Author: Fuzzy Curmudgeon

Sorry, but I haven’t seen a design yet that would be more effective than leaving the hole in the ground and making a memorial park out of it.

It’s about bloody time! The FTC is going to roll out a national no-call list for telemarketers.

Under the new rules, telemarketers also must transmit identifying information that can be viewed by services like Caller ID and limit the number of calls that hang up or leave people listening to dead air on the line.

Now if they can force collection agencies to do the same…
I can’t tell you how many calls we get for peopledeadbeats who must have had our telephone number at some time in the past. I keep thinking I’m going to have to go buy a police whistle. Or sic Bun-Bun on them.

Hmm. Apparently I’m Doc Smith, he of Lensman and Skylark of Space fame.
I figured I’d be closer to Heinlein, but on the other hand I’m not fascinated by sex in quite the way he was. I’ve always been of the theory, based on my reading of Heinlein, that he and Ginny were up to some fairly weird shit. Not that there’s anything wrong with that; but my wife is all I need, as long as she keeps letting me window-shop. (The same permission is granted back the other way, I might add.)
Although I note that I had only to change “It is morally wrong to silence yourself just so somebody else can talk” to “I’m such a fascinating talker, folks are glad to let me do more of the talking” to change my paradigm to Heinlein. And I don’t really see that much difference in those two statements 🙂
(Thanks to Pej.)

If France and Germany think this is a bad idea, I’m all for it.
(Via The Professor.)

Men in U.S. From Saudi Arabia, Pakistan Required to Register With Government
A little late but we’re starting to get on the ball.

There is a lot in this article about William Tecumseh Sherman that misses the point. Basically it’s a psychoanalysis after the fact of one of the greatest generals in our history, and it doesn’t work very well.
This quote directly follows a sub-head of “Criminal acts?”

Lincoln and Grant initially opposed the idea of the march, and Sherman went to great lengths to promote it, even advocating it on the basis of the diplomatic benefits when military reasons alone were not enough to justify it: The world would witness the awesome power of the Union and the utter helplessness of the South.

Actually the reason Lincoln and Grant opposed the idea of the march was that they figured it was a great way for Sherman to be destroyed in detail by Hood’s remnants, Nathan Bedford Forrest’s cavalry, and Georgia state militia. They weren’t too worried about the legalities of the case.

Sherman’s actions, however, belied his words, typified by the incident when he made his headquarters at the plantation of Gen. Howell Cobb, a leading Rebel. “Spare nothing,” he ordered, and everything was burned, despite the fact that the deserted plantation offered no significant material aid to the Confederacy.

Uh huh. Let’s see what Mr. Foote has to say about that.

A leading secessionist and one-time speaker of the U.S. House and Treasury Secretary under Buchanan, Cobb had been appointed by [Governor] Joe Brown to command the state reserves in the present crisis; in which capacity — though it turned out there were no “reserves” for him to command — he had been exhorting his fellow Georgians to resist the blue invasion by the destruction of everything edible in its path. “Of course, we confiscated his property,” Sherman would recall, “and found it rich in corn, beans, peanuts, and sorghum molasses. . . . I sent back word to General Davis to explain whose plantation it was, and instructed him to spare nothing. That night huge bonfires consumed the fence rails, kept our soldiers warm, and the teamsters and men, as well as the slaves, carried off an immense quantity of corn and provisions of all sorts.”
His aim, he said, in thus enforcing “a devastation more or less relentless,” was to convince the planters roundabout “that it is in their interest not to impede our movements.” [Unfortunately his own foragers didn’t pay any attention to his orders and destroyed and confiscated these planters’ property along the line of march.]
…In time Sherman would concede that “many acts of pillage, robbery, and violence were committed by these parties of foragers. . . .” [He estimated that the march inflicted damage of at least $100,000,000,] “at least twenty millions of which has inured to our advantage, and the remainder is simple waste and destruction. This may seem a hard species of warfare,” he declared, “but it brings the sad realities of war home to those who have been directly or indirectly instrumental in involving us in its attendant calamities.” Such, after all, was one of the main purposes of the expedition, and if, in its course, southern women had been subjected to certain discourtesies in their homes, there was a measure of justice in that as well, since they were among the fieriest proponents of a war that might have ended by now except for their insistence that it be fought to the last ditch. Many of the soldiers believed as much, at any rate. “You urge young men to the battlefield where men are being killed by the thousands, while you stay home and sing The Bonnie Blue Flag,” an Ohio colonel heard one of his troopers lecture a resentful housewife, “but you set up a howl when you see the Yankees down here getting your chickens. Many of your young men have told us they are tired of war, and would quit, but you women would shame them and drive them back.”
Foote, Shelby, The Civil War: A Narrative. Volume III, Red River to Appomattox, pp. 643-645

Mr. Trammell should pay a bit more attention to detail before using something like the burning of Cobb’s plantation out of context. And he should also remember that we don’t judge the Civil War by modern standards. It was a law unto itself.

According to Maj. Robisch, “Soldiers serving in the U.S. Army today would be criminally liable for larceny or destruction of property for similar conduct.” It was hardly the kind of action that would engender international support.

Indeed. However, let’s remember something: Our Civil War wasn’t an international event. Although they were invited by the South to play, the English and French opted to stay out. The rules are usually different in fratricidal conflicts…and again, you’re judging the Civil War by modern standards that simply do not apply.

The fact, mostly ignored for more than 137 years, is that Lee’s army was defeated by Grant’s tactical maneuvers, and not a lack of materiel. When the war closed, vast quantities of ammunition, clothing and food were still in warehouses in western North Carolina, and isolated parts of Virginia. Sherman’s march did not destroy a fraction of the total goods manufactured in Richmond, for example.

That’s true. But it’s also true that Grant’s army destroyed and occupied the FUCKING ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY RAILROADS, you numbskull. Lee’s army was out of food, ill-clad, and nearly out of ammunition when Grant ground it to a halt at Appomattox Courthouse, because for months its lines of supply had been cut or nearly so. Richmond was abandoned at least partly because the troops couldn’t be fed! Once Grant got across the Southside Railway, Lee knew the game was up, and tried to break out.

As for Georgia, the local effect was more devastating. The march set the Georgia economy back for almost 100 years, and left deep psychological scars.

Excuse me, but did I just hear the world’s tiniest violin playing?

Would the war have ended sooner if Sherman had taken the course Grant did in Virginia, and pursued Hood’s army to the death? No one can know, but it’s certainly a reasonable possibility.

Not to anyone who actually knows Civil War history. Sherman wasn’t about to go after Hood’s remnants. That was an ambush waiting to happen, what with Forrest waiting in the wings just itching to get his cavalry into Sherman’s flanks. Hood’s army was finished as a fighting force by the time Sherman started out on his march.
All in all I don’t think much of this article. The WashTimes’ Civil War page has been declining of late, unfortunately.

I was just reading this article over on NRO and had a bit of an epiphany.
Why not immediately double the pay of all military personnel?
A few restrictions, though. While we would accept the current obligations of those in the service as valid, any new recruit or any re-up would be a ten-year obligation; period, end of subject, only way out is to get killed or become permanently disabled or do something stupid that earns you a dishonorable. But after 10 years you could retire on half pension; after 20, full pension.
And at the same time we do this, welfare gets cut to subsistence levels. The message: Serve your country and make a decent living. Choose to sit on your duff, and you can just get by while you’re looking for a job.
If we’re really committed to a strong national defense and a years-long war on terror, we need recruits. And they should be paid enough to make joining up worthwhile. In turn they should be willing to serve for a longer period. And let’s face it, under this plan joining at 18 and reupping once gets you to 38 and a full pension; technically you could sit on your butt for the rest of your life. (Few probably would.)
I would have joined up 25 years ago for a deal like that. Instead I’m still a wage slave at 43. Ah well.

A must read.

REALLY busy today. Wearing 4 hats simultaneously. Arghh.

Says Fox.
I love some of the quotes.

“Gore was instrumental in helping to create the longest period of economic growth in our nation’s history, creating millions of new jobs, and turning record deficits into surpluses. He has served as a leader on environmental issues and in international affairs, working with passion and conviction to tackle the toughest challenges we face.” — Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., who expects to make a decision soon on whether he will run.

Not even Clinton was instrumental in creating the longest period of economic growth in the nation’s history. It was created by Ronaldus Magnus in the 1980’s and the Clinton bozos simply rode it till the steam ran out. If Edwards can’t even get his economic history straight, he’ll make a lousy president. Which he would anyway; he’s a Democrat from the South.
And I won’t even talk about Gore’s “blame the humans” Luddite approach to environmentalism.

“From his trailblazing work on the environment and technology as a member of Congress to his extraordinary accomplishments as vice president in the areas of foreign affairs and economic security, Al has defined himself as someone who identifies problems before anyone else and offers solutions while others are still mulling the question.– Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt, who associates say is “very, very likely” to run for president.

The problem with Gore’s answers is that he comes up with them so quickly, they’re still half-baked and still in the wrapper. Gore is not all that smart, and he is not a trailblazer by any stretch of the imagination. He does like to take credit for other people’s ideas and achievements, though: “I invented the Internet.”

“Al Gore was the best vice president America ever had. He would have been a fine president had history taken a different course two years ago.” — Former President Clinton.

Part I: Doubtful, and unproven. Part II: Probably better than you, you filthy scumbucket.

“While Al Gore will not be a candidate in 2004, I know we can count on both of them to speak out on the issues they have fought so hard for and care so deeply about.” — Democratic national chairman Terry McAuliffe.

I know this is out of context but both of whom? (And if both are Algore, which of the 50 different personalities are we talking about?)

“I have the greatest respect for Al Gore, for his many years of dedicated service to our nation, and for his decision, which I am sure was not an easy one,” said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y

“Plus, it gets him out of my way…”

“I think it opens the field. … Everybody has a chance and that’s an exciting time for us as Democrats.” — Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

And probably a belly-laughing time for those of us on the conservative side of the fence.