Don’t know what made this spring to mind, but it seems like a good day for it.

#5: Attitude – I suppose we must think of this in the past tense, since Ireland is wimping out in the face of jihadist aggression as quickly as the rest of western Europe. However, there was a time when [...]]]>

Don’t know what made this spring to mind, but it seems like a good day for it.

#5: Attitude – I suppose we must think of this in the past tense, since Ireland is wimping out in the face of jihadist aggression as quickly as the rest of western Europe. However, there was a time when the stereotypical Irish combination of wit, charm, pugnacity and home-spun wisdom set the gold standard for a national identity. If you subtract the IRA and “the troubles” (OK, and a long list of other atrocities on both sides) the genteel parts of the eternal feud between the Irish and the English is marvelously entertaining and there’s no doubt that the Irish get the best of it. Few things please an Irishman more than yanking the tail of the stuffy English lion and they do it so damned well.

And let us not forget the women. Can you beat Irish-women? (Actually, sometimes it’s necessary, and I know this because my blushing bride has Irish blood in her). With apologies to you Nordic types, southern belles and all the rest of the charming ladies who visit these pages, the fiery, red-haired Irish lass, in my book anyway, trumps all.

#4: The Quiet Man – Still the definitive Hollywood classic on Ireland. One of John Wayne’s best performances and Maureen O’Hara is marvelous as always, but Barry Fitzgerald steals the show. The Quiet Man is one of those movies I could watch every week and it would never get old.

#3: Beer – Guinness for me, thank you very much.

#2: Legends – I’m not talking about the rainbows, pots of gold and Lucky Charms here.  Rather, I’m referring to the rich mythological lore that weaves through Irish folk history. Whether it’s tales of kings like Conchobar mac Nessa, or simply the local story about the banshee who foresaw the tragic death of poor Daniel Fitzpatrick who used to live down the road, few peoples can spin a yarn like the Irish.

#1: Maureen O’Hara – Because she’s hot. Because she’s smart. Because she’s got the kind of temper that makes one certain she’s a firecracker in the sack. Because she could charm the mustache off of Rufus’ face. You all may argue with the rest, but as far as the top spot goes: there is no argument.

Share on Facebook

The Mustang was so undoubtedly the best all-around fighter in World War II that there is virtually no debate on the matter. But the next five? That can be debated. There’s a lot of ways to judge WWII fighters. In this case, I’m going with the “all around” criteria. That means judging the machine’s overall [...]]]>

The Mustang was so undoubtedly the best all-around fighter in World War II that there is virtually no debate on the matter. But the next five? That can be debated. There’s a lot of ways to judge WWII fighters. In this case, I’m going with the “all around” criteria. That means judging the machine’s overall characteristics: its ability as a dogfighter, how well it performed in ground support, range, handling, speed and ability to absorb punishment. Finally, I think that something called “impact” is important too, that is: how widely used was the fighter? Fighters that saw limited use are not considered.

So we’re looking at a balanced approach here, one that immediately disqualifies some popular fighters. The Me-109 was a fine dogfighter and built in large numbers, but its short legs and delicate nature don’t rate a spot in this top five. Same goes for the Zero, which – once the Hellcat and Corsair entered the fray – was completely outclassed. Why not the Me-262? Two words: over-rated. Sure it was fast as hell, but it had no legs and little handling capability, plus the engines didn’t last more than a few hours. Allied pilots quickly figured out that they could out-turn the son of a bitch in a dog fight and then all you had to do was wait till the Me-262 was running low on fuel and headed for home. If you had somebody in position, they could take the jet down during its painfully long final approach.

So, that said, here’s my top five fighters of World War II that were not the P-51 Mustang:

#6: P-38 Lightening – Another Kelly Johnson masterpiece and unarguably the best twin engine fighter of World War II. The Lightening was fast, tough, had a tremendous punch and – once Charles Lindbergh taught the Army Air Corps how to fly the thing properly (true story) – it had great range. A workhorse in the both the dogfighting and ground support roles, the P-38 couldn’t turn with a Zero, but it didn’t have to. It had the speed to get out of the way. Dick Bong, America’s leading ace in WWII, flew the P-38.

#5: F4U Corsair – Essentially an airframe bolted onto the biggest engine they could find. Fast as all get out and heavily armed, Corsairs were still flying ground support missions in the Korean War, and doing it well. The only thing that keeps the Corsair from rating higher is the problems that plagued the fighter when it was introduced. It was a bitch to land on a carrier, until technical fixes solved most of the problems. Early on Corsairs claimed the lives of a lot of aviators who found it too hot to handle.

#4: P-47 Thunderbolt – The “Jug” was renowned both for its incredible ability to absorb punishment and its ability to dish out punishment. Built in huge numbers (over 15,000 according to Wikipedia) the P-47’s speed and range were gradually increased over the years till it was capable of mixing it up with the Luftwaffe quite effectively over Germany. Not much on handling, but with enough speed to get out of trouble, the P-47 was also superb in the ground attack.

#3: FW-190 Würger – The best and toughest German fighter of the war, much more feared by Allied pilots than the Me-109. It was famously described as a tough cavalry horse, as opposed to the 109’s reputation as a fragile thoroughbred. Armed with both machine guns and 20mm cannon, the 190 could do fearsome damage if it got into the middle of a bomber formation. A beautiful plane with a very high service ceiling for the time (39,000 feet), over 20,000 FW-190s were built during the war.

#2: F4U Hellcat: I know what you’re thinking: A carrier-based fighter? Really? Really. The Hellcat was an outstanding aircraft, though many people don’t know about its history. As far as the Pacific War was concerned, the Hellcat was the “air dominance” fighter of its day. It was fast, heavily armed, could carry a butt-load of bombs and/or rockets and – for a carrier based fighter – had outstanding range. The Hellcat was responsible for over half of all aerial victories in the Pacific War and its overall kill-to-loss ratio for the war was an unprecedented 19:1. One hell of an aircraft from the “Ironworks” at Grumman.

Share on Facebook

Before we get to that, we must get to this. Since I was playing hookey from 3D yesterday (aka: working) I did not get a chance to reply to this comment of Rufus:

One of the Little Fireflies (a girl, thank goodness!) went through a 10 month or so phase where she insisted on wearing a [...]]]>

Before we get to that, we must get to this. Since I was playing hookey from 3D yesterday (aka: working) I did not get a chance to reply to this comment of Rufus:

One of the Little Fireflies (a girl, thank goodness!) went through a 10 month or so phase where she insisted on wearing a tutu, 24/7. It was pretty funny.

I herewith am pleased to observe: Nice to see that she takes after her father.

Now that that is out of the way, let’s get down to the business at hand. Y’all know how google predictor works, right? When you start typing in your search term, it comes up with suggestions on what you are looking for. Those suggestions are based on the popularity of search terms. In other words, the more people searching for something, the more likely google will offer that suggestion.

Ergo, google predictor provides an interesting view into what people are interested in when they hit the internets and – for some odd reason – aren’t looking for Salma Hayek’s boobs, which – by the way – are on glorious display just under the fold:

You’re welcome.

Anyway, here’s a few glimpses into the wild world of the internets and the dark recesses of the minds of those who use it.

Be afraid.

Be very afraid…

We start with the search: “Can a woman.” Here’s what we get:

Number three is not too disturbing, now is it?

How about “can a man”?

Outside of the guys that Floyd hangs out with, I think the answer to number 4 is “no, and if the answer is yes, I don’t want to know that.”

Moving to the scary question “Is it wrong”:

Incest takes up 50% of the category. Apparently it’s not just for Kentucky anymore.

Let’s get even more basic. The simple question, “why”:

OK, who hasn’t wondered why we can’t own Canadians? I get that.

Let’s try “Is George Bush”:

And, for the sake of balance: “Is Barack Obama”:

Re number 5: if you have to ask, the answer should be self-apparent.

Let’s end this on a happy note:

You are invited to try it yourself and post your best finds here. Except for Floyd – because we don’t want to know what his twisted mind will come up with – and Eric, because there are only so many ways to search “Eric Porvaznik is cooler than”

Share on Facebook

Had Paddy been hitting the sauce before he flipped out? Wouldn’t be surprised…

As was pointed out on Fox Kennedy was  right, but not in the way he intended. Now that Afghanistan is “Obama’s War” and, ergo, a “good war” the media isn’t spending all of it’s time dumping on [...]]]>

Had Paddy been hitting the sauce before he flipped out? Wouldn’t be surprised…

As was pointed out on Fox Kennedy was  right, but not in the way he intended. Now that Afghanistan is “Obama’s War” and, ergo, a “good war” the media isn’t spending all of it’s time dumping on the supposed atrocities that our boys in uniform seemed to commit on a daily basis when W was POTUS. That’s not to say that the media has ignored Afghanistan. There was endless coverage of the strategy debate before the Afghan surge was implemented. But, perhaps Pat was otherwise occupied during those months.

The best thing that the press can do, once we’ve decided to fight a war, is to highlight the bravery and professionalism of our outstanding troops. Absent that, the next best thing they can do is get the hell out of the way and let the military do its job. Kennedy isn’t really upset that the media isn’t covering Afghanistan, he’s pissed that the media isn’t covering Afghanistan the way he likes – as an evil enterprise needlessly putting our boys and gals in harms way.

Sorry Patrick, but if we’re “fit” (to be tied? I think that’s where he was going) and if we’re cynical, it’s because of raving left-wing lunatics like you. Why don’t you have a drink or five to settle your nerves?

Share on Facebook

Glenn Beck has never been to my taste, but I’m glad he’s out there. (Pun intended). Beck serves a role. When it comes to challenging the socialist in chief and his economic plans, we need guys like Beck who can drive home the message in an entertaining way that Joe Everyman will digest.

What Beck is [...]]]>

Glenn Beck has never been to my taste, but I’m glad he’s out there. (Pun intended). Beck serves a role. When it comes to challenging the socialist in chief and his economic plans, we need guys like Beck who can drive home the message in an entertaining way that Joe Everyman will digest.

What Beck is not is perfect. He’s a flawed human being, just like the rest of us, and that’s OK too. At least it’s OK for me. Not so for the sneering leftists who are obsessed with the man. Former Salon writer Michael Scherer, who now peddles his wares for Time, broke out the extra-acidic vitriol to slam Beck’s interview of ex-New York Congressman/tickle warrior Eric Massa yesterday. By all accounts – including Beck’s – the interview was a disaster and libs are celebrating. For some, one pointless interview means the end of Glenn Beck. Give me a break.

Keith Olbermann has built an entire career on conducting pointless interviews. OK, Olbermann’s incompetence is less obvious since he appears on a network that nobody actually watches, but you take my point. Hate to tell you this lefties, but Glenn Beck ain’t going anywhere.

I’m much less concerned about Beck taking a failed flyer on a slimeball like Massa (and Michelle Malkin tried to warn him) than I am by the fact that Beck swallows the global warming Kool Aid and that he doesn’t have a clue about what’s going on in Europe. Beck even went so far as to call Geert Wilders a “fascist,” which is about as stupid as it gets. That statement revealed that, in addition to not understanding that Wilders is basically a socialist when it comes to government and not understanding the very real threat that jihadism poses to Europe, Beck fails to comprehend that free speech is at stake in the Wilders trial.

Glenn Beck surely has his failings, but getting out over his skis with the Massa interview is not one of them. That’s what’s known as a failure and, when you take chances that nobody in the MSM is willing to take, you’re going to have those once in a while. Big deal.

Share on Facebook

Nothing like arguing about Lincoln, so I’ll extend it to a new post here. In open thread, Floyd – quite correctly – said that if the South hadn’t been so stubbornly boneheaded about slavery, the American Civil War (or the War of Northern Aggression, if you prefer) would not have occurred. New commenter Jeff Stone [...]]]>

Nothing like arguing about Lincoln, so I’ll extend it to a new post here. In open thread, Floyd – quite correctly – said that if the South hadn’t been so stubbornly boneheaded about slavery, the American Civil War (or the War of Northern Aggression, if you prefer) would not have occurred. New commenter Jeff Stone (welcome Jeff!) – also quite correctly – asserts that had old Abe not tried to hold onto Fort Sumter and just let the Confederacy go, the war would not have happened.

We know that slavery, more properly stopping the spread of slavery to the territories, is one of the root causes of the war, although not the only root cause. Lincoln’s great opponent, Stephen Douglas, wanted to lay that decision off on the voters as new territories entered the union as states. That didn’t work, as the antebellum bloodbaths in the Kansas-Nebraska territories so amply demonstrated. Whatever solution we adopted needed to be a national solution. Lincoln’s election certainly encouraged the abolitionist cause, but it did not threaten the peculiar institution where it already existed. Abe’s election merely meant that the slave states were destined to become a minority in an expanding America.

As the founders noted, it is the responsibility of the majority not to abuse the rights of the minority in a representative democracy. Lincoln did not proposed abusing or ignoring the rights of the southern minority in the union. He said, before and after his election, that he had no intention of interfering with slavery where it existed and there is no evidence to suppose that – but for the war – he would have.

But, in a republic, not only is it the responsibility of the majority to protect the rights of the minority, it is also the responsibility of the minority – indeed it is their duty – to respect the decisions of the majority. Representative democracy can not work if the side that loses an election can effectively ignore the results of that election.

The secessionists’ argument essentially acknowledged the above reasoning, but held that it only applies at the state level. The state, not the nation, was the indivisible unit and, having created the nation, each of those indivisible units could uncreate it at their will. Lincoln and other visionaries understood that this line of reasoning was the first step down a very slippery slope that would ultimately undermine the (then still young) concept of representative democracy. As he famously wrote to Horace Greeley, Lincoln did not take America to war in order to free the slaves, he made this momentous decision to preserve the Union and, in a much larger sense, to preserve the form of government that he believed to be the last, best hope on earth. I am frankly baffled that anyone would be surprised by what Lincoln wrote to Greeley (to paraphrase: if I could save the Union by freeing all of the slaves, I would do it; if I could save the Union by freeing none of the slaves, I would do that, etc.). That sentiment sums up Abe’s entire reasoning for fighting the war and serious students of the war know that. The “Lincoln fought to free the slaves” myth is something created for schoolchildren.

For some, Lincoln’s ends are not supportable, so by the time we get to the means there’s no place to go but down. Denying the worthiness of those ends is the equivalent of saying that Britain could have still achieved all it did during its years of glory, had Edward III allowed Scotland and Wales to go their own way in the middle ages, or – to put a point on it – that Iraq would be better off it were split into three separate nations as Joe Biden suggested. For others, even should they share Lincoln’s sweeping vision, the means he used a achieve them are despicable and opened the door to all the ills and excess of big government that we know today. So let’s get to that.

There is a wide gulf between the taxation that Lincoln introduced and today’s IRS enforced federal plundering. There is a huge chasm between federal power today and federal power in 1865. No reasonable person would object to tax rates and policies today if they mirrored those in 1865. No reasonable person would object to the reach of the federal government today if (absent those extra-constitutional war time measures that Lincoln, and just about every other commander in chief has employed during a conflict) the federal government was limited to the role it enjoyed during Lincoln’s day. The argument, such as it is, is that Lincoln “opened the door” and, therefore, all of the terrible things that have happened would not have happened but for this one man. To that I say: horse-puckey.

Are we to believe that socialism would not have taken root, sans Lincoln? Would there have been no depression and – given the socialist winds of the day – no socialist “solution” a la the New Deal, but for Lincoln? Would John Maynard Keynes and his school of thought have had no influence on government policy, had Lincoln heeded Jeff Davis’ wish to just leave the south alone? Are we to believe that there would be no forces pushing for bigger government, higher taxes and more nanny-statism without Lincoln? The historical and cultural forces that have gotten us to this point are huge and inevitable. To blame the state of government today on a mid-nineteenth century president who was using every means at his disposal simply to preserve the best form of government the world has ever known is just nonsense.

Lincoln remains our greatest President, a pragmatist and a visionary rolled into one decent, driven and brilliant man. But for him and his efforts, America would not be the power for good that it is today. As for our failings, there is plenty of blame to lay at the feet of leaders much more deserving of it.

Share on Facebook

As long as we’re talking about Nazis, how about considering the electronic variety? When they first started hitting the streets, red-light cameras seemed like a good idea. We’ve all seen people screaming through red lights and we’ve all had to jam on our brakes because some idiot decided that he was going to make a [...]]]>

As long as we’re talking about Nazis, how about considering the electronic variety? When they first started hitting the streets, red-light cameras seemed like a good idea. We’ve all seen people screaming through red lights and we’ve all had to jam on our brakes because some idiot decided that he was going to make a left even though the left-turn arrow was blazing crimson. The cops can’t be everywhere, so why not use modern tools to make the streets a little safer? After all, officials in charge of these programs would surely exercise a little discretion, right?

Silly, silly me.

Red-light cameras do accomplish the noble task of curbing reckless driving at dangerous intersections, but careful drivers pay a price for that service. It didn’t take municipalities long to figure out that red-light cameras could be revenue generators and boy oh boy, have they. They have filled municipal coffers through strict, but ridiculous, enforcement of right turn on red laws.

According to the law in most states, drivers must come to a complete stop before executing a right turn on red. If you’re like me (a scary thought) when you come to an intersection where there’s no cross traffic and no pedestrians around, you’ll slow down to something of a crawl – but not actually stop – before making that right turn. Nothing wrong with it and, I’ll submit, it’s not the kind of activity that a reasonable cop, or even Barney Fife, would write a ticket for. But those cameras? They’ve got no soul. If the wheels don’t come to a complete stop, the shutter clicks and it’s “gotcha” time.

In a large suburb near Casa Trzupr, Schaumburg to be exact, the village generated millions in revenue from red-light photo enforcement, almost entirely because of dubious enforcement of right turn on red. Finally, public uproar forced village officials to remove the damn things.

If you’re wondering if yours truly has gotten burned by red-light cameras, well yes I have. I recently got nailed twice, within the space of a week, for crawling through a right turn on red at a corner where there was absolutely no one around. I protested both, for the same reason – that no reasonable cop would have ticketed me, so why in the world should the robot? One ticket was thrown out, the other was not. So, I’m batting .500.

There is a middle ground, one that I suspect not many municipalities choose to employ. Rather than having the red-light camera mindlessly fire off tickets whenever it thinks it’s detected an offense, a town can set up its system such that an actual police officer reviews the tape and decides whether he or she would have hit the Mars lights under the circumstances. This is the way that my former home of Streamwood (a particularly well-run town) handles the issue. As a result, Streamwood has not generated as much revenue as it would have had it opted for strict, mindless enforcement, but it has met its stated goal of making a dangerous intersection a little safer.

Red-light cameras are not, in my view, an example of technology run amuck, they are a case of government abusing technology. If we’re going to use these tools, the states (not the feds) should require that every town follow the Streamwood model. Completely removing the human element from police work is not fair to the people that the cops are sworn to serve and protect.

Share on Facebook

Today is a big day for the Second Amendment as the Supreme Court begins to hear arguments about the city of Chicago’s handgun ban. One of the plaintiffs is an elderly self-described liberal Democrat who lives in Morgan Park, a rough neighborhood on the south side, Otis McDonald. The tough old codger wants to be [...]]]>

Today is a big day for the Second Amendment as the Supreme Court begins to hear arguments about the city of Chicago’s handgun ban. One of the plaintiffs is an elderly self-described liberal Democrat who lives in Morgan Park, a rough neighborhood on the south side, Otis McDonald. The tough old codger wants to be able to protect his family (imagine that!) and eagerly jumped at the chance to challenge the gun ban when attorneys were looking for plaintiffs. He was interviewed for a piece in the Chicago Sun Times that ran today. Here’s a quote:

”If this handgun ban was working, I would say, ‘OK, no problem,’ even though it’s against my constitutional rights. But it’s not working,” McDonald said. ”If law-abiding citizens could have handguns, a robber in the streets will have something to think about when he get ready to do one of these numbers on somebody. He don’t know who might have one.”

Two years ago the Supremes overturned the D.C.’s gun ban in D.C. v. Heller, but that decision didn’t extend to states and municipalities. Alan Gura, the lawyer who successfully defended the Second Amendment in the Heller case, is again representing the right to bear arms.

Some of the left claim that McDonald is being used by right-wing gun nuts, particularly because he happens to be black. The old guy doesn’t give a damn if he’s being used or not, he just wants the right result:

”I decided it didn’t matter to me what anyone else’s motives were,” he said. ”I needed something, and I was getting the opportunity to have my voice heard. I felt honored, and I felt the Lord put me here for this. It was divine design.”

Here’s an elderly, decent man who has been repeatedly robbed by gang-bangers. All he’s asking for is the ability to defend himself and his family. Richard M. Daley doesn’t want him to be able to exercise that right. The Chicago gun ban, like all gun bans, simply takes weapons out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, leaving gun ownership in the exclusive purview of thugs.

It’s silly, stupid and counter-productive. And, assuming that the Supremes get it right again, these restrictive laws will soon be unconstitutional. Go get ‘em Alan Gura.

Share on Facebook

It’s been a busy week at the day job herebouts, so I hope y’all have been having fun. A bit of sad news is Trzupr-land yesterday: the family lost another member, my Uncle Wiz who was a World War II vet and all around good guy. For me, Wiz was one of those relatives that [...]]]>

It’s been a busy week at the day job herebouts, so I hope y’all have been having fun. A bit of sad news is Trzupr-land yesterday: the family lost another member, my Uncle Wiz who was a World War II vet and all around good guy. For me, Wiz was one of those relatives that you always wished you knew better, but the everyday madness of day to day life never allowed you to have the time. Suffice it to say that Walter “Wiz” Slusarczyk (and you thought “Trzupek” was unpronounceable) was a good natured, unassuming, hard-working fellow who raised two wonderful daughters and lived a life in full. I can’t recall that me and my sibs ever experienced an unpleasant moment when we spent time with Wiz and his family. Great guy. I share this bit of news, because it led me to reflect on a couple of themes that may resonate with some of you.

First, I don’t believe that anything in your life – other than getting old – can prepare you for what it means to lose a generation. And, by “generation,” I mean that generation of relatives that proceeded you. If, like Stosh and I, you come from a big, raucous family, then the child version of you assumes that all those aunts and uncles will be around forever. You can not conceive of the day when their numbers would be reduced to two. It’s an extinction of sorts. Not really, of course, since their progeny live on, but a very strange feeling nonetheless. Sad? Sure, but there’s more than that. It reminds you of your own mortality in a way few events can. It’s as if the stars in the sky suddenly started winking out, one by one. Nothing, you realize, is forever.

Second, I think I’ve changed my mind on this whole “greatest generation” thing. Wiz did not earn his nickname as the result of a bladder-control problem, but because he was a particularly inventive young Sea-Bee in WWII. Wiz was, in other words, a “wizard.” He was one among the millions that Brokaw would dub the greatest generation, but – no disrespect to Wiz and all of his comrades – that’s not right. The more accurate, if politically-incorrect, label would be: “the last generation to fight a war that American didn’t feel obliged to apologize for” or, perhaps: “the last generation for which patriotism was a universal virtue.”

There’s no shortage of young men like Wiz around today. Anyone who reads the tales of valor and service coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan know that we are blessed with fighting men and women today who are every bit as motivated and dedicated as the marvelous generation that my father, Wiz and millions of others were part of. That label – the “greatest” generation – was not created to diminish the boys who slogged through the jungles of Indo-China forty years ago, or to take anything away from the cold-warriors who stared down the USSR, or to denigrate the efforts of our troops in the Middle East, but: I think that is the effect, at least in part.

They are all great, every one of them. We don’t lack for greatness today – it’s all around us – the difference is that many more of us are embarrassed by greatness in 2010 than we were in 1945, choosing instead, for reasons I do not completely understand, to ignore the valor of those who protect us and sneering at their mission.

Norse mythology holds that departed warriors will fight their battles over again in Valhalla, and that the victors and the vanquished will share laughter and libation in the great hall. I like that image and I like to think that, when their days are done, today’s great generation of warriors will share a beer and a joke with Wiz – and with Walter Trzupek, come to think of it – and all the rest of all the great generations that came before. We’re in their debt

Share on Facebook