Ignorance: The Enemy of Freedom

Transparency, and everything that goes with it, is a prerequisite of freedom.

For how is it I can claim freedom of choice if I'm intentionally left ignorant of the choices or the consequences of those choices?

But there are some trade-offs involved in the process.

To the end of rectifying the ignorance that is a barrier to freedom, government passes and enforces laws against fraud (where someone deprives another of the fruits of his labor under false pretenses), waste (where the fruits of labor are devalued for use on things for which it has no mandate), and abuse (the difference from waste being only malicious intent).

However, these regulations have a cost. Transparency in food, for instance, requires accurate nutritional measurements and labeling. This costs the manufacturer/distributor money, which they build into the cost of the goods sold.

Plus, any time there is a regulation, there is someone there to claim a violation, which results in a strain on the judicial system (not to mention the risk of an unfavorable judgment, regardless of guilt, which must also be accounted for in pricing).

So in addition to the costs that are built into the costs of goods, the legislative and judicial costs (i.e., government overhead) that these regulations incur are ultimately borne by the taxpayer.

In order to raise these funds, the government must require the governed to sacrifice a portion of the fruits of their labor to pay for the infrastructure and the added cost of enforcement.

Since this taxation is an inherent limit of the freedom of the taxpayer, who cannot spend the money the government took on other things he feels more likely to satisfy his happiness, it can be said that regulations and freedom are negatively correlated.

Thus, people should regard regulations with jealous suspicion, understanding that though regulations often change, the power that they imbue on the government that passes them is only very rarely given up voluntarily.

Consequently, regulations tend to have an additive effect, which makes diligence and skepticism -- regardless of the party in power -- that much more important.

Time for Some Campaignin'

Send a JibJab Sendables® eCard Today!

Benedict Arnold Was a Volunteer, Too, Rep. Murtha

Credit Jason Mattera of the Young Americans Foundation for confronting Rep. Jack Murtha (D - PA) on his calling Marines in Haditha cold-blooded killers. As of this moment, the charges against them are being dropped left and right, and Murtha refuses to apologize.

In fact, Murtha even has the audacity to, instead of acknowledge that what he said was not ever supported by the facts of the case, claim moral superiority by pointing out that he volunteered for duty in Korea. As usual, Murtha tried to shield himself from any criticism by pointing out that he was, at one time, a tolerable human being and patriot.



Benedict Arnold was wounded in action in Canada when he took a round to the leg, but he kept leading his troops on in spite of the damage. He was considered a hero.

After he betrayed the U.S. at West Point, he led a small force to take Richmond and captured an American officer. Arnold asked what the Americans would do to him if they captured him. The American patriot told him they would bury his leg with full military honors and hang the rest of him.

Murtha - You are no Benedict Arnold. You are far worse. At least when Arnold changed sides, he started wearing the uniform of the enemy.

Guliani's McCain Endorsement

On the Mark Levin show yesterday, Mark was incredulous that Rudy Guliani dared to suggest he would back McCain, if Guliani himself decided to not enter the race. Levin's disdain for McCain is the result of his lack of conservative credentials.

There should be no mystery here. McCain, in spite of sizable support, is on his heels, and it is speculated that he may drop out soon. This little display of "generosity" may encourage McCain to, once he drops out (and he will) to throw his support Guliani's way.

Not all McCain supporters will, as a result, back Guliani, but some of them will. This was a pure political play. Nothing more.

By the way, McCain's lack of conservative credentials should be of little concern to Levin, as Guliani has next to none. Why he's pretending as if they disagree on only one or two minor issues is beyond me.

Putting the Spotlight on Jack Murtha's Shameful Behavior

May 16, 2006:
"A Pentagon probe into the death of Iraqi civilians last November in the Iraqi city of Haditha will show that U.S. Marines 'killed innocent civilians in cold blood,' a U.S. lawmaker [Jack Murtha] said Wednesday."
[source]

July 11, 2007
"Whether this was a brave act of combat against the enemy or tragedy of misperception born out of conducting combat with an enemy that hides among innocents, Lance Corporal Sharratt's actions were in accord with the rules of engagement and use of force," according to the hearing officer for the case.
[source]

The biggest shame is that it took so long to determine something that was so plainly evident. Jack Murtha disgraced his office, his countrymen, and the Marine Corps, but we -- and the accused Marines -- had to wait over a year for the investigation to bear this out.

It goes to show you the practical harm that can accrue when you support your nation's enemies rather than your own nation.

Pacifism Must Be Mutual

My brother, in response to a post I made elsewhere, made a good point with regard to pacifism. Rather than try to interject my own "wisdom," I'll let his words speak for themselves.

Einstein was a pacifist too. He used to cry at the site of military men marching by in formation. Yet when he was confronted directly with a choice to lend his support in stopping Hitler or to not, he signed the letter Leo Szilard had written urging Franklin Roosevelt to develop a bomb before Germany did.

If one of the smartest men how ever lived had to abandon his utopian principles for realist ones, what makes the rest of us think we could avoid getting in a fight if confronted with it directly? Pacifism only works if both parties agree to it. If one party adheres to pacifism and the other does not, the pacifist will be the one to become extinct.

Einstein's story shows us that pacifism is a luxury some enjoy at the expense of others. That is why I admire those who serve: Because they volunteer to meet the harsh world on its own terms so that America can live in a cocoon of peace. I admire them because they allow the rest of us to revel in our illusion of pacifism, choosing not to fight, because others have chosen to fight for us.

An Open Letter to Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)

I love you to death... And I'm buying a lot of what you're selling (and have been for a long time). Congress should have fulfilled its duty to declare war, as you said.

But although we'd be better served by a your vision of nonintervention, we still can't get around the fact that we were attacked on 9/11. Whatever the flaws were in our policy that the enemy used for motivation, the act was still unjustified, morally.

Since we were unjustly attacked, we had a moral responsibility to retaliate and prevent further attacks. Withdrawing from Iraq before the situation is stabilized will do nothing to advance that end -- and will indeed hurt it, no matter whom is elected President.

I know all the talking points that tell us that "Saddam wasn't behind 9/11... blah blah blah."

That's really irrelevant. Saddam was a known sponsor of terror -- terror that had already reached our soil. The very definition of terrorism gives us the reason we need to remove such threats swiftly and forcefully. If anything, we've not been swift or forceful enough, which is where I think a formal declaration of war would have been very helpful from a practical standpoint. Obviously Congress was obligated to declare war, morally, if they really thought Iraq posed a direct threat to our national interests.

Dr. Paul, I admire and respect you for your integrity, rationality, and respect for our Constitution. Unless I'm terribly mistaken about you, regardless of what you do with your position here, I likely always will.

However, I'd strongly urge you to reconsider this particular opinion, or at least acknowledge that if you are elected President, you would follow a policy that respects the ends of the sacrifice already made by so many in our military (as well as our taxpayers).

Until you do, though I'd still strongly consider you as a viable option in the general election, I will never donate to your campaign and I'll never work for your election.

I won't be working for anyone else, either, but you were at least the one candidate I wanted to support.

Peace in Name Only

Without a hint of irony, after taking his part in the passage of a bill that orders the President to withdraw our troops from Iraq, Barack Obama brazenly claimed that we are "one signature away" from ending the war in Iraq. Veterans need to politely inform this nincompoop that wars are not won on paper, and the conflict in Iraq -- you know, the one Congress authorized -- is only one part of a global struggle against Islamofascists who will decidedly NOT go away just because the Commander-in-Chief did or did not sign a worthless piece of paper.

To be sure, the terrorists we are fighting want President Bush to sign it. They want anyone in that office who will force our troops to do the unthinkable -- retreat in the face of the enemy, and they know a Democrat is more likely to do that than a Republican. Nothing would make them happier, except for, perhaps, a bill forcing the President and the rest of the U.S. to convert to Islam. But whatever you do, don't suggest that the terrorists want Democrats to win. That would be like questioning their patriotism.

I don't know, but is that any worse than questioning the President's integrity? Because the Democrats do that all the time, even though they were in full agreement having access to the same intelligence when their judgment and patriotism were set against the backdrop of 3,000 dead bodies and the bravery of men and women who had the courage to stand up and fight back without being told.

To justify their claim of Bush's dishonesty, Democrats also must conveniently forget the numerous resolutions Saddam Hussein violated, the terrorists he openly supported, the chemical weapons he never accounted for, and the fact that WMDs have actually been found in Iraq. We didn't find the stockpiles he used to have but never demonstrated that he destroyed them as he promised. Everything else was 100% true. Conclusion? Bush lied. Iraq is a failure.

While there are many Democrats out there who, solely on the basis of their gullibility and stupidity, still have their integrity intact, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Edwards and every Democratic candidate for President are cowards, liars, and political opportunists who are willing to sacrifice American troops and America's security because they think it will help them gain power.

Don't take that the wrong way. I'm not questioning their patriotism. I'm saying plainly, they are not patriots.

They're fools, charlatans, and quite possibly the most dangerous people in America. If we do not succeed in Iraq... if we withdraw before we finish the job... the collapse of our nation cannot be far behind. Armed with the knowledge that we are, as Osama bin Laden predicted after Clinton withdrew us from Somalia, a paper tiger, we'll have no means to stop the committed fanatics from bringing their version of jihad to this country.

If we elect Democrats in the next election, we will deserve exactly what we get. I will be, for the first time in my life, ashamed to be associated with my countrymen.

Everybody say "Awwwww"

The Origin of OO-RAH

The origin of the word “OO-RAH” has been a subject of frustration and dispute over the years. U.S. Marines were the word’s first proprietors, using it to express contentment or to set expectations. And although use-dependent, the word OO-RAH can take on a variety of meanings. Now after languishing in military jargon obscurity for decades, it has rapidly become much more commonly known as even civilians associate its use with Marines.

The spelling of the word has never been standardized, as is often the case with phonetic interpretations of a sound that can only be properly formed at the bottom of the lungs. Variant spellings include “OORAH,” “OOHRAH,” and “OOH-RAH.” However it is spelled, it is recognizable as distinctly Marine whether spoken or written, and it can easily be distinguished from the Army version, the venerable but significantly less motivating “HOO-AH.”

On one of the many training videos I had to endure as a Marine, a major in Service “C” uniform was speaking to a bunch of elementary school kids. Never one to particularly enjoy watching these videos when much more important work was waiting to be done, I was at least amused by the approach. Within a course of minutes, the major got the kids’ attention and obedience in a manner reminiscent of boot camp, where upon hearing the command “EYEBALLS!” sixty recruits would lock their eyes on the drill instructor and say, in unison, “SNAP!” Amusingly, the major went on to deadpan, “Marines do not cheer. Marines do not clap. When a Marine is pleased, he says, ‘Aarugha.’” From that point on, whenever he called for an affirmative response, the children would yell at the top of their lungs, “AARUGHA!” I don’t even remember why I had to watch that video, but I’ll always remember that major and his group of elementary school kids or as my dad would call them, “future Marines.”

Of course, an astute reader would note the lack of a “G” in “OO-RAH,” and I also had this thought. However, as it turns out, there appears to be some connection between the familiar battle cry of a Marine and the deep klaxon alarm of a submarine. According to several sources, including Lcpl Paul Hirseman (2004), writing for the Marine Corps website:

Marines and historians have determined the true origins of "Oorah" lie with recon Marines stationed in Korea in 1953. During this time, reconnaissance Marines in the 1st Amphibious Reconnaissance Co., found themselves traveling via submarine to where they were needed. The memorable call of "dive, dive!" would be called on the intercom and a klaxon alarm, which made a very distinct "Aarugha" sound, would announce the descent of the sub below water.

The recon Marines, who heard this sound often, started using it as a motivational tool during runs and physical training. Over time, the word "Aarugha" came to be too much of a mouthful, and eventually molded itself into the familiar "Oorah," according to Maj. Gary Marte, a retired Marine.

[source]

Having grown up as a Marine brat and being given the unique opportunity to watch my two older brothers join the Corps before me, I was well acquainted with the term before I joined. I originally thought it could only mean that the person saying it was highly motivated to be a Marine, as I heard it most often after the “Star Spangled Banner” finished playing before a movie at a base theater. Since then, I have seen it used as a replacement for “Aye, Aye,” as a greeting, and to announce the presence of Marines, such as when the Corps is mentioned to a mixed audience. To further demonstrate the indefatigable utility of OO-RAH, I‘ve compiled a top 10 list of possible meanings:

1. I am a Marine.
   
2. I enthusiastically accept your message.
   
3. I am excited to be here.
   
4. Pleased to make your acquaintance.
   
5. What you ask of me—not only will I do—I will do in a manner befitting a Marine.
   
6. I expect good things out of you.
   
7. Good job.
   
8. I am not supposed to be motivated about performing this task, but I will force myself to express excitement for the benefit of my fellow Marines and to tactfully annoy my superiors who gave me the task.
   
9. I love being a Marine.
   
10. I am about to destroy something.

While the above list is unofficial and not comprehensive, some of the meanings do strike a chord. According to one retired Marine, “[T]he first time my wife heard the ‘OO-RAH’ chant was at a base theater. Everyone stood as the national anthem was played, and one half of a nanosecond after the last note... every Marine went into a repeating OO-RAH chant. [My wife] turned to me and asked, ‘Why are they all barking!’”

That brings us to number 11 on our top 10 list (Marines must exceed expectations, after all):

11. Happy Birthday, Marine!