Archive for April, 2011
Yup…
Posted in What Really Matters, Why the Internet Is Fun and Informative on April 15, 2011| 1 Comment »
…it is still inevitable.
You can run, but it will still catch you.
At least the old guy had the right perspective about it.
After Action Report: Harry Brown
Posted in Why the Internet Is Fun and Informative on April 9, 2011| 4 Comments »
Last night, I finally watched a movie that I have been anticipating for a while. And I’m still trying to process it.
I wanted to like this movie. I really did. I thought that a film about a decorated Royal Marine in retirement who gets fed up with the crime and filth plaguing his home would be impressive. Kind of like the juggernaut of violence that he played in 1971’s ode to violence, Get Carter. But that wasn’t what I got.
The movie started slow. We get a crawling introduction to Harry, now an old age pensioner living in ugly housing blocks. He is struggling with the fact that his wife is institutionalized, suffering from a nameless malady…dementia, Altzhiemers…take your pick. The parts of the days not spent in silence at her bedside, watching her stare off into space, are spent playing chess with an old friend, Leonard, at the local pub.
Leonard cannot conceal his contempt with crime and decay that surrounds him. He points out the openly conducted drug trade to his friend Harry, over a game of chess, horrifying Harry, because it might call attention to them. Leonard’s anger grows as the local gangs do what they can to terrorize him. Leonard cannot understand why Harry, a decorated veteran of the Northern Ireland campaigns, does nothing to even express dismay at what goes on around them. When pressed, Harry explained that when he met his wife, he knew he could never again be the man that he had been.
Two tragedies, one on the heels of the other, shatter Harry’s world, and after getting bad news from the Police, Harry surveils the predators living among his neighborhood. And then gets to work.
As the story unfolds, you get glimmers of the man that the mild-mannered Harry has suppressed, perhaps for decades. An interrogation scene offers a glimpse of the cold-blooded brutality that was necessary to be the Queen’s Man in Belfast and come home alive. But this hardness is still restrained, kept in check. While his age and ailments prevent him from unrolling the blanket of revenge all in one night, Harry does, inevitably, prevail. And by a quirk of fate, a major police raid, and an incredulous constabulary, Harry is not pursued by the law for his extermination of the trash poisoning his neighborhood.
One of the few moments in the film that worked for me was when he was confronted about the violence going on around him, and how he must be used to it from his time in Northern Ireland. Harry’s response was the same as the one in my head, namely, that at least those people were fighting for something, whereas the youths in his neighborhood did it for entertainment.
I wanted to like this movie. I really did. But the presentation was unnecessarily slow, even for a British production, and I found it impossible to believe that a man who had witnessed and participated in the horrors that he did would be able to lock that all away for the love of a woman alone. The payoffs, when they came, had no emotion, no slaking of vengeance. It was justice, and more than many of them deserved, but it was too restrained. Ultimately, Harry’s violence was no more than what was required to balance the accounts, but ultimately it left me cold.
As I thought about it over breakfast, it occurred to me that this was the British version of Gran Torino. But where Gran Torino’s main character sacrifices himself to give his neighbor and friend a chance to find his own life without living under the heel of the crime and decay that surrounds him, Harry’s act was revenge that gave his community some breathing room and a chance to come outside during the day. The cultural differences between we and our cousins remain well-defined.
What Do You Do After Pantsing Yourself In Front of the Electorate?
Posted in accountability, Crappy laws, Crisis, entitlement culture, Faux Intellectualism, Hypocrisy, Institutional Stupidity, Miles Across and Inches Deep, Politics, Priorities, The Politics of Lowered Expectations™, Uncategorized, What Really Matters, Why the Internet Is Fun and Informative, WordPress Political Blogs on April 5, 2011| 8 Comments »
Well, if you’re Lindsey Graham, the undies go next, and you make sure everyone gets a really good look.
After being rightfully skewered for his suggestion that Americans shouldn’t be able to burn Qurans because that will make the heathens rage and burn stuff and kill people (completely ignoring that they need almost no provocation to rage and burn stuff and kill people), Lindsey spoke to Robert Costa at the National Review, and demonstrated that he <i>still</i> doesn’t get it.
General Petraeus sent a statement out to all news organizations yesterday, urging our government to [condemn] Koran burning. Free speech probably allows that, but I don’t like that.
No, Lindsey. It doesn’t “probably allow it“. It unquestionably allows it. That’s the whole point of the words “Congress shall make no law…”. As for not liking it, you might get used to it.
I don’t like that public education has completely failed entire generations in this country to the degree that “critical thinking” has been reduced to repeating whatever someone else with an agenda has told them, so they will push it, even in the complete and utter inability to voice a logical and coherent explanation for doing so.
I don’t like the fact entire portions of our history or no longer taught, or are reduced to a footnote, and that many of the people who set the grand plan for this republic to paper, and helped to advance it, are reduced to footnotes, or slandered and maligned by people whose primary agenda has been to find new and innovative ways to make what is yours theirs.
When General Petraeus wants us to say something because our troops are at risk, I’m glad to help. I don’t believe that killing someone is an appropriate reaction to burning the Koran, the Bible, or anything else, like I said Sunday; but those who believe that free speech allows you to burn the flag, I disagree. Those who want free speech to allow you to go to a funeral and picket a family, and giving more misery to their lives than they have already suffered, I disagree. And if I could do something about behavior that puts our troops at risk, I would. But in this case, you probably can’t. It’s not about the Koran; it’s about putting our troops at risk. And I think all of us owe the troops the support we’re capable of giving.
So why restrict freedom as a means to avoid an “inappropriate response” to the exercise of it? Why not draw that line in the sand, and defend it? We used to consider piracy to be an inappropriate response to passing through certain waters, and therefore we dealt with it. And you know what? It reduced the number of pirates willing to attack our ships. And Senator, with all due respect, those soldiers, even the General, have taken an oath to defend Constitution, and by extension, the freedoms it guarantees. These troops are already in war zones. Every day there is dangerous. I take umbrage at the notion that there is a moral obligation to refrain from exercising a freedom that the troops have sworn to defend so that they won’t face violence from people who stage astonishingly bloody and “inappropriate” expressions of outrage at little or no provocation to begin with.
Frankly, if Karzai was willing to gin up this controversy to inflame people so willing to kill others who had nothing to do with the “offense” in the first place, then maybe the time has come for him to run that little corner of paradise without anyone to help keep the very real extremists who oppose him at bay. Maybe its time to let a people so eager and enthusiastic to be backwards to be backwards, and enjoy the spiritual enlightenment that comes from beating women for the crime of being raped, living without sanitation, antibiotics, education, and decent nutrition. Maybe its time to let the world pass them by as they apply a 4th century brain to 21st century life, or what passes for it a few miles outside of Kabul, Tekrit, or Tehran. But you sure as hell do not reward bloody tantrums by capitulation or surrender of the very rights that make us who we are.
Nobody said anything to me when I said that you can’t burn the flag. People say that is free speech, but I don’t agree. What I was saying is, if I could hold people accountable, I would. But I know that we can’t. I just don’t like the idea of free speech being used as a reason to put our troops at risk. They’ve got enough problems already. I really believe that responsibility ought to be part of free speech. You can’t yell “fire” in a theater. There are a lot of things that you can’t do under the guise of free speech. I just hate it when somebody here, some crazy person, acts in a way that puts our troops in jeopardy. I really feel the need to condemn that. To me, that is not a responsible use of free speech.
——————————————————————————————————————-
If not a particular act, I would like to be able to push back against things that put our troops in harm’s way, at home and abroad. But there is no way to regulate all of the speech that you are talking about. I am not suggesting that we have a constitutional amendment to ban Koran burning, or Bible burning, or anything else. I am suggesting that I wish that we could make people accountable.
And now we get to the real nub of the matter. Responsibility and accountability.
It is great irony having someone who is part of a body that has done more to erode responsibility and accountability in exchange for dependency and the power and authority that it accords lamenting a lack of responsibility and accountability for what people do with freedom. Having a government that has done so much to infantilize people, to encourage irresponsibility, to attack the moral checks on baser impulses, and to marginalize the sources of those moral checks that people and societyimposed without the assistance or participation of government really is a lot. After decades of this we find ourselves in a place where the people who have sworn to protect the freedoms guaranteed to us constantly behave as if we are not to be trusted with them. Whether its supporting this ludicrous idea that we must curtail the exercise of freedom here at home so that people elsewhere in the world do not act badly, or that because someone would act badly here at home because that freedom made it possible, those who serve us appear possessed of the idea that only they can determine what freedoms we should be allowed at all, because some among us chose to exercise them without responsibility or accountability.
Living with freedom is difficult. It’s work. And it should be. There is a reason why Benjamin Franklin told a citizen inquiring what the result of the Constitutional Convention was “A republic, if you can keep it.” If the Senator wants more responsibility and accountability for what we do with freedom, I suggest he start at work, and apply his efforts to ending laws, regulations, and programs that take responsibility and accountability away from the individual and entities.
And read the Constituion every day, until he can fully grok what it is that he is there to preserve and defend.