Today is the day! I'm moving the California in the morning!

Today is my 1st CF birthday! Thanks so much to the community and of Coach and Lauren. I have made such huge gains in so many areas and I am very grateful. I can't imagine not having CF! I really could go on and on about my measureable improvements in fitness, as well as improvements in diet, sleep and so on. I just want to thank you all. Here's to another great year coming up!

damn...almost had it

RAKKASAN!!!

#1
I dont think it is wise to move THE California on a Rest Day...

all right! the crappy air force PT gear makes an appearance

Allison,
What's the new name going to be? Considering that you're moving to Cali...

When I do kettlebell swings or ring work, people just look at me like I'm crazy. I guess my unit is just lazy.

Is that Brett Gratson doing box jumps on the left? TACP son! Represent.

#5 Brett: That was pretty funny. :) made me laugh out loud.

#7 Shane: I was considering AllieCali but I'm not sure I'm ready for a name change just yet. I'm open to suggestions :)

crossfit kid = sub 2 minute "fran" adult.

Hey, what's up with the Torii with "Leader" on it. Are there any 1st group guys at Rakkasan crossfit?

Have Fun, Train Hard,

Billy

af pt gear is pokin its ugly head out. much needed rest. thanks coach

Fun video! Makes me excited to go to the CFK cert. in May!

10 65# thrusters
10 pull-ups
20 mins.

15 rounds and 2 thrusters
M/26/160
Hooray for torn calluses!

I was just reading a series of blog posts on the Freakonomics website about the correlation between wealth and happiness.

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/the-economics-of-happiness-part-2-are-rich-countries-happier-than-poor-countries/

Both of the articles are convincing when it comes to drawing correlations, but neither convincingly establishes causation. My personal opinion on this is that wealth, happiness, and liberty are mutually causative.

Well, let me be the first (maybe) to welcome Allison to So Cal!

You'll love the weather in San Diego.

As for the WOD for 4/30,
-hands mildly blistered
-dead tired right afterward
-and left knee had annoying pain again (from injury back in 1991 that got worse and worse throughout the years)

But, I loved it! Need the rest day big time!

Thank god, My lat is still hurting from Monday. I am going to go for a bike ride tomorrow to relax, purely recreational mind you, no exercise. I hope its sunny....

I love that photo! Get some guys!

@#16: definitely. money CAN cause true happiness when used correctly. heard of Dave Ramsey? his style's not my favorite, a little bouncy, but the financial principles are great. i'll have to check your articles.

i've asked once or twice, but not sure if it just wasn't read. i'm tryin to see if i can find a workout partner in kuwait once i get there in a couple weeks... anybody?

The guy doing the box jumps looks like Crispin Glover (aka George McFly).

See (wfs) http://tinyurl.com/6bnna7

Not positive, but I believe the Leader Rakkasans is one of their HHCs. Drove by it the other day and it said something about HHC.

"And government protects our freedom best when it forgoes infringements on our moral choices but vigorously defends our right to restrict these choices ourselves."
I'd agree with this. I don't go along with Brooks entirely throughout the article, but I certainly agree that liberty is often a major component of happiness, and that it's not the government's role to legislate morality.
However, where does this leave us on issues like gay marriage and the war on drugs? Personally, I'm in favor of fully allowing the first and scrapping the second, yet in large part, it's been faith-based groups/organizations on the other side of the political debate on both topics. (Forgive me here if I'm treading on thin ice, topic-wise; I'm only trying to identify what seem to be two relevant touchstone issues and discuss them in a reasonable manner.)
So the question is, how can we effectively separate morality from legality? Should we take the course of banning gay marriage completely, as advocated by some, completely cutting off an area of freedom seen as vital to many; or accord it full equality, opening what many groups see as a Pandora's box? Should we abolish, or at least heavily revamp, current drug laws and the relevant sentencing guidelines, putting more effort into treatment and prevention, so that they make more sense and don't cut off liberties similar to those suggested in Brooks's mention of cigarettes; or do we enforce them stringently, making the streets "safer" and attempt to cut off the supply?
Ahem. Sorry for the long post; I've been studying a bit too much constitutional law lately - stupid finals. Enjoy the rest day, all, and let's kick some butt come Friday.

My mistake, I just drove by their HHC building, Leader Rakkasans is 1st Batt in its entirety, sorry about that.

#23: I have a simple solution: let the States decide. Why does the Federal Government have to get involved in issues of morality and not Constitutional Law?

I've said this before, but abortion, gay marriage, drug laws, euthanasia, social programs, and other such issues should be pushed back to the States. That was the intent of our Founders.

What screwed it up was slavery. The issue of States Right's to legislate their own morality is what caused the Civil War. It wasn't slavery, per se, but a sincerly held difference in interpretations of the Constitution. Jefferson, in my reading, almost certainly would have sided with the South, had he been alive.

Nonetheless, even though they did pass Amendments permitting the Fed to interfere with the States, we can still work to remove Federal regulation.

I would like to see all social programs pulled back to the States, and our Federal taxes reduced accordingly. That's likely a pipe dream, but I can still dream.

Some states would have a lot of programs, some close to none. It would be an interesting experiment. This is different than saying that Welfare should be abolished. It is saying that we should enable those decisions to made more locally, and less centrally.

#23 Nick,

any chance you're taking criminal justice classes online from Tiffin University? I'm actually finishing a class, Legal and Ethical Issues in Homeland Security, this week. Just wanted to know if you might be in my class since we've gone over Constitutional Law alot in the class.

#23 & #25,

I share most of the opinions both of you stated. I'm not certain about legalizing all drugs but I'm certainly in favor of decriminalization and I'm always in favor of more rights for the states. Gay marriage is a whole different issue though. It necessarily involves the federal government because there is a traditional (if not a constitutional) reciprocity between states in recognition of legal marriage. How do you resolve that when Massachusetts recognizes gay marriage but Rhode Island doesn't? And it's more than a matter of legislating morality. Marriage (my own and other people's) costs me money as a taxpayer. Gay marriage would force all taxpayers to subsidize homosexual relationships. I'm not sure I'm ready to take that step, especially when everything (other than survivor benefits, government pensions, and other assorted $$) can be accomplished with a small package of routine legal arrangements between the two partners.

"#23: I have a simple solution: let the States decide. Why does the Federal Government have to get involved in issues of morality and not Constitutional Law?

I've said this before, but abortion, gay marriage, drug laws, euthanasia, social programs, and other such issues should be pushed back to the States. That was the intent of our Founders"

Barry mate, almost fell off my chair when I read the first paragraph and agreed with you...........then I read the second paragraph and realsied that I was back in comfort zone of disagreeing with you. Abortion has nothing to do with anyone but the woman involved.

#5 Brett: well played sir, that was effin hilarious!

Allison: good luck with the move.

everyone else: rest hard and stay classy

WOOT WOOT!

Did Angie today for the first time. 20:35 as rx. Breaking the pullups into sets of 10 by the end. PU killed me, couldn't even do sets of 10 by end.

Posting thru Army NIPR -

I've been trying to post to say hi, but the wireless provider we use back at the hootch is blocking for some reason.

Anyway, getting set up here (KU). Making due for now. Need cheap, used barbells. - Paypal anyone?

Charlie Mike. 3,2,1,Go!

I'm in 3rd BCT too, and whenever I do CF in the gym everyone looks at me like I'm either retarded or crazy. Whats worse is when I tell other soldiers about Xfit I always get "nah man, I dont wanna mess with any of that". Maybe I'm just not a good salesman.

Hey, flyboy on the left! Hit the barber!

Keep kickin' ass, gentlemen.

Hey Alison, beware, the pizza isnt as good in cali.

Allright Rakkasans!
Thanks for getting after it overthere!
-your brother in the 82nd Airborne

Nice Tori in the background Leader Rakkasan's. Now if you had some "iron hair" to represent 3rd Batt it would be complete. Keep up the good work guys.

"Ne Desit Virtus"

Very nice form on the kettlebell swing....wait, what?

Awesome picture, keep up the good work guys.

Go Gratson! TACP doing it up!

In reference to the picture:
I love that the Army guys are wearing reflective belts and the AF guy isn't.

Hi, any ideas when this months journal is going to be released??

I cant wait to read it.

:)

Hey which affiliate is it that posts endurance workouts on top of the WOD? (IE + 2 hrs do this.....) I found it yesterday and can't remember which one it is now, there are so many affiliates! Thanks in advance

i needed a rest, this is my 3rd week, and have been doing CF 5 days a week, trying to hit it hard. I cant wait to get my son into CF

I6-
send me your APO and I'll bake some elvishmagicklovecookiecarbohydrates for you.

AllisonNYC- good luck, baby. You are on your path. Experience joy and delight every day of your long & beautiful life.
-Spidey

#41 The affiliate is Crossfit Endurance. Their name is their url.

Im writing in RON PAUL,

Got an interesting email from my Dad (he and his cronies spend an inordinate amount of time sharing "inspirational" emails). Thought it might apply.

Jay Leno wrote this; it's the Jay Leno we don't often see....
>
> 'The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some
> poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true, given the
> source, right?
>
> The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with
> the direction the country is headed, and 69 percent of the country is
> unhappy with the performance of the President. In essence, 2/3's of the
> citizenry just ain't happy and want a change.
>
> So being the knuckle dragger I am, I started thinking, ''What are we so
> unhappy about?'' Is it that we have electricity and running water 24
> hours a day, 7 days a week?
>
> Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer
> and heating in the winter?
>
> Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job?
>
> Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time, and
> see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
>
> Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic
> Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move
> through each state?
>
> Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along
> the way that can provide temporary shelter?
>
> I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from
> around the world is just not good enough.
>
> Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up
> and provide services to help all, and even send a helicopter to take
> you to the hospital.
>
> Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home. You
> may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of a fire, a
> group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch
> equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and
> your belongings.
>
> Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a
> burglar or prowler intrudes, an officer equipped with a gun and a
> bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against
> attack or loss.
>
> This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias
> raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90 percent of
> teenagers own cell phones and computers.
>
> How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we
> enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what
> has 67 percent of you folks unhappy.
>
> Fact is we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world
> has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S., yet has a great
> disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed
> people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don't
> have, and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good
> Lord we live here.
>
> I know, I know. What about the President who took us into war and has
> no plan to get us out? The President who has a measly 31 percent
> approval rating? Is this the same President who guided the nation in
> the dark days after 9/11? The President that cut taxes to bring an
> economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been
> called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled
> ungrateful brats safe from terrorist attacks?
>
> The Commander-In Chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there
> defending you and me? Did you hear how bad the President is on the
> news or talk show? Did this news affect you so much, make you so
> unhappy you couldn't take a look around for yourself and see all the
> good things and be glad?
>
> Think about it...are you upset at the President because he actually
> caused you personal pain OR is it because the 'Media' told you he was
> failing to kiss your sorry ungrateful behind every day.
>
> Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have
> volunteered to serve, and in many cases may have died for your freedom.
> There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go.
>
> They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ''general''
> discharge, an ''other than honorable'' discharge or, worst case
> scenario, a ''dishonorable '' discharge after a few days in the brig.
>
> So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of
> Americans? Say what you want, but I blame it on the media. If it
> bleeds, it leads; and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch
> a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling
> lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are
> for-profit corporations. They offer what sells, and when criticized,
> try to defend their actions by 'justifying' them in one way or another.
> Just ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J.. Simpson to write
> a book about 'how he didn't kill his wife, but if he did he would have
> done it this way'...Insane!
>
> Stop buying the negativism you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off
> the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of
> your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country.
> There is exponentially more good than bad.
>
> We are among the most blessed people on Earth, and should thank God
> several times a day or at least be thankful and appreciative.
>
> 'With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding,
> severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another,
> and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, 'Are we sure
> this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance? '
>
> Jay Leno
> 2007

We are SO free that we are apparently free to ignore the enormous differences between Americans and citizens of essentially every other country on the planet. Note that all but the most destitute among us enjoys all of the benefits noted above in Leno's thoughts.

Freakonomics also had a poll to choose a slogan for the United States. The winning entry was: "Our worst critics prefer to stay."

Things to ponder during this increasingly ugly, negative, and depressing election season...

just think how happy people will be when we have a society based on real freedom:

chomsky on anarchism--
http://www.spunk.org/texts/intro/sp000281.html

Hey im in palos heights 60463 (south suburb of chicago). Im 18 and have been doing crossfit for over a year and have a pretty nice gym going. Kinda looking for an occasional partner, maybe get some sort of group of people going..

Interested?- Please E-mail me.

Re: CFK video

I like dodgeball

Good rest day everyone

Thank God for rest days.
Good luck Allison!!

Bingo (and Jay Leno): I agree that we whine and complain waaaaayyy too much, but it doesn't really have anything to do with who the current president is. I mean, if somebody complained about Clinton, would it mean that they were ungrateful to be an American?

We were prosperous and ungrateful under the last several presidents, and we'll likely to continue to be prosperous and ungrateful under the next president few presidents.

Bingo, I totally agree that we are too ungrateful and negative, but I'm not sure what this has to do with complaining about Bush (or any other particular president). Are you also ungrateful for your American prosperity if you complained about Bill Clinton during his administration?

Ok folks, I'm loving the Crossfit program but I have a bit of a problem. I separated my shoulder yesterday parachuting here at Fort Bragg so now I'm being tolkd no dips, pull ups, push ups, or overhead weightlifting for 2-3 weeks. I want to keep up with the program as much as I can so I need some recommendations on WODs to do so I'm not just sitting on my 4th point of contact for 21 days while this thing heals. Little help here?

"Bits of human flesh are scattered on the ruins of the building," witness Farah Hussein told Reuters. "People are counting the skulls to know the exact figure."

I don't want to degrade it into a "why americans are whiners discussion", but all of these dumb media surveys that go out that say "more americans are struggling than ever before" which is essentially a liberal talking point, take no account that consumption has gone up by 70%, which means that we are consuming more goods than we have before.

Poor in America 50 yrs ago has nothing on poor in america today. Poor people today have cell phones, TV's, etc. I love when people complain about gas prices, but are unwilling to cut back on other areas of their life. There is no "right" to go to the movies on the weekend, there is no "right" to travel freely wherever you want. There is no "right" to a college education. I think that the more these false "rights" get thrown around, the more we kid ourselves about how good we really have it, and unfortunately, the more ammunition the liberals have no matter how much BS it is.

Soreness is not the word to describe the pain in my legs after yesterdays WOD. I should have taken speal more seriously when he warned us. Also, i should have taken heed from the fact that he had not posted his score by 8:00pm which usually means he's not going to post. His non-willingness to suffer through this again says a lot. My legs won't be right for days.

#30 InfidelSix: you don't happen to be up in buehring, do ya?

#53
Will, welcome to the world of the quarter mile lunge walk...

suggest you buy a kettlebell or two. work the one side you can use. the deadlift, clean, jerk, snatch & squat are all yours for the price of a kettlebell.

enjoy your GHD. that ought to give good hurt.

box jumping is your new best friend. and, get in the pool & thrash with one arm.

just, whatever you do, don't bounce around on a pink plastic swiss ball.

good luck.

Check out snopes.com. Jay Leno did not write that piece.

i hope not to steal the thunder of such a great quotation from bingo, because i absolutely agree with all said, but for the sake of accuracy that short essay was actually written by Craig R. Smith in an article called Made in the U.S.A: Spoiled Brats.
the last line, about "is this the time to remove God from the Pledge of Allegiance?" was adapted from a ten second joke of Jay Leno's.

STILL FABULOUS WRITING!!! couldn't agree more!

Here is a link to the original article on 2006.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53028

Long Live 2-187! Raider Rakkasan.

CF is King!

Guilty of simply forwarding on the email of a 77 year old grumpy old man without doing any background fact checking. Still, whether written by Leno, Craig R. Smith, or Alfred E. Newman it is still germaine to the topic of the day.

May is the one year anniversary of my crossfit epiphany. I want to thank Coach, and all the guys at CFATL (Dan and Mike G esp.). Crossfit is a wonderful community and something I'm very proud to be a part of.

M/21/170#

Made up the 5 rounds: 15 75# snatches and 400m run

17:4-something. Need alot of work on my hanging snatch. After that fran-a-thon yesterday, my legs feel like...well I can't really feel anything ha!

I'm pro-Freedom and pro-States rights because no matter how smart you are, you can't foresee the total impact of a law until it's put into action. That was the beauty of the Constitution. Unfortunately, this legacy has been perverted by those that wish to gather power by absolving personal responsibility.

Like it or not, Freedom is a double-edged sword.

"To the frustrated, freedom from responsibility is more attractive than freedom from restraint. They are eager to barter their independence for relief from the burdens of willing, deciding and being responsible for inevitable failure. They willingly abdicate the directing of their lives to those who want to plan, command and shoulder all responsibility." --Eric Hoffer

#25 Barry Cooper,

I agree with your "let the states decide" stance as a general principle. In it's freest form, it seems to have an effect similar to a localized version of what we would see if there were no restrictions on international travel, commerce, and habitation. Basically the states turn into mini-countries with the federal government ensuring that the state borders are porous. This would be good at least in the free market sense of creating policy competition and allowing us to see which state's policies work best.

But what it doesn't do is protect the rights of people in a given state from being infringed by that state. You could argue that the free market influence would make this almost irrelevant since gross restriction of freedom by a "rogue" state would be accompanied by a mass exodus from that state. But you could also argue that some rights are so fundamental that they should be protected by government. Pro-choice advocates might say a woman's freedom over her body is one of those. Gay rights advocates might say that sexual freedom is another. The hard question is which of these to put under the federal jurisdiction. In some ways the "states' rights" position is the easy way out (although there is something to be said for easy ways), but it is definitely a good default.

My question for the day is this: Assuming we agree that freedom is better, what do CrossFitters (especially the military ones) think about this article and how it applies to our current wars? Does the freedom we are allegedly bringing the Iraqis justify the potential racket?

http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket

AllisonNYC,

Good luck with your move and take the West Coast by storm.

In regards to today's article:
I've learned to take a skeptical view when studies are quoted in opinion pieces. This is especially true if what is being studied is as etheral of a concept as "Happiness". When talking about the happiness research the author points out that "In general, researchers rely on self-reported measurements of happiness" in the third paragraph. There is no baseline for happiness. Even when many different factors are accounted for it still stands that the definition of happiness is on a person by person basis.
However, it's not the level of happiness that is important, but rather what is affecting the happiness.
Whether or not citizens of America are truly ungrateful for what they have, as posted by #46 (bingo), it is important to recognize that these people are dissatisfied. I think that the basic provisions of water, electricity, and plasma TVs help focus on other issues rather than survival. Which is great when you need a nantion to think for itself. If you don't want them thinking to themselves then you better make sure that the news scares the hell out of them every night so you can deviate that focus.

OKay, I'm starting to go on too many tangents and I wanted to keep this short anyway. I'll try to post again later.

Happy 1 year CF Joel B!

John #45

I'm with you!
RON PAUL - The new battle cry for freedom!

wow what is with all the rest days all the sudden? and that guy does look like George Mcfly

Raze, I too am feeling your pain today. I think I need a walker ;)

I'm going to Quantico for the day tomorrow! One of the perks of working on the Hill, I guess. I wish I could come check out CrossFit Quantico but it doesn't look like that's on the program. If any of you guys are out there helping out, look for the girl grinning after running her first ever sub-24 min 5K this morning. I wish I had a CrossFit t-shirt to wear.

24/F

In regards to Mr. Brook's essay:

I was listening to the radio and heard a morning talkshow explain how Americans are "free" in regard to their choices of food. He went on to say how it is irrespnosible to eat McDonald's every night, but a few nights a week won't hurt.

I began to think- when the found fathers envisioned freedom, they probably didn't forsee the ignorance in America today. In reality, the choices of American food is only the tip of the ice-burg. Cue everything else wrong in America. I could write a list, but I won't.

AlisonNYC,

Have fun in Calli- I've wanted to move there for years, but I haven't yet. For your departure, a little old school from 2PAC:

"Famous cause we program worldwide
Let'em recognize from Long Beach to Rosecrans
Bumpin and grindin like a slow jam, it's west side
So you know the row won't bow down to no man
Say what you say
But give me that bomb beat from Dre
Let me serenade the streets of L.A.
From Oakland to Sacktown
The Bay Area and back down
Cali is where they put they mack down
Give me love!"

raze-

i am right there with you buddy. i knew about 1 hour post workout that this was going to be a whole new kind of soreness. i woke up this morning and my legs are shot. the worst part is that in a sick and twisted way i really enjoy it. i was going to workout today, but i think i might actually take this rest day and enjoy a sunny afternoon.

joel b- happy 1 year crossfit anniversary!

oh and that adorable kid in the video with the braves gear on sure knows who the best team in the mlb is! woot woot!

7 rounds. I think I could have pushed for 9 or 10, but I had basketball right after so had to save a bit. Wish I could have pushed myself more on that one. Next time.

#68 - "wow what is with all the rest days all the sudden?""

No more than usual. 3 on, 1 off.

"and that guy does look like George Mcfly"

:-)

#27: the essence of the problem is this: you are asserting a right to the liberty of the woman. Those seeking to ban abortion are asserting that the unborn fetus--a green shoot emerging from the ground, not yet a mature plant--has a right to life.

The issue is where life begins. The argument that it begins at conception is not unsupportable, and it comes down, ultimately, to an understanding of what life is. This is an argument that cannot be resolved, in my view, by science, as it is inherently subjective.

Therefore, we should let the States decide. In my view, a large part of the massive polarization we see in our national dialogue originates in the fact that Red states need the Feds to be Red States, and the Blue states need the Feds to be Blue states. Why not let people govern themselves according to their own preferences, under the rubric of a national government that commits to protecting us?

With respect to drugs, I literally think every drug should be put on the table. Let states decide. This might create some logistical trouble in enforcement, but it doesn't appear to me that the War on Drugs is effectively preventing those determined to get drugs from getting them. It creates a bit of a delay sometimes, but not ultimate lack of availability.

There is just much too much money on the table to keep those making it from finding ways. For this reason, I would expect the drug lords to lobby for the continued criminalization of all drugs. It is only through artificially reduced supply that demand enables such high prices to be charged, and so much money to be made.

Don't have time to deal with other issues. The net is that multiple views are possible, and I see no reason that local views should not be given precedence over national ones. It would enable us to focus more fully on what a President is supposed to do, which is perhaps first and foremost to protect the nation.

#65: that is precisely and exactly, historically, philosophically, and according to the Founders themselves, the purpose of the Bill of Rights. I would encourage you to read the first fifteen, and deduce from them a right to abortion on demand.

Regardless of your religious views, the precedent of the enacting of binding and unalterable law by the Supreme (or other) Courts is clearly contrary to the spirit of freedom, and the Constitutionally defined separation of powers.

Oh, and with respect to our efforts to help the Iraqis build a stable and just democracy--an effort marked often by recividist and nihilistic opposition--I would encourage you to get a copy of Michael Yon's new book "Moment of Truth".

Most of the stuff you read on the internet is recycled from the Vietnam War era. It was wrong then, and led to the deaths of millions of people (if we factor in the Cambodian genocide, which we could have prevented) and enslavement of millions more.

And it is wrong now. This can be shown clearly by the fact that the focus of opposition has shifted from realities on the ground, to the reasons we went there. The argument seems to be that if a mistake was made in the past, it can be reversed by pretending the first decision was never made. In this particular case, this would mean removed troops immediately with no regard for the capacity of the Iraqis to prevent a renewal of mass torture, murder, and repression.

This would be morally wrong, and I see no way that any rational person who actually evaluates the available facts could conclude otherwise.

Read the book, if you want to learn what you need to know to make an informed decision.

When I put aside being sore from all the pull ups we did yesterday, I'm kinda hoping for Lynne to rear her dirty head in the next 4 days, Hooray Chesticles!

Due to no WOD this Sat worked out today.

I found one on XFit by Overload

10 KB swings (24kg KB)
5 SDHP (65 #)
5 Burpees
Max rounds in 20 minutes.

I had a very fast start. But yesteday's WOD soon caught up. I managed 10 rds.

Barry -
"Therefore, we should let the States decide. In my view, a large part of the massive polarization we see in our national dialogue originates in the fact that Red states need the Feds to be Red States, and the Blue states need the Feds to be Blue states. Why not let people govern themselves according to their own preferences, under the rubric of a national government that commits to protecting us?"
Exactly; both types of states want the federal government to adopt their own position. Of course, calling an entire state either "red" or "blue" is an oversimplification, but it's convenient for the current purposes. As someone pointed out above, however, the problems start when people cross state lines; how can we ensure that rights (whatever they may be) recognized in one state will enjoy the same status in another? Is that an appropriate role for the federal government?

Also, from #76: "the precedent of the enacting of binding and unalterable law by the Supreme (or other) Courts is clearly contrary to the spirit of freedom, and the Constitutionally defined separation of powers."
Article VI, §2 of the Constitution is the Supremacy Clause, stating that the Constitution "shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." I'll call your attention to the binding of judges in every state thereto. Under Article III, §2, "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution." Marbury v. Madison established the power of judicial review, stating in part: "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is." Of course, this role is open to argument, but judicial review is widely accepted in American jurisprudence.
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee extended this role for the Supreme Court to review state and local actions, also pointing out that the Constitution is based on a recognition that "state interest might sometimes obstruct, or control, or be supposed to obstruct or control, the regular administration of justice." See also Cohens v. Virginia and Cooper v. Aaron.
It's not the role of the courts to establish new law; it is, however, "emphatically" their role to say what the law is.

Also, from #75: "The net is that multiple views are possible, and I see no reason that local views should not be given precedence over national ones. It would enable us to focus more fully on what a President is supposed to do, which is perhaps first and foremost to protect the nation."
Multiple views are definitely possible, and heck, I'd agree that in many cases, the states have an important role as laboratories for new initiatives and ideas. I'd also agree that foreign policy - "protect[ing] the nation" - is a central duty for the president. However, he takes an oath to uphold the Constitution; everything he does is, MUST BE, subject to that standard.

Anyway, I agree with you that the states have a large and important role to play; however, federalism requires a certain amount of sacrifice of sovereignty on their parts in pursuit of the greater good. Just my two cents.

#71, James G-Ville, writes,

"I began to think- when the found fathers envisioned freedom, they probably didn't forsee the ignorance in America today. In reality, the choices of American food is only the tip of the ice-burg. Cue everything else wrong in America. I could write a list, but I won't."

Is your point that the founding fathers probably never intended the ignorant to be free; that they intended or would have preferred to put the intelligent in charge of making decisions for the ignorant; and that wrong choices made by the less enlightened are the source of what is wrong with America?

I have two questions that are meant in the spirit of true curiosity and not as an attack on any of the above posts.

1) Why does a high level of freedom and/or quality of life mean that a person cannot or should not disagree with a governmental policy or 'direction' of the country? Can't a rep be grateful for the freedoms they enjoy but disagree with a dem presidency/congress/school board and vv?

2) Why is the argument of the original intent of the founding fathers used so often in asserting a position? Isn't it possible for a subsequent generation to improve on what the founding fathers intended?

Again--not trying to attack, just curious to get people's thoughts.

#70

Congrats on your sub-24 5K time ... Capitol Challenge, I presume. Glad I wasn't the only crossfitter there. Finished in 19:52, a PR. Let's wear our X-fit tee shirts next year!

#82, expat, writes,

"Why is the argument of the original intent of the founding fathers used so often in asserting a position? Isn't it possible for a subsequent generation to improve on what the founding fathers intended?"

If a subsequent generation can improve upon what the founding fathers intended, then that generation should do so in plain view and with the consent of the people, by amending the Constitution.

Otherwise, we are leaving it to congress to pass laws as it sees fit, simply announcing that it is improving on the intent of the founding fathers. Or, even less democratically, we can leave it to the Supreme Court to declare that it no longer finds original intent compelling and that it has a better idea.

To phrase your question differently, what better ideas have come along that differ from what was originally intended but are not worth putting to the people to decide in the form of a constitutional amendment?

#84 - Hari - I think Thomas and Scalia would agree with you. One of the arguments for originalism is that the Constitution says what it's meant to say; if you want something and it's not there, then by all means, try to pass it as an amendment. Failing that, however, legislating on what's not actually within the document is undemocratic.

Only 8 rounds for me. Got in the last pull up right when the 20 was up. Thrusters were so easy but like always the pull ups slowed me down. I am not good at pull ups whether I am doing them normal or kipping

AlisonNYC is moving to California during a rest day.

Coincidence? I think not! :)

# 81, Hari, writes,

"Is your point that the founding fathers probably never intended the ignorant to be free; that they intended or would have preferred to put the intelligent in charge of making decisions for the ignorant; and that wrong choices made by the less enlightened are the source of what is wrong with America?"

I cannot concur that there is one known source of what is "wrong" with America let alone blame the "less enlightened." Nor can I conclude that the founding fathers never intended the ignorant to be free, but I can estimate that perhaps the fact that freedom has become common there has been a breeding of ignorance coupled with a culture that is entertainment driven.

I would add further that there was most definitely ignorance within the early years of the USA, but I would say that generally that was an exception the rule where now we've decided that ignorance within government affairs is somehow acceptable.

In a culture where we are more concerned with who our next American Idol is instead of our next President, there is something fundamentally wrong which borders on absurdity.

Nick #87,

Change the word "undemocratic" to "illegal" and I'm with you 100%

All great stuff! I started my Xfit a few months ago in OKC and I am now in Pax River, MD. I see no other CrossFitter's anywhere. Are you out there? Email me!

Any Crossfitters in Patuxent River, MD. If so email me. I am tired of being the only one in gym!

The Leno letter wildly misses the point. The current president and the current direction of the country have nothing to do with the amenities that are listed. Are we so spoiled because we don't like the political situation in the country when the basics are still good? No. And if we are, we're spoiled by our right to participate in the political process, and if you think that right is a problem, move to Cuba where you won't have to worry about it.

You'll find that most people are very happy in the US, even those that are outspoken active in politics. You know why you don't hear about it? Because it's not newsworthy. And you know who profits the most from the kind of cynicism and complacency he's complaining about? Comedians. He makes jokes about politicians's failures all the time. If he told jokes like "I really like the US highway system. No punchline, just sayin'" he'd be out of a job.

Jim #90,

Ignorance is no more prevalent now than it was when the constitution was written and there is no question that the Founding Fathers had concerns about it affecting government. From the original strict qualifications for voting to the electoral college, the system was designed to prevent the ignorant from participating and to limit their influence when they did.

The real question is, what do you want to do about it?

Jim #90,

Ignorance is no more prevalent now than it was when the constitution was written and there is no question that the Founding Fathers had concerns about it affecting government. From the original strict qualifications for voting to the electoral process (the "c" word get blocked), the system was designed to prevent the ignorant from participating and to limit their influence when they did.

The real question is, what do you want to do about it?

Are there any CROSSFITTERS in the SANTA CLARITA/VALENCIA area?

and, I am definitely a Ron Paul supporter!

a pox on the day of resting, she said, so she tried the Bee-yotch Barbara WOD. Now embarrassment reigns supreme & the time will not be posted, but happiness overcomes it because of the finishing of said WOD.......what the f^(<?

gilbert, it's not that you are a bad salesman, you're problem is that you are in the army. Don't be suprised that the fat an lazy look at you like that. I'm in the army too and all you can do is your own thing and if you are doing CF, that makes you more right than most.

WillK, going through what you are, taking time off because of an back injury and the 'what do I do about CF?' dilema is a real ass chapper. The only thing I could do was take that time off, rest, be aggressive with icing my injury, do lots of body weight squats, core work (in my case learning to engage it so I can avoid what got me injured in the first place, poor midline stabilization) and some ring work. With a shoulder injury you may not be able to do that, but only you know what you can and can't do. I get a decent amount of say in what I do for PT so that helps, too. If you check out the WOD archive, there are quite a few WOD's that do focus primarily on the lower body and you should be able to work with that. I wish you luck.

Nick,

All you are doing is describing the legal machinery by which national Courts compel compliance with their versions of our laws. This is in some respects necessary, but it becomes abusive when "rights" are created and legally enshrined which appear nowhere in the Bill of Rights.

The way it was supposed to work is States could do what they wanted, but a certain minimal number of rights were to be guaranteed nationally, and the fear, then, was not that the States would prove the oppressors, but the Federal government.

Where this changed was with respect to race. Roughly around Amendment 12 or 13--somwhere in there--you see the power inserted for the Federal Government to interfere actively in the self regulation of the states. These laws were enacted to enable Washington to protect freed slaves, and counter Jim Crow laws, in my understanding. The same machinery was used to enforce desegregation.

However, the same apparatus was also used first to create a nationally enforced right to privacy--which never occurs in pristine form anywhere in the Constitution--and then a right to abortion, since the Court held abortion to be a private matter, and since privacy was a "right", then logically abortion, too, was a right.

No legal scholar that I know of will defend this as an honest and open interpretation of what was actually written by our Founders, who were always extremely meticulous about their choice of words.

You can debate--and we should debate--whether abortion should be legal or not, but the fact is that it doesn't matter at this point what the People (As in "We the People, in order to form a more perfect Union") want. We cannot, now, vote to ban abortion anywhere, because the Court has made it a right--in effect, added it to the Bill of Rights as a part of the Constitution--and not a matter subject to legislation by our elected representatives. This is ridiculous, no matter where you stand on the issue itself.

In all honesty, I truly believe we would be a happier nation if we could truly foster local differences, and a good place to start would be increasing the amount of discretion allowed individual states.

Think this through: they could legalize "tea" shops in Seattle. You could make it look like Amsterdam, if you wanted.

Minnesotans could enact month long vacations as mandatory for companies doing business in their state, and enact Scandinavian style social protections.

Throughout the South, they would stop collecting FICA and all the other deductions, incentivize savings and investment, and everybody would be able to keep a lot more money every month and live as they chose.

Life is change. There is no point in trying to make one single decision on an issue, and expect that decision to hold forever. The whole beauty and benefit of our system is its flexibility. And the more articulation points--the more decisions points, and points of entry to the system--the more flexible it is.

The bottom line, to turn back to today's article, is that self governing people--who have chosen a form of self restraint that works for them, and which is socially sustainable--will on balance always choose well for themselves, given freedom. And the well being of the people is the well being of the nation.

I will add that in all systems of any sort whatever, you have winners and losers. You have winners and losers in social democracies. There are rich people and relatively poor people in Sweden and Denmark. In Cuba and other so-called egalitarian nations, the Party members enjoy both extra legal rights--they can get away with more--and added wealth.

Everywhere you go, and everywhere you look, you see people sorting themselves into ranks. In free nations, those with power tend to be the most motivated and the most talented. In autocratic nations they tend to be the most ruthless, and most dishonest.

Which do we prefer? I think this article makes clear that the former yields the most happiness all around.

# 95 Rob

Ahh, what am I going to do about it... Attempt to elimiate ignorance though teaching others to reject it and embrace knowledge.

On another note- who wants Fran tomorrow?

Very Cool. I want to be a CrossFit kid! Now if I can just convince Jeff Martin to adopt me so I can play CrossFit baseball all day long.

Andres De la Rosa, M age 33+1/2 ... =P

By the way, the class looks very creative. Can't wait for CrossFit Marin to finally land a location so we can organize some CrossFit kids classes.

I just want to say that my legs are absolutely shot and feel like I have concrete in them. I played sports my entire life, always been extremely active, was active duty for 6 years, and do not slack off of workouts and competition often. I have run marathons, halfs, ten milers etc. BUT...my legs last night after the work out and this morning felt worse and I have been doing Crossfit for going on 2 years, as much as I can at a non affiliate gym.
Yesterday absolutely sucked something AWESOME!
Cheers coach...I am walking like the brick is in between my you know what and the best part that I always get stares from the beach body Globo gym sheep.
Sorry, but needed to get that out. Back to Free People are Happy People, someone moving across the country and trying to find a beer that is Zone diet compliant(kind of a waste in my mind).

#90, Jim G-Ville, writes,

"I can estimate that perhaps the fact that freedom has become common there has been a breeding of ignorance coupled with a culture that is entertainment driven."

You apparently see ignorance as being correlated with freedom; that given the choice, people use their freedom to pursue entertainment (eating at McDonald's and watching American Idol) rather than what you see as more important matters (focusing on the choosing the next president).

How would you suggest the tradeoff between freedom and ignorance be managed? During the presidential debates, should all lesser forms of entertainment be taken off the airways?

The point of my post, the bulk of which is apparently written by Craig R. Smith, is that freedom allows us the choice to be happy or unhappy, and that time and time again a significant percentage of Americans CHOOSE unhappiness. They do so in the face of having all, or substantially all of the challenges to "life" well-covered (food, shelter, clothing, safety from harm, safety net in the face of disaster), and do so in response to inadequate fulfillment of their "wants", be they material or ephemeral. They choose to be unhappy because they have the luxury of the choice, dwelling in the shallow space under the far end or the asypmtotic line of unresolved needs.

I dare say that the quote could have referenced Clinton, GHW Bush, or Reagan. The more prosperous we become, the further removed we are from the struggle to secure our daily needs, the more susceptible we seem to become to wallowing in the negative.

.02

Comment #100 Jim G-ville,

That's a worthy personal goal and I wish you luck but the thought of the government embarking on a quest like that gives me the screaming willies... much like the thought of doing Fran tomorrow.

"...the far end OF the asymptotic line..."

Hari, you're outrageous! :)

No, I would not suggest we venture toward communism in any such way.

But where is the genesis of this type of ingnorance? Given a choice between American Idol and a presidental debate what would Americans choose? Why would they make that choice? What experiences did they have to influence that decesion?

Where do you suppose is the breakdown?

m/34/218/5'11

Had to do yesterday's workout today:

rds for 20 min.
65 Pound Thruster, 10 reps
10 Pull-ups

10 rds.

Barry, and the others here -

I've enjoyed discussing this with you, and if you'd like to keep it going, feel free to shoot me an email. It seems to boil down to us disagreeing on the scope of allowable federal regulations and the accompanying policy arguments. However, I've got to get back to studying for right now. Thanks for the good discussion.
One parting thought, though; you write that "[i]n free nations, those with power tend to be the most motivated and the most talented. In autocratic nations they tend to be the most ruthless, and most dishonest.
I'll agree with you about the autocracies. Animal Farm + historical experience = pretty clear picture. Nobody with any sort of integrity would argue that the USSR was all that wonderful in terms of fulfilling its ideals, or even how life was for the lower classes - and let's face it, there were classes. Free nations, however, present a trickier problem. I think that even in America, you're likely to find quite a number of talented "losers," and a large number of talentless "winners," simply based on where they started out in life. Of course, the American Dream is still meaningful; Clarence Thomas seems to have done pretty well for himself, coming out of backwoods Georgia without English as his first language. It's just a question of trying to figure out the appropriate balance.

Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence.

Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.

Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.

Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts.

Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.

The slogan Press On! has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.

Calvin Coolidge

Barry...amen on the idea of persistence!

I chased a woman for seven years before she agreed to marry me.

42yom 182lbs

OK so today's a rest day. So I decided to play around and try this WOD I put together and that I named after my girlfriend. She was born on 04/14/1986, so I took all of those digits and put them in a hat and this is what came out:

"Linsdey"

For time:

14-10-9-8-6-4 of:
Overhead Squat(95lbs).
Knees to Elbows.

Because my legs are still shot from yesterday's 120 thrusters I only used 85lbs however.

9:49

Next time I'll use the whole 95 lbs and compare the time to this one.

Since I keep teasing my gf about how one day she's one person and the next another, I accuse her of having a split personality. So in the same fashion, this WOD will have a part 2 to it, so stay tuned!

Correction on my last post:

The WOD is called "Lindsey" not "Linsdey"; simple typo Iknow, but I just want to make sure if my gf picks this up she won't give me any shiiite for it!

#107, Jim G-Ville, writes,

"Given a choice between American Idol and a presidental debate what would Americans choose? Why would they make that choice? What experiences did they have to influence that decesion?"

The choice may be based on any number of rational factors. People may have concluded that they actually learn very little from these debates. (What if anything did you learn?)

They may have already made up their minds. They may have already voted in their state's primary, and so subsequent debates are irrelevant until they include the actual candidates for the presidency, as opposed to a party's nomination.

They may recognize that presidential candidates are rarely able to deliver on the positions they advocate during the primaries.

They may find American Idol, their friends, their families, their hobbies, or their work to be more interesting than the candidates.

Complete as many rounds in twenty minutes as you can of:
65 Pound Thruster, 10 reps
10 Pull-ups

13 rounds, 10 thrusters and 2 pull-ups.

CF just made my day. The CF Journal just arrived in my in box.

Speaking of AF PT gear. I don't think it's bad looking, but the shorts fit so poorly and feel so weird that when I first started wearing them I felt compelled to keep checking to see if I had them on backwards. Then to top it off, after a particularly long and tiring day during a recent vacation to the sand box, I did wear them inside out into the dining facility. Fortunately, some kindly NCO pointed out my error. I snuck off to the cadillac and fixed the problem before any of my crew noticed.

Any way, I love getting CFJ every month. Thanks!!!

Congratulations Marshall!!!

Made up the 5k on a stationary bike
5k run=15k bike or 9.6 miles

Didn't time it because I don't care how fast I can bike in place.

I think I can start running again next week

Josh Murphy and I "modified" yesterday's WOD by adding 10 burpees to the thrusters and pullups. I could have swore we got 8 rounds but Josh said only 7. Things get a little fuzzy. Josh is on some burpee quest or challenge from CF Marina so every workout has to include burpees. Some people...

Did some catching up in the past couple of days. Yesterday I ran the 5k (23:20) with the other NiteMovers. Today the thrusters and pullups -- subbed 2 12kg kbs for the dumbbell, got 9 rounds. That was a tough one.

I need some advice on how to get to finally do pull ups. I do jumping pull ups and assisted pull ups but I want to be able to lift my own weight. Any advice? I have been doing CF for 6 weeks now and can am just starting to do the dips with my own body weight and not assisted but PU’s are totally different.

Connie #121,

If you can adjust the amount of assistance you get on the assisted pull ups that would be best. Just work your way down until you don't need any assistance. It takes bands or a graviton though and you may not have the equipment.

Slow negatives are a good way to build up the strength you need to do a pull-up. When you do a jumping pull up, let yourself down as slowly as you can from the top of the pull up. I'd say aim for at least a 2 second smooth descent. The problem with this approach is that it creates a habit that is counter-productive when learning the kipping pull-up.

Day behind. Thruster/PU WOD. 11 rounds.

2 days behind due to the virus returning. Thought I had shaken it but it came back with a vengeance. Feel 100% today and happy for the rest. Giving the thruster WOD a crack today and 5K tomorrow. Still going for sub 20 mins even though I am still a little weak.

Happy training

Yay!
New CF Journal today.

Yay!
New CF Journal today.

F/40/5'2/123

I got a kipping pull up today!!!!!!!

Today is my 3 month anniversary for CF and getting a pull up has been a big goal, but also a thorn in my side. I kept feeling like I should be getting it and I just wasn't. It was recommended that I improve my upper body strength and a lot of the regular Crossfit stuff would get better too. So, today, I started doing Coach Rippetoe's strength training workouts from Starting Strength. Now, I know that my strength didn't improve in just 1 workout, but after the workout I decided to practice pull ups and...BAM!! I got it!

Unfortunately, there was no one in there to see it, so I kept practicing it over and over until Ryan came it and I could show off. I even got 3 in a row!! I am so stoked. Small victory to some but WAY big to me!

#121 Connie
Hang in there. Keep practicing. Keep getting stronger and you will get it!

Ava - your a work hourse. We are all so proud of you! Keep it up sister! Small moves turn into big gains!

tucker

I'M HERE! I LOVE IT!

Did max cleans at Dave and Sage Castros home gym.

105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130? 135, 140 145!

New PR for me. I was worried I lost strength after not training very much for the last few months. Guess that's not the case:)

Sage is one strong Mama.

I'm looking forward to a great workouttomorrow for my 1 year anniversary.

Thanks for the shout out Seth! It has been a long time comin! I'm back in the game, haha!

AllieCali huh? Well its 70 degrees here in San Diego today, dont all move here at once.

"dont move here all at once" is meant for everyone on the board.

Day behind, 20 min Thruster/Pull-up rounds.
Subbed 55# for thrusters
7 rounds

7 mile hike with the husband, actually came up on a black bear playing in the creek about 75 yards ahead of us. It was OSM!!

HOPE.

CHANGE.

YES WE CAN.

YES.. WE.. CAN..

ObamaMessiah

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OLn4dte3nk&feature=related

Sacrifice your liberty, to He who knows best, for the "good " of group.

Believe in Change.

A Change You Can Believe In.

dsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsddsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsd

41 M 190#

Had to miss yesterday, so it was my rest day.

CFWU 3 X

as rx'd 13.5 rounds

Blew through the first 5 rounds in 5 minutes, thought I was going to get 18 or 19 rounds...ya right!

dssdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsdsddssdsdsdsdsdsdsd

27/m/150#

I'm day behind here:

subbed 55# thrusters - just not beefy enough, yet
pull ups (had to do kipping somewhere in the middle)

8 rounds

Followed by a 8 mile run, don't know if that was a good idea yet but I think I'll find out tomorrow.

08.05.01
cfwu x 2
Practice on:
HP Snatches 45# bar only
Did a few w/ 95#
Cleans 95# and 145#

"RAKKASAN" represent. We need to set something up on Striker.

m/41/187
As Rx'd: 37:33

A bit overcome with emotion on that last mile thinking of Lt. Murphy and the other sacred Americans of Operation Redwing. They gave everything for total strangers, my wife and children among them. I will exhaust myself in an effort to become stronger but will never live up to their sacrifice. Rest in heaven, brothers. The rest of us will do what we can..."until there is no enemy, but peace."

Barry #25

In war, an aggressor and a defender need not have the same objectives. Because Saddam may have invaded Kuwait for oil does not convert the US objective to defeat his invasion of a sovereign state into a US corporation oil grab. Resisting Communist expansion in Korea or Vietnam did not make America imperialist. The American Civil War is of a different species.

The argument is common that the Civil War was the United States acting to resist the ex post facto illegal act of secession. In the context of the events of one or two decades leading to the war, that seems a short-sighted, legalistic rationalization. The goal of the South clearly was to retain slavery. See Confederate States of America Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union, 12/24/1860. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/csa/scarsec.htm. As cataloged in that historical document, Northern states had been aggressively and unconstitutionally interfering with slavery. The issue split the Democratic party into a northern and southern branch, with separate candidates, and doing Lincoln no harm in his candidacy. The South was left politically powerless, painted in a corner under an administration dedicated to the goal of the North – fix a nation half free and half slave.

The country needs to be aware of the fact that the Civil War was the war to end slavery. The revelations of the past month make clear that Obama, raised White, learned to be Black as an adult at the feet of Jeremiah Wright. As a result and as Obama has made clear in his speeches, he is informed by slavery, segregation, and the socio-economic status of the blacks. His platform of change and unification is to collect debts with no credit for the Civil War, nor for the Civil Rights Acts of 1875 and 1964, nor for Affirmative Action.

The debts are paid. Slavery is over. Segregation is over. And Affirmative Action is another failed program of the left, this time patently racist, and counterproductive.

What is needed are intact families, children raised under the influence of a female and a male (they are quite different, normally), pride in education and individual accomplishment, destruction of drug profits (the left seems able to ruin the profits of legitimate operations), and strict policing of street gangs.

As to “Free People Are Happy People” – pretty much nonsense. Freedom is concrete and has a permanence. Happiness is emotional -- fleeting, ephemeral, and situational. If happiness could somehow be defined and measured, it should prove uncorrelated with freedom. Discontent can be sown even among a free people. See Jeremiah Wright, Marxism, or the Democratic Platform.

Jeff,

I'd agree with you in general--as usual. Certainly, intact families would fall under my own conceptions of virtue, particularly when the failure of the family clearly leads to social and economic dysfunction.

With respect to the Civil War, it is a very interesting topic, and one I still don't understand to my satisfaction. In my understanding, though, Lincoln was prepared to accept the continuance of slavery in the South where it already existed, and was content--in the interest of compromise--to ban its expansion as new States were added. Stephen Douglas, in my understanding, argued that the States should decide.

I visited his birthplace not too long ago, and found myself tearing up. Knowing something of him, I found myself placing myself in the position of having to make a firm decision between two options, both of which are bad, and both of which will lead to much misery and suffering.

Those who don't study history forget that quite often--perhaps even generally--the right choice is not obvious. Bad things happen no matter what you do. Lincoln sacrificed some 600,000 American dead to keep the country together. Although opposed in principle and in personal disposition to slavery in its entirety, he had been willing to accept it to keep the Union together. However, his hand was forced.

He had to choose: war to preserve the Union, or acceptance of secession, the continuation of slavery anyway, and an abandonment of some large portion of what might be termed the American experiment.

"We are met on a great battlefield of that war to test whether a nation so conceived can long endure". (quote approximate)

I look at the world through his eyes, and it is heartbreaking. The more one reads about him, the more clear it becomes why he is generally considered our greatest President, with only Washington as an alternative contender. I told my kids he may well have wanted to be assassinated. He normally had two bodyguards. He gave one the night off. There were death threats by the hundreds, and he had himself had a premonition of his death.

I think he was tired. Just my gut instinct.

That's making a short story long, though. With respect to African-Americans--former slaves, many generations ago--I think they need to decide if they are to be victims perennially, or survivors.

The true tragedy that struck them was the insistence in the mid-60's by white liberals that they were owed something, and they just needed to sit back and wait for it.

If you look at the actual content of the agitation Obama did in Chicago--"consciousness raising", to use a euphemism--it consists entirely in the fostering of self pity and related resentment. It consists in making people angry enough to demand someone else fix their problems. Obama is that someone else, who will enable them to have hope. No, not even that: to "give" them hope.

This is the logical outcome of the politics of Victimology.

I'll say more in a second post, but am already risking the wrath of the filters.

With respect to happiness, I like the analogy of Chaotic systems. I know--or suspect--that the "science" of Chaos likely offends your aesthetic sensibilities, but it supports my own.

Happiness is not a quantity. It cannot be purchased, or owned. It does not persist like an object, or a person.

And yet, we speak of it as existing. In my view, the best way of understanding it is that it is an Emergent property of a system defined by values held to be sacred, and which work to foster moral and mental clarity.

The more you work to grasp Happiness, the more it flees. It is like the water that tormented Tantalus.

I believe, though, that if you work hard to be who you believe you were meant to be, based upon a sincere appreciation of and pursuit of the values you hold sacred, happiness finds you.

In a totalitarian system, you are not free to pursue your own conception of perfection or virtue. Everything you do, and say, and almost even think, must be moderated by concern for being condemned for what would amount to apostasy.

The greatest curse that can befall someone is to hold nothing sacred: to believe nothing. In my own conception--and I see this article as supporting that idea--this is because you need to choose a form of restraint to be happy. In traditional societies, the sacred was given to you.

In our own society, large segments of our culture have worked assiduously to reject the social fabric which gave rise to our nation in favor of some form of new values, which are never expressed clearly, and never rise to the level at which they could be expressed non-compulsively.

What purpose is served by encouraging people to abandon the will to fight within our system for advancement, and to instead become self loathing dependent parasites?

This is exactly what Wright is doing in his "rejection of Middle-Classness". He is telling black people they don't have to abide by the values of White America. Yet how else are they supposed to rise out of poverty? This is unclear, because he is unclear, and he is unclear because hatred is his primary emotion, and destruction is what he desires for his enemies.

Obama was not surprised by anything Wright has said in the last five years. Obama is many things, but he is not stupid. He was not surprised by the most recent statements, except by how it affected his polling. Despite his fundamental agreement with everything Wright says, he has finally had to distance himself from a close friend in the interest of getting an opportunity to implement his radical policies from the Oval Office.

That's enough for now. Oi, I have things to do.

Great thought provoking article.

The things it brings to my mind are two-fold under one thought. The thought is, America is an idea, which for most people is freedom and liberty.

Thing # 1: There has been more government regulation codified into law in the last 30 years than in the entire history of the Republic prior to that.

Thing # 2: Emprisoning people without due process is a frontal assault on the idea that America represents to the world.

Cheers !

My brain won't stop, so one more. My apologies for my long-typedness.

If we assume the end goal of both Conservatives and Liberals is the creation of a richly textured potential for personal felicity, then a couple general statements can be made.

Happiness, since it is not a quantity, cannot be given. Wealthy men commit suicide and poor farmers die happy men surrounded by their loving families. Money is a potential, not an end. Therefore, giving money even to poor people, if it is destructive of the values which give them meaning, is actually taking something away. It is a negative exchange.

Likewise, giving freedom to people is in some respects a form of charity. It is creating the potential for the building of the "wealth" of virtue. As I have said, that person is wealthiest who can be happiest with the least. And that person is most poor who cannot be happy with anything, which ties in to what Bingo said.

The foundational error of Leftism, in my view, is the rejection of the importance of personal qualities--of nobility in its broadest and most positive sense--in favor of "social" qualities (like Equality), as if the latter could exist without the former. Dictatorial rule is inevitable if virtue can only exist in general, and never in specific. That's a bit high level, but I don't have time to expound further.

I didn't have time for this either, but I know myself, and its the only way to stop the wheels turning.

*Cough*strawman*cough*
In seriousness, though, Barry, I agree with the first part of what you said in your last post; "As I have said, that person is wealthiest who can be happiest with the least. And that person is most poor who cannot be happy with anything" is a great way to look at the world, and a very true one. However, your implication of a "Leftism" conspiracy is, first of all, borderline fearmongering, and second, overly simplistic. I'm not stating this as my own appraisal, but simply to reflect your own analysis: "Rightism" seeks to deny social qualities, such as basic equality, while valuing only individual characteristics - most notably money. Does that seem about right? No, no it doesn't. Both social and individual qualities add to society, and while the two aren't always exclusive, excessive focus on either will lead to the exclusion of the other. Dictatorial rule is inevitable if virtue can exist only specifically, and never generally, because if that happens, the only virtue that will truly be recognized is money.

#152: That's the point of the Constitution, isn't it? To create a framework within which those capable of governing themselves can in fact do so?

Were the Founders of our nation principally concerned with people unwilling to manage their own affairs? It doesn't appear so to me.

#150: two questions.

Do you differentiate between Americans and non-Americans?

Most of the people at Gitmo were in fact terrorists. If we try them, the amount of evidence is unlikely to win convictions under American standards of "beyond a reasonable doubt", and if we release them we will be giving them another chance to kill Americans.

Under any rational standard, they should at a minimum be imprisoned for the rest of their lives. Why does this bother people? Most all of them would be happy to kill as many Americans as they could. Why should we let them try?

# 153: Nope

Barry -
Well, yes. That is the point of the Constitution. Though when I pointed out the whole "judicial review" thing earlier, you seemed fairly willing to dismiss 200 years of constitutional law.
And I'm with #154; due process doesn't differentiate between Americans and non-Americans. Besides, the standard "beyond a reasonable doubt" was put in place because our society places a greater value on trying to ensure that every innocent person goes free; as William Blackstone said, "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." Not to mention the fact that the tribunals at Gitmo violate due process, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions.

# 153: The answer to your second question is in the thought and second thing posted in # 152.

One of the best explanations I've heard of the U.S. Constitution is that it was chiefly an economic document which granted extraordinary economic power to a national government.

This was a revolutionary step made possible by the dire economic conditions that led to Shay's rebellion. The proof of this was the fact that an attempt was made to have a Constitutional convention in Annapolis prior to Shay's rebellion, and few showed up.

Bill of rights is another story.

Whoops, that should have read # 150...Its late !

#30 ElCapitan - no, I'm in Arifjail ... err, Arifjan.

SpiderChick - thx, will do.

The good thing about Arifjan - fresh fruits & veggies, real milk. It's easy to eat well, as opposed to mob station (Ft. Bragg) which was crap. Really makes you feel much better.

26/m/88kg

thank god its a rest day my legs are killing me after yesterdays WOD

#155 Nick wrote,

"Not to mention the fact that the tribunals at Gitmo violate due process, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions."

Actually, that is not a true statement. Tribunals are called by UCMJ and The Geneva Convention. Due process, as you are implying, does not apply since they are not citizens and their crimes are from a military conflict. It does apply as to unlawful combatants. Also, if they were lawful enemy combatants they would have been released to their country of origin at the end of hostilities. However, since they were not this now becomes an issue, plus the little recognizd fact that their home country(s)' do not want them back for precisely why we don't want them to enter our borders.

You don't have to agree about due process. Yes, something does have to be done with them, but no it does not have to be on par with our domestic judicial system with respect to WHO runs the proceedings and HOW the proceedings are governed as these are combatant trials.

""Rightism" seeks to deny social qualities, such as basic equality, while valuing only individual characteristics - most notably money"

Actually "rightism" as you put it does not deny social qualities, it just does not MANDATE them. The point is that LIBERTY forbids coercion. MANDATED social "qualities" ,as you call them, are COERCION.

You are loosing your way, and will not be allowed to alter definitions to suit your argument.

#155: Nick,

Please square "judicial review" with the creation of a right not mentioned in the Constitution. In the course of your response, please articulate in detail for me exactly what rights enumerates in the Bill of Rights led to the creation of the "right" to abortion on demand. I know the history. I doubt you do, and I know you can't defend it on legal grounds.

In my own view, I am the one trying to defend our Constitution from people who can't implement their policies through popular vote, so they work the legal system to generate power out of all proportion to their numbers. No one who studies the case law can see Roe v. Wade as anything other than political activism implemented by an unelected body. They got away with it, it's true. That doesn't make it right.

With respect to our Constitution, the need became clear for a strong Federal government--and particularly a strong Executive--following the chaos of the Articles of Confederation. That doesn't affect anything I'm saying. The Constitution says that whatever is not specifically made a power of the Federal Govt. in the Constitution is to devolve to the States.

With respect to Blackstone, just to be clear, if one of those 10 guilty people subsequently murders 100 innocent people, you consider that bargain worth it?

The only possible congruent answer is yes. I just want you to say it.

This should be fun:

"It only takes 20 years for a liberal to become a conservative without changing a single idea."

-- Robert Anton Wilson

That's an interesting example of perceptual filters. What I think you think that statement is saying is that Conservatives are people who simply don't change their ideas, and are simply unable or unwilling to change with the times.

Given that you are presumably a leftist (note: I really prefer the term leftist to liberal, since I do not and never have viewed "liberality" to be a bad thing), it becomes a matter of common sense that anyone who doesn't change with the times is going to be progressively more and more wrong.

This is apparently intended to put me in the position of defending my own inflexibility. That's my read on it.

However, I've read his book "Quantum Psychology", and in my own interpretation of what he is saying, he is simply making a statement that context changes. What is considered radical in one generation (open homosexuality, for example) becomes a commonplace in the next. In this generation, for example, the idea of openness is a given, and the new cause celebre is marriage, which would have been unthinkable 20 years ago.

As a Conservative (I've struggled how best to label myself, and this is likely the best overall word), however, I see no reason to abandon traditional values. I'm infected, like most people, by where our society has moved to, but at the same time I do what I can to defend what is good in our nation, and work to improve it according to my own understanding of what is best.

Leftism is a complex phenomena, but on some levels it could perhaps be reduced to a demand for change for the sake of change. Change is conflated with improvement, and lack of change with stasis. I see this, for example, in the art world. They think that what's new is ipso facto good. This is a corruption of the notion of creativity, in my view.

This basic postulate--shall we call it "change pour change"?--is wrong, in my view. Most of the changes leftists like Obama and Clinton want to make will make things worse, if we view them systemically and over time.

As I have said, the basic social mechanisms in society that matter are the capacities to transform grief to healing, pain to joy, and chaos to order. All of these are done both personally and communally, and are infinitely easier in conditions of shared values.

For that reason, anything that attacks shared values, is destructive of what really matters. If you give people money they haven't earned, and have no intention of earning, you corrupt their dignity. If you engineer a society in which failure is impossible, you nourish irresponsibility, and corresponding lack of personal control.

As humans, we need difficulty. We need challenges. We need pain. For that reason, we need,in my view, to keep some of the wildness of Nature loose, and on the prowl.

I'll likely bring this up another day, but I'm reading a book--"A Better War"--on the abandonment of South Vietnam by America, and one of the key figures (John Paul Vann) commented that in 1971 more people were murdered in New York than were American KIA's in Vietnam.

So, I got to thinking about Iraq. According to numbers I pulled from Wikipedia, in the period 2003-2007 some 2,793 people were murdered in New York City. These numbers are hailed as progress because they are historically quite low.

We have lost something over 4,000 people in Iraq. Every one of those deaths is to be mourned, and it is tragic. But if we contextualize them, we can see that in the grand scheme of things, that number is really, really good. What if I pulled out traffic accident deaths? Or national homicides in the same period?

The people who oppose our efforts to help the Iraqis secure for themselves a just government of their choosing do so out of fear. They fear that their fundamental cowardice will be exposed, and the emptiness of their pessimistic rejection of everything good that America stands for and has done will see the light of day. They want us to fail, and they want us to fail so that their role in generating that failure can be obscured, as it was in the period of the Vietnam War.

The lies--I hope, at any rate--will not work this time. There are too many access points to information beyond their control.

Actually, I dislike both leftists & rightists. Leftists want to take my money, rightists want to take my dope...

Ya know, theres power in them thar few words pardner !

Contextualize...Hmmm.

What are your GWOT bona fides, Sir ?

Barry convientantly leaves out Iraqi civilian deaths in his Wikipedia based demographic anaylisis.

It's ironic coming from someone who often pontificates on virtue- and the lack thereof in people who dont hold his general political view.

Guess its "all relative" huh Barry?

I try to make light, or ignore some of this tripe- but thats truly
a sickening display of intellectual parochialism tinged with the sophistry of would be social engineer- not unlike the communists he loves to conjur in his quest to understand the richness of American political veiwpoints.

People suffer when ideas are more important than humanity.
To Barry- the idea of freedom within the parameters he sets is more important than the actual people he is discussing- this is what gives him the "authority" to make sweeping comments on say- Obamas personal relationship with God (how does he know?), or say, the collective guilt of Gitmo detainees ( how does he know?_- or say, the medical facilities in Cuba- it's not evidence based, or empirical- simply rationality in a Louisville vacuum- those people dont agree with his philosophy therefore they must fit into a certain aspect of his world view- namely one which diminishes them as humans- so lets forget that the actual number of people dying at its lowest figure exceeds 100,000. How convienant for us to build a thought on- but wait- better make sure youve called everyone who would sensibly disagree a LIAR first... thats the advance credibility youll need.

Its just weak,and the mark of someone who doesnt have the gumption to go places,meet people, experience the world with an open and adventurous mind. (ie - guided tours dont count)

regardless of where you stand on the war- YOU are the liar if you dont use all available data in promulgating your viewpoint.

It's not about left right or middle- its always about people first.

3-2-1 - wake up and smell the corpses.

James

Ggood point at the end...I agree whole heartedly....why do people feel so concerned with being conservative or liberal, to the point they lose all their own beliefs...think about the subject, do your research and make your own opinion...im so sick of people just regurgitating any fact they get off the news...thanks james, world needs more of you..