Hey! I'm "This Guy"!.

I was on Hugh Hewitt's radio show late this afternoon, and dropped Hugh an email:

I was one of your last callers on Thursday (6/29). In the beginning of the Mark Steyn interview you said:

"I've always thought we were going to win this war, and I've always thought we'd summon the political will to do it. But today's Supreme Court decision, coupled with the House of Representatives' refusal to name names in their resolution condemning the action of the New York Times, and the similar reasoning coming out of the United States Senate leaves me wondering."

Then you asked Mark, "What's it going to take?"

As I said, I've been struggling with that question myself. I've been a blogger for a little over three years, and while my particular concentration has been on individual rights, I sometimes (often) stray into other areas of politics. Last weekend, as I said, I posted a piece specifically on this question, "A Terrible Resolve." In short, unless the Jihadis strike a major blow against us, here, in the continental United States, we aren't going to get serious and we're going to give up.

As I say in the piece:

"And here we are again. This time we're engaged in combat with enemies that wear no uniform, that blend with the civilian population, that use that population as a shield as well as a target, and who embrace their own deaths. Our soldiers, once again, are in the unenviable position of having to determine which woman, child, or old man is harmless, friendly, or a killer. Sometimes we make mistakes. And, as before, sometimes they might not be mistakes.

"But still, we're restrained. No carpet-bombing. No nukes. In fact, we've gone so far as to drop precision-guided bombs filled with concrete in order to minimize the risk of killing innocents or destroying important infrastructure. However, we're willing to unapologetically kill women and children when the target requires it.

"The question is, 'How much longer will this restraint last?'

"The Wilsonians want us out for diplomatic reasons. The Hamiltonians don't want to keep paying the financial bill. The Jeffersonians don't want to keep paying the bill in blood.

"The Jacksonians want us to take the gloves off."

Please do read the whole thing. It will probably depress you further, but it will remind you that there are a lot of people out here in the shaft of the spear backing up the people on the point.

The "shaft of the spear" bit had to do with the caller right before me, "Major Mike," who commented that the NYT story and today's SCOTUS decision were going to send a message to the soldiers on the point of the spear that there was nothing backing them up.

Well, Hugh must've read the piece and liked it, because he linked:

Bonus Question: Who's better read and more trustworthy on basic matters of logic? NYTer Eric Lichtblau, or this guy?