Tuesday, September 14, 2010
What a Long, Strange Monday it Was . . .
Yesterday, I started my 15 minutes a day 12 step writing regime, and I even have a sponsor.
I had already had a conversation with the family about mom needing to finish her graduate school career. At 50, it's getting ridiculous! And that means starting the dissertation. Because 90% of dissertations that are not finished were never started.
And yesterday I did several hours of housework in order to get some order back after First Day Rosh Hashannah (no work done), Second Day Rosh Hashannah (no work done), followed immediately by Saturday--an all-day seminar (no work done). I was feeling proud of myself after I put in my 15 minutes of writing that expanded to 30, followed by phone calls and getting a necessary form filled out for the Catron County Assessor--for the Ranch!!!--and a trip to the Albuquerque Uptown Borders store to purchase Strunk and White. (That's The Elements of Style, and oldie but goodie!)
I was feeling on top of things. I was doing my life pretty well indeed.
Or so I thought . . .
I picked up the Rasta Jew from Cross Country practice at about 6, and when we pulled up, I asked him to bring the dogs in. Shayna was already inside, but Lily and Umbrae were in the dog run.
Now usually, the Rasta Jew waits a while before bringing them in. He generally needs to inhabit his room alone for a while, and reassure himself that he is part of his space. So, looking forward to sitting down to read a book about a city girl turned farmer, I went about putting away some clothes in the closet. And was suddenly surrounded by two very excited, wild and crazy dogs. (I usually make them all sit in the dog run before I open the gate, and again at the door before I let them in. I do this to avoid what happened next. And when Lily jumped up on the bed, I ordered her down. And she jumped straight over the footboard and right onto Shayna.
We had a repeat of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly in my bedroom.
Except that the Rasta Jew had to dry fire his pellet rifle next to Lily's head to break her away from Shayna. So it was a Monday evening trip to the Vet Urgent Care with Shayna, who had multiple abraisions and wounds on her left foreleg and chest. She was more serverely injured than I thought by looking at her.
Over three hundred dollars later, I was ready to take Lily in for immediate euthanasia.
Rehoming her seems irresponsible since I'd just be passing the problem on to someone else. . .
The Urgent Care Vet gave us the name of an animal behaviorist, and the Engineering Rancher Geek, who had initially said we should euthanize Lily today, spent 45 minutes on the phone with one of the researchers. I filled out a very long questionnaire, as did the ERG. To see this person will be quite expensive, but that expense includes a full medical evaluation and lab tests. If this leads to a definitive answer that either something can be done or it cannot, it could give us peace with whatever decision we make.
In the meantime, upon return from the vet last night, a groggy Shayna went into her crate and has refused to come out in nearly 24 hours. I cannot give her the antibiotics--the priciest item on the estimate for her care--but I think if I can just entice her to eat one of the liver-flavored pain tablets, she will come out and eat, drink and take the antibiotics. And take a short, halting walk outside . . . this is the longest Shayna-on-strike we've had since we brought her home.
Whatever hard choices we make in the next few days, for sure we cannot let this happen to poor Shayna again.
Oy. I don't like Mondays. At least, not Mondays like this!
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Murder in the First Degree: Remembering 9-11on 9-12

I remembered that day of ash and smoke, come out of a clear blue sky. It came out of the blue, but it came not by accident. It came by the intention of evil men. Murder by malice aforthought.
And the wound is still raw now, nine years later. I still feel ripped open, vulnerable and I still experience the red fire of anger behind my eyes. ( I who witnessed it by television from a thousand miles and more away).
And I wonder at those who want me, want us to curb our anger, to worry about what those who did this think about me, about us. About US.
A person who does this-- who brings buildings down upon the heads of the people of a city--who plans ahead the murder of innocents and innocence with such extravagence;
A person who does this deserves no thought, no consideration, no concern. A person who does this deserves nothing but to have destruction rained down upon him. He has chosen to become not a human being and has forfeited any consideration from human beings.
And those who would use the liberties vouchsafed for them by the Constitution in order to bring about the destruction of the cities and people who protect that Constitution, even to bring about the destruction of the Constitution itself, deserve no protection, no consideration and no concern. They deserve nothing from the people who look to the Constitution for the protection of rights.
Let us not forget who did this and why they did it. Anger is an appropriate response to such an intrusion upon the rights of the innocent people who were murdered on 9/11. Hatred of the evil deed and of those who deliberately took over 3,000 lives, and of those who supported it, cheered it, and approved of it, is a proper response to the murder of innocents.
This was no accident. It was no tragedy--no consequence of the exegencies of nature, no coming together of random chances. It was murder in the first degree.
Catching Up: A Bitter-Sweet New Year
Catching Up: Circumstances and holidays, Jewish and American, have all come together to create a blog-cation of nearly two weeks at Ragamuffin House and Ragamuffin Ranch. This is the second catching up post today! This week, I am beginning a regular writing routine, in order to be more faithful to blogging on all kinds of topics, not just politics.
Rosh Hashanah 5771:

Shanah Tovah--as the graphic says: A Good Year--for a High Holy Days season that kind of snuck up on us, beginning in the same week as Labor Day.
Our lunar Jewish calendar is intercalated with the Western solar calendar, so that seven times in 19 years, we add a leap month to keep the holy times and seasons in line with the actual seasons. Sometimes leap month comes every two years, and sometimes, like this year, it comes in the third year. When that happens, the second year comes with holy days that are very early according to the solar calendar.
So Rosh Hashanah 5771--the Jewish New Year--snuck up on me, and we almost missed Elul, the month of preparation. Or did we? So much is happening in the world and in our lives, and during Elul, I think our hearts and minds were busy with changes--some welcome, some unexpected, and some necessary to the times and seasons.

On Wednesday evening we ate a very good dinner complete with round cinnamon-raison Challah, dipped our apples in honey--for a sweet year, and then went to synagogue to welcome the new year with our beloved (if at times exasperating) fellow Jews. We hoped and prayed for a good and prosperous year for ourselves and the whole House of Israel. May it be so! May we make it so!
On Thursday and Friday at the first and second day morning services, we performed the Mitzvah--the commandment--of hearing the Shofar, the wild calling of the Ram's Horn, to awaken us, to warn us, to strengthen us for what is coming: the good, the bad and the ugly.
Given the signs of the times, I think the bitter-sweet mood among our fellow Jews is indeed timely. Economic hard times are only beginning, and tends to cause the anti-Semites to come pouring out of the woodwork. Israel is threatened, and war with Iran may not be avoidable, which brings a large number of our people under the gun. And the new Exodus from Europe--Jews leaving countries where they are warned not to tell who they are, or wear a kippah, or a star, for fear of retribution from the growing Muslim majorities in Sweden, in France, only because they exist as Jews. The world grows harder and more troubled.
And yet, we remind ourselves at our solemn and yet hopeful assembly:
". . . how unyielding is the will of our people Israel! After the long nights, after the days and years when our ashes blackened the sky, Israel endures, hearts still turned to love, souls still turned to life.
So day and night, early and late, we still rejoice in the study of Torah, we will walk by the light of Mitzvot. They are our life and the length of our days. Praised be the Source of Life, and Love, and Israel, our people!"
--CCAR and the Union of American Hebrew Congregations (1978): Sha'arei T'shuvah: The New Union Prayer Book for the Days of Awe (p. 25-26).
We have survived worse, and come back to flourishing life. The dry bones are clothed in new flesh. And at those times when the outside world becomes hard and troubled, we must summon within us the resolve to keep the flame alive within our own hearts, and within the hearts of our homes and our synagogues, in order to succor the strength and resolve to come through this latest great gate in history with strength and honor and love of life.
And may this year indeed be a good year for me, and you, and the whole House of Israel, and the whole world. For Rosh Hashanah commemorates and celebrates the birth of the world, and the goodness of life.
Catching Up: Labor Day at the Ranch
Labor Day at the Ranch: We spent much of the Labor Day weekend at the ranch. We moved some boxes down there, and took the dogs for the first time. Transporting three dogs three hours each way was an adventure, but we managed it well, I believe. We did some soil samples and marked our fields, and now will be planning various projects to be done once the High Holy Days are done.
Because the former owners are still in residence, finishing up their various commitments, we have been staying in the cabin each time. I love the front porch and the view across our little valley. And the back faces the rimrock, part of the Colorado Plateau formations.The Rasta-Jew makes friends with Cowboy J.'s horses. They will be moving with him, but in the meantime, they enjoy a peaceful early fall morning at the watering tank.
The Rasta-Jew loves the ranch and finds much to do there. On Labor Day weekend, he repaired the drive shaft of an old Jeep truck, put in transmission fluid, and replaced the battery and cables. He forgot brake fluid though, so he was driving in low gear and stopping by coasting on level ground.
The Engineering Rancher Geek had some lessons in Tractor 101, and immediately began grading the road and the driveway, including the area in front of the barn.
While he was doing that, I was sifting the soil samples and getting them ready to ship out to NMSU, where the State Extension Soil Labs are located. They will be tested because we will need to add amendments this fall in order to be ready to plant in the spring.Lots to do! LOTS!
We were hoping to go the ranch this weekend, too, but it would have been just to much with Rosh Hashanah Thursday and Friday. Shabbat was strange as I had a Dissertation Seminar (a PhinisheD support group for this the loneliest time of the process) late Friday afternoon and all day Saturday. Lots of discussion, seeing old friends at different stages of their research and writing.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Appleseed Shoot: Former Cook, Now Becoming a Rifleman
During the Shoot, our home-away-from home was firing line, which was situated 25 yards in front of the first target line. Over the course of two very full days, we learned the fundamentals of the Rifleman skills: safety, the six steps for taking a shot, the Natural Point of Aim (NPOA), and how to shoot prone, sitting, kneeling and standing. The Rasta Jew was a natural, but I improved only slowly, changing rifles twice to solve a few physical problems.
Picture: The Rasta Jew lays out the sleeping bags on the firing line. These will serve as ground cover for shooting prone, sitting and kneeling. (Taken August 28, 2010).
Shooting from the prone position is the most stable, and done right, is both relaxed and beautiful. Sitting is the next most stable, because there is still much bone in contact with the ground. Kneeling is next, and standing is least stable. However, when shooting in real situation--such as hunting--there is no bench, and one may need to shoot in a variety of positions to hit the target. Therefore, a good marksman can shoot accurately in a variety of positions.
Picture: On the second day, they brought out some bigger guns. Here the Rasta Jew shoots an M1-Garand (a classic rifle) at metal targets 200 yards away. Another participant is sighting for him, to let him know how to adjust his aim. (Taken: August 29, 2010).
During the breaks and the lunch periods, the teachers take turns telling the story of April 19, 1775. The stories are intended to remind us that those people then thought about us now, and given the choice between slavery and the bullet box, wanted to leave us a third choice: the ballot box. They are intended to get citizens involved in that legacy.
Picture: Navy Chief Bill "don't call me sir" Black teaches the Rasta Jew to fire an AR-15 on the AQT. The Rasta Jew qualified as a Marksman, but did not earn the coveted Rifleman patch this time. (Taken: August 29, 2010).
Despite the intensity--the pace was like drinking from a firehose--Appleseed was a great deal of fun. The teachers, who are all volunteers, spent a great deal of time helping each of us one-on-one, and met us where we were at with respect to our skills. Everyone who perservered, went away as a better shot than when they started. As a novice on a rifle, I began with scores in the twenties on the AQT, but by the end I scored a 96, 14 points away from Marksman.
Picture: The teachers for this shoot. The orange hat means teacher-in-training; the red hats are teachers, and the green hat is the Shoot Boss. (Taken: August 29, 2010).
"I am a former cook, becoming a Rifleman. And it feels GOOD!"
And I brought away some insight into the minds of our forefathers who fought the Revolution as well. They were always talking about "posterity." They were always thinking about us. But we are not thinking about our posterity. And when Gill "Bluefeather" (the Shoot Boss) said this, I said out loud, "Maybe that's our problem!"
And one of the other teachers said, "I think you have the secret."
John Adams said this to us:
"Well, Posterity. You will never know what it cost us to preserve your freedom. I only hope that you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that I ever took half the pains to preserve it."
The point of Appleseed is not only to make us a nation of Riflemen again, in the Spirit of April 19, 1775, the day our country was born in blood, but also to get us to remember the spirit in which our forefathers preserved our liberty, thinking always down the years to us. And to get us to think about our posterity in the far future with the same care, so that we, too, preserve our liberty. And it was their hope, and should be ours, that their third choice--the ballot box--will be sufficient to preserve it.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
More on Those E-mail Chains . . .
About a week and half ago, I posted my concerns about one of those chain e-mails that was going around, because I was concerned about what kind of message was being sent. That blog post, Ayekha, can be found by clicking the link. Today, I received another chain e-mail, this time ending with the claim that "the Marines want this to roll" on the internet.
You've got to be kidding. Which marines? I am sure that the contents, anonymous and unsourced did not come from the commander of the United States Marines. But so many people seem to reflexively re-post these things, without giving a thought to what is being said, or the fact that readers really don't know by whom it is being said. In this case, the first three quarters of the post was largely true, and the argument interesting, though unsourced. (It argued that when Islamists become a certain percentage of the population of a Western and relatively free society, they begin agitating for privileges that end up underming the core values of liberty and tolerance that the society has extended to the Islamists). And the overall sentiment of the message was one that I can agree with--that the principles and values of Islamic Totalitarianism are incompatible with those of the United States.
However . . .you knew that a however was coming, didn't you?
However, my concern came with a bit of unreason purported to be by an American who had lived in Saudi Arabia for twenty years, that was completely contrary to the principles of individualism and liberty that we are claiming to defend. The piece called "Can Muslims be Good Americans" has passed through my in-box before, and contains ten arguments all of which contain factual errors, and all of which could be used to argue that Catholics or all Christians or Jews could not be good Americans either. In fact the first time I saw this non-argument, I set about doing exactly that by substituting the word "Christian" and then the word "Jew" into it, and constructing the particular arguments based on what I know about those religions. The one "proving" that Jews cannot be good Americans was particularly devastating, because I know a lot more about Judaism. I just did what the author of this piece did an combined ideas and laws from all over the 5,000 year history of Judaism, without rhyme, reason or qualification, and generalized them to all Jews, and viola! Jews cannot be good Americans.
I am not going to argue the particulars of this piece of badly written propaganda because the fundamental flaw is that it is overgeneralized,and each point can be simply refuted by this argument. If you wish to see the propaganda, it has been published here, and there are numerous rebuttals to each and every point all over the internet.
In this case, what we see is a well-meaning discussion of the very real dangers of Islamic Totalitarianism and its goals combined to which the unknown author appended this piece of drivel, wrote that the marines really want readers to pass it on, and then hit send to several thousand of his or her closest friends and relatives. In this case, it was BCC'ed to me, preventing me from responding to everyone that the person who sent it to me sent it to, so I responded to the person who sent it to me, and the person who sent it to her. After that, the origins are lost in cyberspace.
Here is my reply:
The first three quarters of this message is in great part correct. Islam is a complete system of life just as Christianity was in Europe in the Medieval period (the 5th to 15th Century C.E.) The danger to us is that Western individualism is in conflict with such a complete system (this is why that system ruled by the Roman Catholic Church in Europe did not survive modernity), and the modern Western way of life based on individual liberty cannot coexist with a theocracy. Further, although it is identified as a Western Religion because Mohammed was influenced by Judaism and Christianity, Islam is not at all Western in its thought. Western thought can be identified as thought that was heavily influenced by Greek logic and by the Rule of Law as understood by Greeks, Romans and Jews of the Hellenic period (500 B.C.E. - 400 C.E.). Because Islam is NOT Western, we are making a huge mistake if we believe that we can reason with the rulers of Islam, or if we believe that tolerance extended to them will cause them to be tolerant of us. The idea that we live and let live so long as no ones rights are being violated is a Western idea that took the whole of the Hellenic Period and the Medieval Period to come to full fruit in the West. It took 2000 years of religious development, philosophical development, and many religious wars to move from the concept of the Divine Right of Kings to the concept of Individual Sovereignty.
Islam, isolated in the middle east after the Battle of Vienna, bypassed a good deal of that development, and although Islam--in the form of the Caliphate of Spain--can be credited with preserving certain Greek ideas, it did nothing with them. It was, rather, the careful preservation of Greek writings by the Christian Monastics that led to the Renaissance, and the flowering of modern Western culture.
I agree with you both in that I hardly think it is our duty to allow the world to plunge into the chaos of religious war and theocracy by surrendering our values for the dross of multiculturalism and thereby honoring the barbaric values of a desert culture that wants to take over the world. And multiculturalism is not a modern Western value, it is a post-modernist fantasy. In order to prevent the destruction of the West, we must defend our principles and our values, and understand that no one has the right to destroy the rights of others, and that our Constitution cannot be used to destroy itself.
And that leads me to the last quarter of this e-mail, entitled "Why Muslims Cannot be Good Americans" . . .
I have seen this before, and I have replaced "Muslims" with "Christians" and "Jews" for each of the points and came up with similarly absurd results. Apparently neither Christians nor Jews can be good Americans! This is because the assumption in the piece is based on the collectivist notion that every Muslim, Christian or Jew is exactly the same as any other, and the equally collectivist notion that the United States was built on the principles of a Christian Theocracy. By the time of the Enlightenment, during which the values of individual rights and liberty became fully developed, theocracy had been tried by the West and found wanting.
Here is the crucial piece: Individual Muslims can be good Americans, as can individual Christians and individual Jews, so long as they accept the values of individualism as opposed to those of collectivism. In our system, rights are inherent in each human being, are therefore individual rights. There are no "group rights." Islam as individual religious expression can and should be tolerated, but any demand for collective privileges (a better term than "group rights" which is a contradiction in terms) must be repulsed at once. IOW, we ought to do as MacArthur did with Shinto during the occupation of Japan. As an individual religious expression, he told the Japanese to have at it. But any attempt by an individual or group to form an oligarchy--that is any attempt to gain privileges or power over any individuals sanctioned by government based on Shinto emperor worship--was firmly stopped. MacArthur did this with the blessings of James Byrne, from the US State Department, who wrote to the General in a telegram:
"Shintoism, insofar as it is a religion of individual Japanese, is not to be interfered with. Shintoism, however, insofar as it is directed by the Japanese government, and as a measure enforced from above by the government, is to be done away with. People would not be taxed to support National Shinto and there will be no place for Shintoism in the schools. Shintoism as a state religion—National Shinto, that is—will go . . . Our policy on this goes beyond Shinto . . . The dissemination of Japanese militaristic and ultra-nationalistic ideology in any form will be completely suppressed. And the Japanese Government will be required to cease financial and other support of Shinto establishments." (Quoted in : No Substitute for Victory: The Defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism by John David Lewis in The Objective Standard, Winter 2006-2007)
(By the way, this article is excellent intellectual ammunition for those of us concerned with preserving our values, and can be read for free at the link I put on the title).
What was done in the occupation of another country in order to pacify it, is certainly the proper policy to pursue on our own shores in order to protect the rights of Americans, which is the purpose of our government in the first place. Certainly, Islam as individual religious expression must be left alone according to our own values, but just as certainly Islam as an attempt to dominate our people must be fought according to those very same values. And we must go beyond the vague feel-good statements of the multiculturalists, as well as the diatribes of religious dominionists of the Christian persuasion, to define the difference according to the values of individual liberty enshrined in our founding documents.
Some of my readers may believe that my attempts to fight drivel on the internet are quixotic, and in general, they probably are. But, after all, my replies to to the people I know who send the stuff to me with a flick of the finger. And my goal is to get those people for whom what I say may have some influence to think before they push the "forward" icon. Undoubtedly, I will be unsuccessful in a large number of cases--especially among those who have confused religion with the Constitution. But for those who really do believe in individual liberty, I hope my arguments may cause them to consider what they are supporting when they forward this kind of stuff.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
The Cartoon "Road to Serfdom"
In 1944, during the war against collectivism that we call WWII, F.A. Hayek published a book in Britian. The book was called The Road to Serfdom. This book was published in the United States later the same year. Hayek was an Austrian School economist working in London at the time. He was concerned about the role of central planning in the inevitable descent of collectivism into barbarism that he had watched happen on Continental Europe. He pointed out that although such economic theory was generally begun by people of good purpose, that the Road to Serfdom is paved with such good intentions. He said:
However much we may differ when we name the culprit . . . we all are, or at least until recently, certain of one thing: that the leading ideas which in the last generation have become common to most people of good will and have determined the major changes in our social life cannot have been wrong. We are ready to accept almost any explanation of the present crisis of our civilization except one: that the present state of the world may be the result of genuine error on our part and that pursuit of our most cherished ideal have apparently produced results utterly different from those which we expected."
(F.A. Hayek (1944). The Abandoned Road. In Bruce Caldwell (Ed.). The Road to Serfdom: Text and Documents (The Definitive Edition). p. 65-66).
I first read The Road to Serfdom in college, but re-read it two years ago, and as I have often found for myself, I appreciated and understood Hayek's reasoning more fully with the passage of time. Part of the reason for this may be that my understanding of the world improved with age, and another part may indeed be that the United States has traveled further along the Road to Serfdom in the 30 years that have passed since I first read the book, and so its meaning and importance have become more immediate.
The book itself is written for the layman, and is not a text in economics. Rather, it explains the importance of economic theory to human action, particularly with respect to the problem of central planning. However, it was written in a style suited to its time, and in this age of bits, bytes, and soundbytes, where our time has become limited, those who are scrambling for a living in increasingly precarious situations may not have the time to read it.
In the early 1950's Look Magazine developed the main theme of each chapter into an illustrated pamphlet. Although the ideas are not fleshed out as carefully as Hayek did in the book, the main progression down the Road to Serfdom is well done. Here, as forshpice to actually reading the book, is a You Tube video of the Look Magazine pamphlet:
It is my hope that if you haven't yet read the book, this will whet your appetite.
CAVEAT: In the book, and even in this pamplet, the defintion of socialism that Hayek used necessarily included central planning. At that time, there was no soft, European-style socialism that had as its central focus the so-called "redistribution" of wealth via taxes and the welfare state. Hayek discusses this in his 1976 Preface to the book, which can be found in the Caldweller Edition cited above. That the work pre-dates this kind of "social democracy" does not mean that this kind of economic system is immune from the consequences of collectivism on human liberty, it only means that this way of limiting human liberty had not been invented yet.





