Being Thankful

Reader_Iam at Done With Mirrors and the creation of a Thanksgiving feast. Around here, and I am not kidding, we are planning to have the traditional Thanksgiving pizza. There is a good reason for putting off the feast until Saturday, but no matter. Enjoy the Harvest Vegetable Pie over at Done With Mirrors. We'll stick with pizza.

Facing Fact

I see certain things as fact. Others take exception to those facts on a fairly regular basis around here. Fine, that is part and parcel of doing this self-imposed job of hanging my thoughts out for the world to see every day. My view of the world does not always coincide with other people's perspective. But there are some things I honestly believe are right and just and true in the world. Those things boil down to a single word: freedom. I think it is wrong to force others to accept your views. Don't get me wrong here, you have every right to try to convince others to accept your views, but you have no right - at all - to force those views on others. Ever. And to use violence or intimidation to force those views on the unwilling is heinous. Which brings us to this.

If we, the most powerful force on the planet, in a fit of disappointment and anger at our bungling policies to date, decide to shrug off our responsibilities to the future — we will soon receive, and deserve, the furious contempt of a terrified world. In fact, even those Americans who today can't wait to end our involvement in the "hopeless" war in Iraq will — when the consequences of our irresponsibility becomes manifest — join the chorus of outrage.

Expedient Washington politicians, take note: Your public is fickle. They may cheer your decision today to get out of Iraq but vote you out of office tomorrow when they don't like the results.

Much of the world (and a fair portion of the American public) may hate us today for our alleged arrogance. But they will spit out our name with contempt through time if we permit to be released the whirlwind that will follow our exit.

I have heard it said (by conservatives and Republicans, as well as others) that "if the Iraqis just want to murder each other, we should let them. We offered them freedom, and they didn't want it." If our decision on Iraq was only about Iraq, that argument might be persuasive.

But if, as it is hard to imagine otherwise, our departure from Iraq yields civil war, chaos, warlordism and terrorist safe havens — it is very likely that Iran will lurch in to harvest their advantages, Turkey will send in its army to stop an independent Kurdistan, and Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the other Sunni states will be sucked in to fend off Shi'a Iran's hegemony. In that nightmare maelstrom the 20 million barrels a day of oil shipped from the Persian Gulf — and the world economy with it — will be in daily risk of being cut off.

Nor is that all. Al Qaeda and other terrorists are already gloating that they have whipped the "cowardly Americans" in Iraq. We will be seen (in fact, we are already beginning to be seen) as a weak reed for moderate Muslims to rely on in their hearts and mind struggle against the radical Islamists. Bin Laden was right in one regard: People fear and follow the strong horse; even more so in Middle Eastern culture, where restraint is seen as weakness and murder is seen as strength.

Please read the whole thing. We are at a crossroads. There is a horrible calculus here: We have lost around 3,000 of our fellow citizens to this war. Our enemies have decided on a tactic of murdering their own people to defeat us. And if we walk away, they will have won a great victory at an astonishingly low cost to us, regardless of how high the butcher's bill is to their own. The Islamists are not Muslims. They seek only temporal power while pretending a religious fealty to Islam. They do not care who they kill to get that power.

And they will continue to press the attack if we walk away. They will not stop. They will be emboldened. The "emerging consensus" of the "realists" will cost the entire world a horrible price.

UPDATE: Don't miss the "Stuffington Roast".

Confronting CAIR

Little Green Footballs has a stunning video. Tucker Carlson completely disassembles a CAIR spokesperson. This is really worth watching. Carlson's complete, total rejection of the CAIR spokesman's arguments are actually quite brilliant. I've said that I think the imams set this whole thing up to make a scene - I rather suspect Carlson feels the same way. But the imams also set up CAIR to get hit with a backlash. Carlson is an indication that this is the case.

The “Creative” Times

It is instructive to see the editorial thought process of the New York Times in action. The are, without a doubt, the most vociferous proponents of extremely strict interpretation of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. So much so, in fact, that they are the arbiters of what may or may not be kept secret by the government. Just ask them. However, if they disagree with an amendment they have, shall we say, creative interpretations.

America’s confusion about the Second Amendment is now nearly total. An amendment that ensures a collective right to bear arms has been misread in one legislature after another — often in the face of strong public disapproval — as a law guaranteeing an individual’s right to carry a weapon in public. And, in a perversion of monumental proportions, the battle to extend that right has largely succeeded in co-opting the language of the Civil Rights movement, so that depriving an American of the right to carry a gun in public sounds, to some, as offensive as stripping him of the right to vote. Senator Allen’s bill is, of course, being cheered by the gun lobby, which sees it not as an assault on public safety but as a way of nationalizing the armed paranoia that the National Rifle Association and its cohorts stand for.

Let's just think for a moment about that, shall we? If, as the Times interprets, this is only a collective right and not an individual one, why is it necessary in the Bill of Rights at all? But the killer argument comes from Jon Henke at QandO. He creatively turns the Times own logic right around and applies it to the First Amendment.

An amendment that ensures a collective right to free speech has been misread in one legislature after another — often in the face of strong public disapproval — as a law guaranteeing an individual’s right to speak freely in public.

Brilliant, devastating and irrefutable. Which means the editorial writers at the Times will not understand it in any way, shape or form.

A Bit Of History

The History Channel does a bit of myth busting about Thanksgiving. There are a lot of interesting facts over there, as always, but the one about what the Pilgrims and the Indians (native Americans if you prefer) ate is quite interesting. Also the way they ate the feast is not what everyone believes. First of all, they had no forks.

What foods topped the table at the first harvest feast? Historians aren't completely certain about the full bounty, but it's safe to say the pilgrims weren't gobbling up pumpkin pie or playing with their mashed potatoes. Following is a list of the foods that were available to the colonists at the time of the 1621 feast. However, the only two items that historians know for sure were on the menu are venison and wild fowl, which are mentioned in primary sources. The most detailed description of the "First Thanksgiving" comes from Edward Winslow from A Journal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth, in 1621:

"Our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together after we had gathered the fruit of our labors. They four in one day killed as much fowl as, with a little help beside, served the company almost a week. At which time, among other recreations, we exercised our arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and among the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five deer, which they brought to the plantation and bestowed upon our governor, and upon the captain, and others. And although it be not always so plentiful as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want that we often wish you partakersof our plenty.

Few if any vegetables, a low carb diet, indeed. Food wasn't served in individual portions but simply placed on the table. It's a bunch of interesting little factoids that contradict a lot of the perceptions of what actually occurred. But it didn't happen quite the way some people want to teach it, either.

Proving That Reporters Can’t Do Math

Confederate Yankee looks at a BBC story about cluster munitions in Southern Lebanon and proves, rather quickly, that the Beeb's reporters have never heard of a calculator. The number the BBC reports is so ludicrously inflated, that it should be embarrassing to them. But they are the Beeb, I don't think they are capable of shame.

Flying Palaces

On November 22, 1935 a Martin M-130 flying boat left the marina in Alameda, California on the first trans-Pacific mail service of Pan American World Airways. The aircraft would begin carrying passengers the following year in rather luxurious comfort. There was a lounge, in fact.

 The Martin M-130 (better known as the China Clipper) first carried passengers on October 21, 1936. Although it was the largest flying boat ever, it gave a feeling of grace and style. The Clipper's central lounge, which was wider than a Pullman club car, was fitted with broad armchairs, and its meal service included china and silverware. The first nine passengers paid $1,438.20 for a round trip from San Francisco to Manila. It cruised at 150 miles per hour and had a range of 3,200 miles.

The jumbo jet of the 1930s.

Here's another history of the China Clippers (they have pictures of the interior).

Beyond Parody

The current slide of the British into the downright silly embrace of political correctness and rampant nanny statism has to be just about complete now. Because it is hard indeed to imagine how much lower it can go when it takes away a tradition like a pie-eating contest.

Vegetarians are to be allowed to compete in the World Pie Eating Championships for the first time.

In previous years the only filling available to contestants was one of meat and potato.

But next month, following "relentless pressure" from the Vegetarian Society, a cheese and onion version will also be on the menu.

Tony Callaghan, the event's organiser, has also changed the rule on the number of pies to be eaten.

First prize has traditionally gone to the contestant who could eat the highest number of pies in three minutes. The current record stands at seven.

On December 13, however, the winner will be the man or woman who can devour a single pie the quickest.

Mr Callaghan, who stages the event at Harry's Bar, Wigan, Greater Manchester, says he has changed the rules in response to the Government's healthy eating campaign.

"I realise it may be controversial, but this is the way forward for pie-eating at this level.

"It will make for an exciting sporting spectacle, whilst also doffing its cap to Government guidelines on obesity.

"We have also bowed to relentless pressure from the Vegetarian Society and agreed to introduce a vegetarian option."

I'm sorry I did not visit Britain years ago when I had a chance to. I honestly don't think I'd like it there now. How sad that is.

A Timely Treatise On Turkeys

The annual pardoning of the White House turkey has occurred. The birds, named Flyer and Fryer were given formal presidential pardons, a tradition started in 1947 by Harry S Truman. But since Thanksgiving is upon us, we here at Blue Crab Boulevard thought it would be a good idea to explore the varieties of turkeys available this year. Most people will eat domestic turkey:

Some will have an intrepid hunter in the family and get to eat some wild turkey: 

Some purists will insist on heritage turkeys, the almost forgotten breeds that reputedly taste better than the modern domestic turkey: 

Some will be unlucky enough to be served a tofu turkey:

If you are unlucky and get the tofu bird, we recommend a healthy serving of the other Wild Turkey to help kill the taste.

Regardless, have a very happy Thanksgiving, everyone.

Eat Your Heart Out, Evel Knievel

Oh, sure, Evel Knievel is a big name in motorcycle stunts even now, long after he retired. He even once tried to jump (sort of) the Snake River Canyon. But his audaciousness (or insanity) never rose to this level! A 72 year-old British man attempted an even more ambitious, death-defying stunt of positively awe-inspiring proportions!

He tried to jump his car over The Solent, from the Isle of Wight to the mainland!

LONDON (AFP) - A 72-year-old man escaped with minor injuries when he drove his car over a 30 metre (100 foot) cliff before landing on the beach below, police said.

Terry Flynn was doubly lucky because his stepson, Andy Baldwin, was driving past when he saw the car veer across fields towards the drop and called the emergency services.

But Baldwin only realised who the driver of the car was when he rang Flynn's mobile phone later and was told to call a hospital accident and emergency department.

Now that takes guts! Or an incredibly bad sense of direction. We report, you guess the right answer. (You could guess that Flynn was extremely lucky and be quite correct.)

Go Buy A La-Z-Boy At Once

It could very well save your life. Because they are pretty much bulletproof.

WALNUT CREEK, Calif. - Now comes another reason to stay put in the La-Z-Boy: A man sitting in his easy chair was shot in the head by his wife, but the sturdy recliner absorbed most of the bullet's force and left him virtually unscathed.

The couple had been arguing at home on Sunday evening, said Contra Costa County sheriff's Lt. Charles Skuce. Then Jan Kamp stood behind her seated husband and fired a gun at the back of his head, Skuce said.

Because she fired through the recliner, the bullet only slightly wounded Norman Kamp, 57, Skuce said.

Norman stood up from his chair, followed his wife into the kitchen and declared, "You shot me," according to authorities.

She tried to shoot him again, by the way. She's been arrested. Me, I'm off to the furniture store. Just in case the wife gets angry.

The Not So Good Shepherds

So, somebody's sheep gets stuck on a ledge above a quarry in Britain. The owner calls the emergency phone number and reports it. Firemen are sent on a mission to rescue the animal. A whole lot of firemen. 40 of them to be precise.

The emergency services received a 999 call when the animal got trapped on a ledge above a flooded quarry in Bacup, Lancashire.

The sheep's owner was amazed when seven fire crews were sent to his aid.

They performed a delicate, two-hour operation involving a team using wetsuits and an inflatable boat.

Three fire crews were sent 30 miles from Preston, while others arrived from four different stations in the area, including Bacup's own local crew.

A fire service spokesman said: "Incidents near water have health and safety issues.

"The numbers sent weren't there to ensure the sheep was rescued but that no firefighters were injured."

It boggles the mind. 40 firefighters took two hours to rescue a sheep. But then, we are talking about the folks who let their own firehouses burn down. They have much to be sheepish about.

The Wrong Benediction

The Opinion Journal points out the real reality, as opposed to the "reality" the "realists" have constructed in their heads. The moves and trial balloons toward opening negotiations with Iran and Syria have come up against the hard reality of the assassination of an anti-Syrian minister of the Lebanese government. A hard jolt of reality, indeed.

Former Secretary of State James Baker has been saying that, when it comes to diplomacy, you don't "restrict your conversations to your friends"–shorthand for the view that the U.S. should engage Syria and Iran to find solutions in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. But yesterday's murder of Lebanese Minister Pierre Gemayel might remind even Mr. Baker and his Iraq Study Group what some of those non-friends are all about.

"The hand of Syria is all over" Gemayel's assassination, said Saad Hariri, the leader of the parliamentary bloc that helped evict the Syrian army in the spring of 2005. Mr. Hariri knows whereof he speaks: His father, former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, was blown up with 22 others in February 2005, and the preliminary U.N. investigation offered a trail of evidence pointing to Damascus as the culprit.

….

Curiously, Gemayel was killed just as the U.N. agreed on the composition of an international tribunal to try the case. It is no secret that Syrian President Bashar Assad has been pulling out all the stops to quash the trial. Six pro-Syrian politicians in the Lebanese cabinet recently resigned en masse in an attempt to cripple the government, and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has been threatening huge demonstrations to bring down the anti-Syrian Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, who is also backed by the U.S. and France. Killing Gemayel removes another obstacle to Syrian dominance in Lebanon.

Which brings us back to Mr. Baker and the rest of the U.S. foreign-policy establishment now urging a new entente with Damascus. It's true that every Administration must deal with the world as it is. But when it comes to Syria, do the sages of the Iraq Study Group really want the Bush Administration to seek the benediction of a country that stirs such mayhem in Beirut?

Which has always been the problem with these ideas. Neither Iran nor Syria are serious about negotiations. That is very obvious with the timing of this murder. That Baker's group is still busily launching trial balloon after trial balloon indicates they don't appear to care about the actual reality that these two countries represent. They prefer the unreality of what they wish them to be instead.

UPDATE: Confederate Yankee: A de facto state of war.

The Protection Racket

Pete Du Pont, writing in the Opinion Journal, takes a look at the protectionist bent of the Democrats and wonders why. Because the evidence that free trade works is obvious. Protectionism, on the other hand, may save a few jobs in a certain sector, but at the price of higher costs to other segments of society.

Simply put, markets work. A recent Global Insights analysis concludes that Wal-Mart's 1985-2004 expansion of sales resulted in a 9.1% drop in the price of food at home, a 4.2% drop in the price of other goods and commodities, and a 3.1% decline in consumer prices overall, saving the average working family about $2,329 per year. And with that came a net increase of 210,000 Wal-Mart jobs in 2004 alone.

And trade agreements open market opportunities. The North American Free Trade Agreement, signed into law by President Clinton in 1993, has expanded total trade between the U.S, Canada, and Mexico by 172%. U.S. exports to Mexico have grown by 189% and to Canada by 111%. U.S. agricultural exports to Canada have doubled, to $10.6 billion from $5.3 billion, and to Mexico even more–to $9.4 billion from $3.6 billion. More than one million jobs were created in America by NAFTA.

Overall the U.S. Trade Representative's office says that 10.4% of the 2005 American GDP is the result of U.S. exports of goods and services. The Peterson Institute says that globalization boosts the U.S. economy $1 trillion annually, or about $10,000 per household. There is no question that trade both increases jobs in some areas and decreases them in others, both internationally and domestically. When cars replaced carriages, computers replaced typewriters, and E-ZPass replaced toll-takers in America, some jobs were lost and other were gained.

The new Doha round of World Trade Organization talks has been delayed by America's and France's refusal to agree to reducing agricultural subsidies. Perhaps these are negotiating positions, but would the U.S ever agree to reduce farm subsidies for greater international trade access? In a Pelosi-Reid Congress certainly not–U.S. farmers received $47 billion from the U.S. government in 2004, about 18% of farm income–but for the American people free trade and lower agricultural subsidies would be a substantial step forward.

The protectionism is, of course, being driven by the unions. The Democrats are paying them back for their support. In the process, they may yet tank the economy. That could be enough to throw them out of office in 2008. We'll see.

Quit Smoking. Take Up Bigamy Instead!

Douglass "Dude" Cigarette has been stubbed out, maybe for as long as ten years. It seems that the man who played the anti-smoking crusading cigarette pleaded guilty to bigamy. He may have had as many as four wives at one time, although that is still under investigation.

LYNCHBURG, Va. - A man who dresses up as a giant cigarette and uses hip-hop music to encourage children in Lynchburg and beyond to avoid smoking pleaded guilty Tuesday to bigamy. Phillip Dale Williams, 37, had as many as four wives at the same time, Chuck Felmlee, deputy commonwealth's attorney, said.

Williams' fourth wife, Lashawn Stevenson, became suspicious earlier this year when her husband began receiving child support notices in the mail. When the couple wed in 2003, he told her he had never been married, Felmlee said.

Stevenson's investigation led her to a Vallejo, Calif., woman, Antoinette Borum, who told Stevenson Williams left her in 2002 with two children and no child support. When Stevenson confronted Williams, he told her he had married Borum and two other women before her, Felmlee said.

Williams told police he divorced the first wife, but not the second or Borum. Police haven't been able to contact the first two wives, Felmlee said.

He's facing up to ten years in prison. You don't suppose he'll be the butt of jokes, do you? I mean, it's tough watching a career go up in smoke.