Tony Snow

He was well-known to people that follow politics, less so to others. He was a good man, a good conservative, and his death is a loss to all. Of course, it is his young family that will miss him most. It seems he lived a life that they could be proud of.

For a brief glimpse read this.

Ganando (Winning)

One of the reasons why I have supported ambitious (and imperfect) missions in Iraq and Afghanistan is that I believe we can win. It may take time, include some failure, but ultimately we will win.

The decades-long fight of the Colombian government against the Marxist FARC is an endeavor like that. For years the government has failed to make headway of any significance. Now, under the leadership of Uribe they have struck yet another blow against that terrorist organization with the rescue of hostages, including several Americans and the prominent Ingrid Betancourt (read details here).

In today's Wall Street Journal there is some commentary and details into how the operation worked and what role the U.S. played in it. On the latter subject here is an excerpt:

U.S. involvement in the mission underlines the close ties between Washington and Bogotá, the Bush administration's closest regional ally. Colombia is the third-biggest recipient of U.S. military aid behind Israel and Egypt, receiving some $5.4 billion in U.S. aid since 2000. Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and President George. W. Bush speak regularly by telephone, Colombian officials say. Trust between both sides is so strong that Mr. Uribe told Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain, who visited Colombia this week, about the mission on Tuesday night, the night before it took place.

Uribe has been insistent in his aggressive and militaristic action against the FARC. For years this was an unpopular approach with many other governments:

But things changed dramatically March 1, when the Colombian military killed the FARC's No. 2 man, Raul Reyes, in a bombing raid on his camp just across the border in Ecuador. Laptop computers that belonged to Mr. Reyes showed that Mr. Chávez and the FARC were using the negotiation process to try to gain international legitimacy for the rebels and force Mr. Uribe to call off his military offensive.
Emails in the laptops also revealed that the FARC had no intention of releasing either the three Americans or Ms. Betancourt, calling her their most valuable negotiating card. But in one dramatic stroke this week, the rescue mission won support for Mr. Uribe's get-tough approach.
"I have to recognize that the strong hand has prevailed," said human-rights activist Robert Menard, founder and secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders. "Our insistence on the need to negotiate with the FARC, hoping they would release their most valuable card, was foolish."
Governments from Havana to Caracas to Paris moved closer to backing Mr. Uribe's campaign against the FARC. In Cuba, retired dictator Fidel Castro on Thursday praised the Colombian action and said the hostages should never have been held to begin with. Such a "cruel" detention was not justified by any "revolutionary purpose," Mr. Castro said.

To have Castro say such a thing is remarkable. FARC has been left for dead, and dead they should be. I hope other terrorists are taking notes. This is an inspiring success.

I Dare to Bear (Arms)

It's a thing of beauty...

That is a picture of the Smith & Wesson M&P .40 caliber handgun, the newest member of my family. I actually bought it a few months ago, but wanted to save this post for the very important Supreme Court decision in DC v. Heller (complete majority opinion found here). An excerpt from the beginning:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

It may surprise some of you that there could be disagreement on the question, as 73% of Americans already believed in an individual's right to own firearms, but in the 70 years since the last major court opinion on the 2nd Amendment that very question had emerged.

I decided to purchase a gun in part because of my belief in this right. I'm not concerned for my safety, nor do I live in an area where crime is a real problem. I just wanted to exercise my right to own a firearm. So I did, and now the Supreme Court has (according to the majority) simply affirmed a long-standing right. From the SCOTUS Blog:

The individual right interpretation, the Court said, “is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment,” going back to 17th Century England, as well as by gun rights laws in the states before and immediately after the Amendment was put into the U.S. Constitution.
What Congress did in drafting the Amendment, the Court said, was “to codify a pre-existing right, rather than to fashion a new one.”

SCOTUS blog also has an interesting roundup of quotes here. I also happen to believe this.

In most democracies gun rights are not enshrined and are often severely limited, if not eliminated. Author and legal analyst Dave Kopel discusses whether gun control presents a danger to human right in this article. It is an interesting concept to think about.

It will be interesting to see the many questions that come from this ruling. Already the National Rifle Association has sued to overturn Chicago's ban on firearms. As someone said today, the job security of 2nd Amendment lawyers is pretty good right now.

BLOG UPDATE

UPDATE: Lappy's back. Breathe a sigh of relief why don't you.

My laptop is in the shop, so the purpose of the post is to explain that in its absence most of my posts will be shorter. I use my laptop to blog and write SPOTD's at night, but without it I will likely have shorter posts than normal, as I am generally too busy at work. I hope you can survive until then.

NEW POSTS will appear below this one until "Lappy" returns home.