I've been delinquent on many things of late but among them is giving you accolades for this important piece of work. It is a seriously professional piece and, as with any work of this magnitude and topic, not without controversy.
But that is what I particularly like about it. In every critical reply I read at Information Dissemination, all of which were VERY well-written and well-thought themselves, no where do the critics debate the need for US Navy primacy...or even, as far as I've read to date, that a slanting of the budget toward the Navy might not be in order. That the critics didn't take the easy tact of saying "we need a bigger Army (or Air Force)" or "we need to maintain budgetary parity" or any of the other usual arguments is a testimony to the strength of the way you presented your argument.
As it gains more traction, and it will, I am certain those arguments will arise, but that it was not the first reaction among critically-thinking people earns you an A. (I reserve the A+ for prettier students.)
The Blog: A compendium of thoughts on politics, world affairs, economics, pop culture and social issues, from the center right perspective of me--Bryan McGrath--a University of Virginia graduate who spent a career in the world's greatest Navy keeping my mouth shut about politics and social issues (ok, publicly keeping it shut). Those days are over! Pull up a chair and chime in where you will. Keep it clean, civil, concise and relevant.
The Fish: The fish is a "coat of arms" for the blog, symbolizing three formative influences in the life of the blog founder. The first is his experience at the University of Virginia--symbolized most importantly by the fish itself, or a caricature of a "Wahoo", the fish we have acquired as an informal nickname. Additionally there is the sword, the sword of a Cavalier. It is not wielded in a threatening manner, as this is a civil blog. But it is there, should it be needed. Thirdly, there is the influence of 21 years in the Navy--symbolized by the anchor on the Wahoo's fin (and again, the sword) . Finally, there is the bowler, tuxedo, and monocle, symbols of a refined, intellectual conservatism, or what I seek to encourage here.
The Policy: I take FULL responsibility for what I write. I will not be held responsible for the content of my comments section--as long as it is civil and passes my own inscrutable sniff tests, it will appear. If the comment offends you, that is on you.
Feedjit
Follow Me:
On Twitter at ConsWahoo On Facebook at "Fans of The Conservative Wahoo"
2 comments:
Not to be a fanboy, but I think you hit the long ball here. I'll send it to our Lunch Buddy and see what he says.
I've been delinquent on many things of late but among them is giving you accolades for this important piece of work. It is a seriously professional piece and, as with any work of this magnitude and topic, not without controversy.
But that is what I particularly like about it. In every critical reply I read at Information Dissemination, all of which were VERY well-written and well-thought themselves, no where do the critics debate the need for US Navy primacy...or even, as far as I've read to date, that a slanting of the budget toward the Navy might not be in order. That the critics didn't take the easy tact of saying "we need a bigger Army (or Air Force)" or "we need to maintain budgetary parity" or any of the other usual arguments is a testimony to the strength of the way you presented your argument.
As it gains more traction, and it will, I am certain those arguments will arise, but that it was not the first reaction among critically-thinking people earns you an A. (I reserve the A+ for prettier students.)
Seriously, well done.
Post a Comment