Blake Bailey recounts the appalling Road Home program at Slate.

If there is a hell, it is not a place of burning. It is the eternal waiting room for heaven.

The banality of everyday life is suffocating. Even events of seeming significance shrink into nothing. I’ve been have a lot of trouble caring, lately. My work, the 24-hour news cycle, all the little pictures that facebook’s news-feed serves me, they seem irrelevant. I have bigger things to worry about.

Has corruption entered the American character? I know, I know, Americans have never had pure hearts. What I mean to ask, “Is America on the decline?” Has the war on terror caused us to accept a bunker mentality? America is in the vicelike grip of fear. Our backgrounds have been turned into potential terrorist battlefields. Let me tell you something, the idea of the bureaucratic agency called the Department of Homeland security frightens me. Do we really want the tentacles of the federal government reaching into every crevice of our lives?

Face it, we can’t protect our malls from suicide bombers. And that prospect scares me. What happens to America when they hit the heartland? Will the people clamor for the government to take their civil liberties? The sad thing is that I am certain that this will be the response. I am beleaguered on both sides: The ever-present specter of tyranny is equally as destructive as a terrorist’s bomb.

Something deep within our souls changed that day, when the barbarians sacked Rome. The American Empire suddenly felt vulnerable. Our collective psyche is still wounded. Like fools, we turned to our strong leader George Bush, who turned out to be the biggest fool of them all. His Manichaean paranoia₁ is dangerous. Disparate bands of Islamic terrorists and disparate totalitarian Islamist movements have been linked together into the monolith that is Islamo-fascism. We’ve raised our children under the dark cloud of terror. This is all they’ve known. This is almost all I’ve known. I was just aware enough to know that 9/11 changed everything, but I didn’t know anything about that everything that had been changed.

I have glimpses. I remember a time when you felt a slight twinge when the airplane landed and could give your loved ones a hug right before they boarded the airplane. These kids will have grown up in America under siege. As long as they can remember, you’re supposed to submit. You’re supposed to take off your shoes. Your luggage occasionally has a paper in it saying that TSA conducted a search. You’re supposed to smile and thank them for protecting our country. For us, security is a hassle. For them, it’s natural to leave the hair gel at home, or put it in a plastic baggie.

They’re growing up in a world where the phrase “The American Way” is foreign. Truth is trashed for expedience. The institutions of justice are tossed aside for the prerogative of the executive. They may read in the history books about a different America, not hated by the international community, full of dreams and full of the entrepreneurial, the frontier spirit. Alas, they hear, that time is over. We are a different America who faces a different threat, unlike any other.

Not I, you say. But maybe you’re like me, under another level of the cloud cover. Worried about the internal threat, I run the trouble of ignoring the fact that I’ve allowed them to frame the debate. The fear still envelopes me. We need to beyond the fear and quantify the threat in a realistic manner.

I also chastise the scoffers who think there’s no threat at all. I won’t take the time to address them, but I will say that the threat of terror is very real and will continue to remain real no matter what happens in Iraq. The question becomes: How do we address terror without fighting a war on terror? How do we fight without fear? How do we keep ourselves safe without security consuming our lives? How do we undo so many mistakes? How do we reframe the debate?

One answer is that we cling tenaciously to our traditions.₂ I mean various things by tradition. Most especially, I’m referring to our institutions of justice and government. If we give those up, then all is for naught. We must also preserve our moral traditions. This has nothing to do with gay marriage. This has everything to do with our belief that every human being has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Of course, this isn’t enough. It’s not enough just to believe that we need traditions. In order to reaffirm tradition, we need to defeat the bunker mentality, the Manichaean mentality. We need to end the war on terror. We need to work with the international community to make terrorism unacceptable and a crime against humanity. We need to work with the international community to create an acceptable mechanism for punishing states that sponsor terror.

Americans need to be prepared for the next attack. We need to not become panicked animals who need to be herded by the government when that next attack hits. The Department of Homeland Security is just a bastion of pork-barrel spending. The real effect of terrorism is psychological. They can do nothing if we dust ourselves off. They can do nothing if every attack is met with swift emergency response. The casualties are reduced and quickly we return to our everyday lives. They can’t break us if we don’t submit.

Yet even all that’s not enough. It’s not a question of what we need to do, but implementation. Brzezinski asks, “Where is the U.S. leader ready to say, ‘Enough of this hysteria, stop this paranoia’? Even in the face of future terrorist attacks, the likelihood of which cannot be denied, let us show some sense. Let us be true to our traditions.” This is why I’m so worried about 2008. I see no one.

This is the problem I struggle with now: How to save America from the decline. I see many things that need to be done, but no will to do them. I can’t do this alone. You can’t do this alone. Unfortunately, I don’t know what can be done as long as our current crop of candidates remains mediocre and politically un-courageous. I thought letting this all out would provide with the clarity to provide solutions, but I see nothing at this point. At least, nothing that will solve everything all at once.

For now, let me be courageous. Let yourselves be courageous. And maybe I can get some other young people to be courageous. Spread the word that the “war on terror” is counterproductive. Tout America’s traditions as the best way to protect the “homeland.” Wherever you see false security, speak up.₃ Don’t let anyone get away with anything anymore. Don’t let security be determined by politics. America deserves real solutions, not this madness. Tell all the politicians, when it comes to keeping America safe: No more bullshit.

If they tar you as unpatriotic, shout even louder. They want nothing but theater. We want real security. We want the security of civil liberties. We want the security of emergency response. We want the security of international institutions and international law. We want the security of justice, not some vague forever-war. Most of all, we want the security of not being afraid.

I think that if this happens, if America awakens and demands a return to her traditions, the so-called leaders may finally do something.

This is Phase 1: The Awakening.

₁Brzezinski used this phrase when he was being interviewed on the Daily Show.

₂I was surprised at Brzezinski’s line at the end of his article, mentioning that we should be true to our traditions. It spoke to me very much. I find it strange that now it is the conservatives who want to throw away tradition.

₃This is the difficulty with the bureaucracy. The people no longer control how the nation keeps itself safe. Bureaucrats do. These people think they’re experts, but they’re just fucking things up.

From today’s Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Thompson has also been criticized for failing to back some comprehensive tort reform bills because of his background as a trial lawyer. Here he insists his stance was based on grounds of federalism. “I’m consistent. I address Federalist Society meetings,” he says, noting that more issues should be left to the states. For example, he cast the lonely “nay” in 99-1 votes against a national 0.8% blood alcohol level for drivers, a federal law banning guns in schools, and a measure limiting the tort liability of Good Samaritans. “Washington overreaches, and by doing so ends up not doing well the basics people really care about.” Think Katrina and Walter Reed.

I’m sold. Run, Fred Thompson, run.

Interesting reading on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

Selected quotes:

“In contrast to most of al-Qa’eda’s senior leaders, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed liked to indulge in the sins of the Western civilisation that his movement is devoted to wiping out.”

“Peter Bergen, the author and leading expert on al-Qa’eda, said: ‘I think he really was in it for the fun. To use a horrible metaphor in this context, he was having a blast.'”

For some reason, this reminded me of The Dread Pirate Bin Laden. I momentarily thought of KSM as some sort of swashbuckler.

Captain’s Quarters adds this:

“Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was not the only jihadi who indulged the sins of the flesh while on assignment as a terrorist. The 9/11 attackers also enjoyed so-called Western decadence during their short stay in the United States. As the 9/11 Commission report noted in its excellent recounting of the plot, a half-dozen of them made test flights to Las Vegas in the three months preceding the attack — and while in Sin City, they indulged in alcohol, gambling, and strip clubs. KSM apparently lived the dissolute lifestyle as a rule, though, and not an exception.”

Anyway, if this is true, KSM is no Islamofascist, no jihadist — he’s just a plain criminal. But what to make of the 9/11 foot soldiers?

On a semi-related note, here’s my quote of the day for August 28, 2006: “There are criminals and killers — we know the scum who wear the mask of the Jihad and religion… They used to kill people as criminals and now they kill them under the cover of jihad.” — Abdul Qader Mohammed Jasim, the Iraqi minister of defense

I don’t think the actors in 9/11 were mere criminals, but I do think criminals are trying to legitimize themselves with the cover of jihad. I also think that it may be helpful to take control of the narrative and not call the terrorists jihadists, but to call them common criminals. Food for thought, especially for the Manichaeans out there.

We stood in the long line for maybe a minute, but we knew we weren’t going to get in. Fine with me, I didn’t want to see Coulter anyway. On one hand, I wish we could’ve got in. Then, I would’ve sat there, and I could’ve booed or walked out. On the other hand, I find it far more likely that I would’ve sat there, quietly seething.

Instead, I found out the next morning that Ann Coulter had pretty much called John Edwards a faggot. I think John Hawkins, at Right Wing News nails it, calling her selfish.

I never liked her before, but now I have no respect for Ann Coulter at all.

And don’t give me that “It was a joke” excuse. That is the lamest excuse ever. There’s something called “delivery.” Ann’s delivery wasn’t funny; it was just insulting.

I used to think that there’s no such thing as bad publicity, but… bah, who knows, maybe this helped her with her book sales.

What depresses me the most is how people cheered. No, depresses and disgusts. AGHH!

By the way, here’s a sneak peek at Ann Coulter’s next CPAC speech: “I would say something about Obama, but apparently you can’t call a black person a nigger anymore without going to rehab.” [I wonder how many kids would cheer that.]

If she’s coming next year, I am so protesting.

I smirked a little bit. I had taken a glance around the room and noticed that a few people were starting to nod off. Tim Pawlenty wasn’t giving a stump speech, he was giving a lecture. While his execution was off, I still think he had a few very interesting things to say.

He stressed the importance of suburban voters, specifically, suburban women voters. He said we shouldn’t refer to them as “soccer moms,” giving a very persuasive spiel about them being in the work force, etc. He expressed a worry that suburban voters, even though they liked Republican principles, they thought of the Republicans as the party of the rich. I think he’s onto something and the Republicans have really got to fix their image. We’re seen as the party of bigots and the uber-rich.

Pawlenty, at one point, asked the audience about the person most popular among women. After a pause, I managed to answer along with him: Oprah. He said that Obama was Oprah-ish, managing to exhude that same type of demeanor.

I don’t think Pawlenty managed to tap into any of that Oprah power, but I think he’s on to something. Republicans need to appeal to suburbia, and especially suburban women.

I was surprised at the rousing ovation that Tom Delay received. I guess he is “the Hammer,” but didn’t he leave disgraced? Well, I didn’t stand up and clap. I didn’t do much listening to either Delay or Horowitz, who were speaking on some type of panel. However, I did do enough listening to Horowitz to feel very uneasy about it. No wait, let me backtrack.

First, when the lady was introducing them, she took so much pride in the fact that they were people that liberals loved to hate. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to be hated. If someone can’t stand me because of certain political positions, fine, they can do that, but I’m not going to actively try and get someone to hate me. Somewhere in her introduction, she said that Horowitz was a former Marxist.

Anyway, I leaned over to my friend and said, “This will probably get me shot, but I think Horowitz still sounds like a Marxist.” Ironically, while I was thinking those thoughts (before I mentioned them to my friends), Horowitz prefaced some statements by apologizing for sounding like a leftist (although I think it involved how he was using many numbers or something).

Strangely enough, the choice derogatory term for the Democrats from Horowitz is that they are a “religion.” They are religious in that they want to establish a heaven-on-earth. Fair game, I hate their idealism, but the way Horowitz describes the left just makes me feel creepy. I can’t say what it is, but although his targets have changed, his language sounds the same… as if he’s still denouncing the bourgeoisie. He spoke of the left as a monolith, and I didn’t like his approach.

I didn’t hear him speak, but my friends apparently enjoyed Huckabee’s speech at CPAC. We looked up his record afterwards and apparently he was a big spender. I don’t really have an opinion of Huckabee, but I couldn’t resist writing this down:

Fuck Huck.

Sorry to be crass, but I think it’s hilarious.