he not proud of it? And if he is proud of his record, why then does he refuse to run on it?

    This is John Kerry… U.S. Senator?

    This is the same John Kerry, who overcame his primary contenders by default; defining himself loosely enough to fit an amorphous evaluation of ‘electability’ by a party that has long since abandoned conceptual conviction to variable consensus. Nevertheless, he was given a tremendous opportunity to demonstrate the quality of statesmanship that defines a good leader. He could have united the Nation, and secured her efforts and resolve. He could have recognized the nature of the present conflict and given it the legitimacy it deserves. He could have acknowledged the enemy, renounced brutality, praised allies while denouncing the timid and the guilty. Three years into the present struggle, he could have helped tremendously to weaken enemy networks and secure victory. He could have done all of this by simply standing firm with the effort that his vote, his words, and his support had helped to begin in the first place. He could have supported his Nation and his President in a time of War. Even if, he had developed sincere disagreement with the liberation of Iraq and ongoing efforts to engage terrorism, he might nevertheless, have recognized the severity of the given situation and set his personal vanity aside in an effort to maintain a semblance of unity and strength in the face of clear and present danger. As a Senator, that was his duty. As a Citizen, that was his responsibility. As a Man, that should have been his honor. As a Candidate, his actions and his judgment speak for themselves. If Mr. Kerry maintains an obligation to this Nation and its people and sincerely believes that he can better perform the job of Commander-in-Chief, then he might begin his quest by demonstrating a respect for that office and it’s current elected occupant. Yet, as he continually undermines that authority in the eyes of the nation, the world, and the enemy, so too does he impair his own potential authority. He likewise defames the Nation as a whole and his service to its people. It begs the question: what kind of a man endeavors to assume a role for which he has so little respect? Further, what kind of a man lacks pride for a life of ostensibly respectful service? I would go so far as to ask…what kind of a man scurries from role to role and position to position foraging for the sustenance of an esteem that remains elusive to him?

    Who is John Kerry?… Man? Or Mouse?!

It's been one hell of a year. And we're just getting warmed up.

    No comments: