Bring Me Men

w704It’s been a bit more than a week since we celebrated the 4th of July in our usual bombastic style. I find it fitting that we celebrate like a bunch of kids, we are still a very young nation. Still we are in our young adulthood, and most of the time, we probably should act like it.

I spent a good part of the weekend reading about our failures, mostly of vision. I topped it off last night with a television series documenting the men that built America, and yes I mean built. Tom Scott, Morgan, Carnegie, Rockefeller, Edison, Westinghouse, Tesla, and yes, sadly Frick, as well. Men of vision, and will made of cast iron, who never did understand the word ‘No’.

Quite a contrast to the willful children we are watching who want to be our president, let alone the feckless ‘community organizer’ who is. I think there will be more articles about this, not least because I’m hardly alone in what I’m seeing, and some of the others will be featured here. But for today, let us have a poem, by Sam Walter Foss

The Coming American

On the Fourth of July we all love to dilate
With the thought that we are inexpressibly great;
That we’re all legatees of fate’s fairest bequest,
And that destiny’s egg has been laid in our nest;
That we’ve climbed up the sides, up the roof, and sublime
We stand on the top of the ridge-pole of time.
The horizon’s too narrow to limit our stride,
And infinite space is too small for our pride;
Heaven’s vault is too small our hosannas to ring,
And the zenith too low for our gestures to swing;
Our heads are too tall for the low-studded sky,
And we call for “more room!” on the Fourth of July.

‘Tis a day you expect that the orthodox bard
His poetical bunting will flaunt by the yard;
‘Tis a time you expect his tumultuous Muse
To explode at the end of a sky-rocket fuse.
Still I venture to tempt the bold heretic’s curse,
And tremblingly give my unorthodox verse.

For aren’t we too old to be pleased, like the boys,
With glory and gunpowder, thunder and noise?
Too old to sit down in unruffled sedateness,
And muse on our grand and ineffable greatness?
The loud days of our national boyhood are over,
The barefooted freedom of dew and of clover;
And let us throw off, with the boy’s outworn jacket,
The old day of rollic and revel and racket.
Those days are now passed; they will not come again
We are men. Let us grapple the problems of men.

And as men, may we not, on the Fourth of July,
Some specks in our history’s amber descry?
As the politic small boy will creep, on the sly,
To the side of the table that’s nearest the pie,
So we press around — and the crowding is great —
To the luscious pie-side of the table of fate.
But the small boy will learn, as the swift years go by,
There are viands transcendently better than pie.

Let us look at the sum of our work ‘neath the sun.
Have we yet done as much as the old past has done?
We have built our large cities of marble and brick;
But our Shakespeares and Platos are not very thick.
We have urged them to speak with the best of good-will;
But our Miltons are mute and inglorious still.
Our dawn has now passed, and the morning grows late;
But our absentee Angelos linger and wait.
Our hastening noonday encroaches on morn:
But our Darwins and Newtons have yet to be born.

From the dead buried past there are phantoms arise,
With scorn in the cavernous deeps of their eyes;
And they say, “We have searched for him, patient and far,
Through your broad-acred Land of the Evening Star.
We have called for him long; but his voice is still dumb.
Our brother still lingers; our peer does not come.”

But we have had epics of mighty designs
On manuscript ruled with the longitude lines.
On a continent-manuscript, boldly and free,
We have written our epics in railroads; and we
Have worked out our dramas. Each act is an age;
And a land from the sea to the sea is our stage.
We have grappled with nature, and tamed her.
The fen,
The swamp, and the forest, the wolverine’s den,
The home of the bison, the haunt of the bear,
The thronged and the tall-towered cities are there;
And the nest of the serpent, the wild dragon fen,
Resound with the shouts of the children of men.

Now the snake’s hiss is hushed, and the wolf’s howl is dumb,
Has the hour not struck for our poet to come?
Now our cables are laid, and our railroads are wrought,
Build us temples and fanes for the high-priests of thought.
Now our prairies by million-trod pavements are lined,
Build us highways that stretch to the frontiers of mind.

Now our cities are sown by sea, river, and glen,
Let us look for a harvest of epochal men;
Let us look for a Voice from the wilderness sent
To teach us a wise and divine discontent,—
Discontent at mere bulk, tossed by waves and by breeze,
With no pilot soul on the rudderless seas.
Let us look for great bards whose tones, fervent and strong,
Shall burst like the morn through our twilight of song;
Wise prophets, whose sky-lifted eyes are alight
With a gleam that is caught from the future’s far height,
Who see through the fogs o’er the valley outspread
The sunburst of hope on the mountains ahead.
Is it not time to grow, in town, village, and glen,
A strong breed of men who are saviours of men?
Strong pioneer souls who shall blaze out the way
From the frontiers of night to the borders of day?
Shall not this maternal pure soil of the West
Foster sages and seers on its matronly breast?
Shall we not find once more, in these late years again,
The pride of old Homer, wise shepherds of men?
Let us beckon these men, with our favor and praise,
And giants shall grow in the earth in these days.

We are large, and our largeness there’s none to deny;
But Fate calls, and who answers with brave “Here am I”?
Little Athens was small, but her soul still survives
With gifts of its graces in millions of lives;
But Scythia was large, and the long ages tread
On the answerless dust of her myriad dead.
Little Concord — great sons made this small village great;
Great Chicago — ah, well! We will listen and wait.

There is music, I know, that is hopeful and blithe
In the swing of the sickle, the sweep of the scythe;
In the lisp of the foreplane, the smith’s anvil-peal,
In the roar of the mill, and the clash of its wheel;
There’s a music that’s timed to the rhythmical beat
Of the quick-step of Fate in the thunderous street;
There’s a music that’s played by the breeze and the gale
In the creak of the mast and the flap of the sail;
And there’s something that smacks of an epical strain
In the clank of the engine, the sweep of the train.
This music, though mixed with the toilers’ tired moan,
And mingled with heart-break too deep for a groan,
Is wrought out at length in an anthem sublime
That fills without discord the wise ear of Time.

But this is but prelude Fate’s orchestra plays,
To the strains that shall come in the fulness of days;
For the age-lengthened rhythm beat out by the Fates
In the building of cities, the founding of states,
In the earthquakes of war, in its thunder and groans,
In the battles of kings, and the crumbling of thrones,
Is but prelude that’s written by Destiny’s pen
To herald an epoch of masterful men.

In that day we shall worship, by wisdom made whole,
Not greatness of bulk, but perfection of soul;
And the thought-millionaires with our full acclaim then
Will be wreathed and anointed the leaders of men.
And methinks our Great Fate, from the hills to the sea,
Has sent forth this call to the years yet to be: —

Bring me men to match my mountains;
Bring me men to match my plains, —
Men with empires in their purpose,
And new eras in their brains.
Bring me men to match my prairies,
Men to match my inland seas,
Men whose thought shall pave a highway
Up to ampler destinies;
Pioneers to clear Thought’s marshlands,
And to cleanse old Error’s fen;
Bring me men to match my mountains —
Bring me men!

Bring me men to match my forests,
Strong to fight the storm and blast,
Branching toward the skyey future,
Rooted in the fertile past.
Bring me men to match my valleys,
Tolerant of sun and snow,
Men within whose fruitful purpose
Time’s consummate blooms shall grow.
Men to tame the tigerish instincts
Of the lair and cave and den,
Cleanse the dragon slime of Nature —
Bring me men!

Bring me men to match my rivers,
Continent cleavers, flowing free,
Drawn by the eternal madness
To be mingled with the sea;
Men of oceanic impulse,
Men whose moral currents sweep
Toward the wide-infolding ocean
Of an undiscovered deep;
Men who feel the strong pulsation
Of the Central Sea, and then
Time their currents to its earth throb —
Bring me men!

About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

33 Responses to Bring Me Men

  1. Ike Jakson says:

    Yes Nebraska

    We don’t have lots of them here; only just a few left; hope you have more of them over your side.


    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      Some, not sure about enough though, Ike.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Surely manhood has changed in the West, and we must recover not just our history, but our guts and glory! No guts, no glory, simple as that! And where are our spiritual leaders?


    • the unit says:

      We got Pajama Boy and Caitlyn. /s

      Liked by 1 person

      • NEO says:

        Yeah, ain’t we lucky? 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

  3. John Doe says:

    That is sort of ironic, if not overtly hypocritical, isn’t it? You show the iconic chapel at the AFA, and it is much more beautiful from the inside, believe me, but it was your generation that actively avoided combat, avoided the draft, avoided the war, and avoided responsibility. I’m about to head to another deployment, and while I appreciate the “Operation Gratitude care packages, it would be nice if the burden were shared a little. In posting the “Bring Me Men” poem, with associated picture, aren’t you also directly criticizing yourself?


    • the unit says:

      Er…a MBA being deployed? Where? Greece? Taking other people’s money to distribute?


      • John Doe says:

        It’s not hard to understand. While you hear platitudes like “The military teaches leadership” the reality is, it is difficult to translate military specific skills to the civilian world, particularly when so few people actually serve in the uniformed services in any significant capacity. This is one reason NEO’s comments were so strange, he talks a lot about what he and significant portions of his generation did not and could not do, which is serve, but now extols the virtues of that service. It is a very “Do as I say, not as I do” sort of attitude.

        This is one reason I cannot stand Bill Whittle. He goes around telling people he did not go to the USAFA because he could not fly because of his eyesight, but anyone who knows anything about commissioning programs knows this is a lie, your determination of flight status comes with a commissioning physical, at the end of studies, not the beginning. He might not have passed after four years of study (I knew some people who did) and his eyesight might have gotten worse (know people who had this happen as well), but he still could have served, but he couldn’t be bothered, so it is better to lie and pretend that he really wanted to serve, but just couldn’t make it. Best of both worlds there. Talk the talk, but never need walk the walk, so much easier that way.

        But on to education…For many, the way to bridge that chasm (military to business) is an MBA. Aside for the education, it is another networking mechanism. Added to this, the DoD is highly interested in business savvy given the era of cost cutting and streamlined operations. And, to their credit, many business schools are actively seeking military members, and I am not just referring to crap programs like the U of Phoenix (though some have fallen into that unfortunate trap). but top schools like Harvard, Wharton, and Stanford.

        Plus I am not mentioning the Reservists, and other people who potentially come back into service after a break in time.

        I do not see why you are confused, but I assume you;re just trying to be funny?


        • the unit says:

          I do try to be funny quite a lot. Thanks for the link. So often we really don’t know each other’s contribution. So you assuming NEO didn’t serve…go back and ask Rosie the Riveter about what it takes to serve and win. And thank you for your service. At ease.


        • John Doe says:

          Rosie the Riveter? So the OP says “Bring Me Men” but when Men can’t be Men, it’s a good excuse that at least they could be women?


    • Btw, it is a myth that the “whole” 60’s generation of Americans ran away from their military duty! I am of course a Brit now living in America, and was “attached”(RMC) to the American Marine Recon, in two wars… Nam and later Gulf War 1.

      So “John Doe”, who are you? And what is YOUR military MOS?


      • John Doe says:

        It is a myth that I said “the “whole” 60’s generation of Americans ran away from their military duty”. I said, and I actually quote (since I never used the word “whole”)…

        “it was your generation that actively avoided combat, avoided the draft, avoided the war, and avoided responsibility”


        “[Neo] talks a lot about what he and significant portions of his generation did not and could not do, which is serve, but now extols the virtues of that service”

        A few weeks ago 538 carried an interesting article that showed that in the general population of the US, around of 7% had some form of historical service, with around .4% serving currently. It gets even more problematic when you consider that most recruitment comes from within the communities and families of those with active service, creating a sort of mini-society that self-perpetuates service. This sort of self-exclusion can be a bad thing.

        Also, your question makes no sense. An actual MOS only exists in the Army and Marines, in the Navy and Air Force there are different terms for career specific designations.

        Do you actually have a D.Phil, and Th.D.?

        As for my career field? I’m comfortable enough in myself and know enough to not discuss it publicly.


        • @”John Doe”: Your “dancing” around the question of YOUR military service, and military occupational specialty? And just who YOU are in general… do I smell an old rat, who has been here before under guise?

          Liked by 1 person

        • John Doe says:

          It’s interesting how you characterize things. “Dancing”? The first thing you seem to tell anyone online is all about how you were a Marine, I’m guessing you would tell the young man at the 7-11, but in reality this is… Wrong? That’s not really the right word. Outdated, maybe?

          There is plenty of guidance online about operational issues and what not to put out online, and information about your job is actually fairly high on that list. Do you need me to post it? Particularly if you have a job that pertains to sensitive subjects, and this is hardly cloak and dagger, just natural security. You do not seem to know this, which is really kind of odd. It would not be out of place maybe 10 years ago, but today most have come up through a system that understands what is and is not acceptable to put online, but you do not seem to know it. Perhaps the world has passed you by, or perhaps you never learned it in the first place?

          But you like to talk a LOT about it. About how, where, what, when, why, and how you served. I only point out the doctorates you have because they mysteriously disappeared from your historical postings a while back, at one time it was the signature to everything you posted on the internet, though I did not pay attention to see when you stopped using them, specifically. For someone who likes attention, it is odd.

          I am not going to post my specialization because I do not talk about those things, in direct response to the SECDEF’s policy on OPSEC (which I thought an old Mustang like you would understand), and this is dancing…? But you claim not one, but two doctorates, then suddenly dropped them from use, and this is somehow normal…?


        • Again, “John Doe” the issue is NOT about me, but about you, and I thought you were “deploying”? It is you sir that seems to be amiss, no life experience.. at least that I can see and hear? Again, it seems I might smell a rat, and it sure ain’t me!


        • John Doe says:

          Well, this is interesting. You smell a rat, supposedly, me. You claim considerable experience, you tell everyone you meet your military history.


          You keep insisting I should violate military OPSEC guidelines?

          You want me to post my job…? An OPSEC page about Facebook, for spouses, specifically says…

          “Don’t list your specific job on Facebook. Do you really want the enemy to know specifically what you do? That information could potentially be used against you.”

          I have said I am deploying, but not, when, where, or why… I can post where this is actually prohibited as well, but if I post two links the system gets messy.

          How is it that the career Mustang who tells everyone about how he served and loves to bring it up (a little discretion on the internet might be a good thing), is advocating violating OPSEC, but the alleged “rat” is maintaining OPSEC (and seems to be the only of the two to know what it actually is) but is suspected of faking…?

          Why does the “Rat” know what he is talking about, and the “Mustang” seems to be completely unaware? Perhaps it is because I have life experience that I do not need to plaster it everywhere?

          Having actually served, knowing that I did and what I did/do is enough…


        • Well “Mr. Doe”, we need to move on, NEO has had a “rat” on here a few times, so if you are real, good for you. I myself at 65, 66 in Oct., and a Brit btw, living now in America, don’t like to hear people attack the Baby Boomers! So we will leave it there. But surely “pride” is quite a military aspect, and one that this old RMC and “Bootneck” surely has, with the history of my own military family aspects and history.


        • John Doe says:

          If you are an old “Bootneck” like you claim, how is it you demanded I violate the most basic operational security standards? It is not like “Loose Lips Sink Ships” only existed in the Internet era. You tell everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, on the internet your military history, but display no functional knowledge of the most basic standards. You would have to be an imbecile to demand anyone post their current active duty job and deployment information, and yet…?

          I see why you want to “move on” but I think you should explain.

          You also claim a few doctorates that I suspect are fraudulent as well. If you want to ask some hard questions, you should not be upset at facing some yourself. Is anything in your background real? The education, the military, any of it?


        • Maybe I was right? YOU just might be that old rat that I smell! You have really showed NO true military aspect of your own? And you attack like so many using the old ad hom! This is NEO’s blog, respect it!

          Liked by 1 person

        • Thanks Ike, I do appreciate the support! Funny, ad hominem is always the attack against the man, when one cannot debate or dialogue with the given subject, it is always prejudicial also! Sadly, it is too prevalent today in our overt pc society!

          Liked by 1 person

        • John Doe says:

          This is fairly simple. You tell everyone how you were a Marine, how you were in the Gulf War. If you bought lemonade from a few kids selling it for 50 cents a cup on a hot Saturday afternoon, they would likely hear all about how you were a “Mustang”.

          So how does someone with this much experience make a mistake that not even the greenest recruit would make. Why are you asking questions that you SHOULD know you should not ask?

          Either you’re intentionally asking questions you know you should not…


          You don’t know that you’re not supposed to talk about this sort of thing.

          The first scenario is somewhat implausible, I would never ask someone about their security clearance, outside of specific situations like job interviews (which would likely not be online) so that makes no sense. The second would mean you’re really don’t have any military experience.

          I did not put the words in your mouth, you voluntarily asked, so it is not like you can or should blame anyone else.

          The only logical conclusion is that you honestly did not know it was not something anyone should be posting on a random internet message board, which would indicate that you really have no idea what the normal rules of military operational security are. If this is the case, it raises a lot of questions. Added other dubious statements you have made all over the internet, you are prolific with your commentary if nothing else, it raises more questions. You can scream and holler about it, but there is no real answer for the problem.

          This is not ad hominem (you should look up the definition before using the term). What you have said raises serious questions.

          Just as a case in point, you said…

          “ad hominem is always the attack against the man, when one cannot debate or dialogue with the given subject”

          You asked questions that would have me post information that completely violates military standards of security, but claim significant military experience that would normally preclude asking such questions. How does this happen? This is not an ad hominem, it is the natural question arising from a completely contradictory position, such as asking a question you SHOULD know not to ask.

          Please explain.


        • “Mr. Doe”, I never asked you to reveal a bit of your military security aspects, just what might be your branch of service, mos, i.e. generally. For example my youngest son is a medic in the British Royal Army, and serves in the infantry. This is hardly secret information, and of course I am proud of him! Again, you just “don’t” seem real mate? The “onnis” (reality) does appear to be on you!


        • And just again another personal note, but both of my son’s were born in my 40’s (at 40 and 46). Yes this family does have a bit of pride, in ourselves and each other!


        • John Doe says:

          It’s odd how little you know.

          Let’s say I was an Air Force 17D? Cybersecuity specialist. Would a 17D who is deploying, really want to advertise that? Would they even want to even begin talking about it? Just admitting the specialization would reveal more information than you could possibly imagine about security clearance and even mission operations (why would a cybersecuity specialist need to deploy when they can do a lot from their own couches)? I say all of this because I am not a 17D.

          In other words, there is a whole world that you know nothing about that you are rather ignorantly asking about when, once again, you SHOULD know if you had an ounce of actual military experience. Again the most green novice knows to keep mum, but again….

          you do not?

          Why not?


        • Your right about one thing, I am just an old retired RMC Bootneck! If your for real, then stow all of this wanting to win some kind of argument, and just move off smartly! My last words on all of this!


        • Btw, I love “Jaksonian Philosophy”! Thanks again Ike… rock on! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • Ike Jakson says:

          Thanks irishanglican. It’s very gracious of you. I shall look you up. Go well.


        • John Doe says:

          “Your right about one thing, I am just an old retired RMC Bootneck!”

          Except this is not what you claim. You also claim to have two doctorates…

          You can’t say “I’m just a dumb ol’ grunt” when you completely flub simple military practice, while claiming two doctorates at the same time. It does not work that way.

          I would also expect a double doctorate to know the difference between “your” and “you’re”.


        • Well Mr. so-called “John Doe”, if I was not sure who you were, I think we all can know now… that you are that wee lad from New England, or called New England something? You are just a young millennial troll, tying to find his manhood! Keep after manhood, its not easy, but surely look-up the word ad hominem in the dictionary, it’s what YOU have been doing! (And yes, I am an old but hardly dumb RMC). Btw, as I have shared here before, I am somewhat dyselexic! Funny too, but I was an English Lit guy in so-called High School, that was way back when, 1 I loved, and still do the etymology of words! And yes, I have a few personal Dictionaries, even a huge Second Edition American Webster’s Unabridged!)

          Btw, thanks to share my blog piece with the people here! I am NOW done with you, I will not address you again!

          Liked by 1 person

        • Thanks again Ike! Btw, “Bring Me Men”.. is right in the wheelhouse here, eh! Even us older men are always working on ourselves!

          Liked by 1 person

        • John Doe says:

          I doubt you noticed, but the link I provided where it explicitly said not to paint details of your military life hither and yon, was not intended for service members. It was for housewives. Even military housewives know what you do and ask of others is really dumb….

          but you don’t.

          The OP here, bring me men, is rather apt.

          Men don’t pander so pathetically for accolades by telling everyone they meet that they used to be a Marine. I remember General Krulak once saying, spoke to my commissioning group, that Marines did not need to tell everyone how special they were.

          Men don’t need to claim fake degrees, they study what they study.

          You don’t know how to use homonyms, what the definition of an ad hominem is, and claim two doctorates. No educated individual would ever believe your story, but you need the lie to… I don’t really know. Feel better about something? Most people do not have one doctorate, let alone two, so why you are faking either in light of pretty damning evidence is beyond me.

          Why you know less about military OPSEC than a military housewife, I do not know. Perhaps you need the attention? It does not make sense.

          At the end of the day, I think the OP is apt. You’re not paying the bill. You don’t need to have a Websters Dictionary to know what a homonym is or how to use them.

          As for ad hominem, here is what you said…

          “that you are that wee lad from New England, or called New England something? You are just a young millennial troll, tying to find his manhood! Keep after manhood, its not easy, but surely look-up the word ad hominem in the dictionary, it’s what YOU have been doing!”

          Here is what wikipedia has…”short for argumentum ad hominem, means responding to arguments by attacking a person’s character, rather than to the content of their arguments.”

          Now, here is my argument

          Robert claimed significant military experience.

          Robert advocated violating OPSEC by asking someone to post military details of their career, some of which could carry significant information about security clearances and mission orientation (see example above concerning the Air Force 17D). This is prohibited by common knowledge and even military housewives know this.

          Robert has never addressed this or explained how he knows so little of military practice.

          Robert claims two Doctorates. He misuses simple words in his native language, makes significant errors in defining logical fallacies, and cannot address arguments. It would be unusual for someone with one doctorate to make these mistakes, let alone someone with two. This is why doctorates are so valued, it carries with it a stamp of significant intellectual capacity (when earned, perhaps a diploma mill is at work here?)

          His response to all of this is …

          You’re a millennial.

          You’re a Troll.

          You’re from New England.

          Back to the definition of ad hominem…”responding to arguments by attacking a person’s character, rather than to the content of their arguments”

          Did Robert explain his proposed violation of, and lack of familiarity with, OPSEC standards? No, he completely ignored it.

          Did Robert explain his unfamiliarity with logical fallacies or English?
          No, he ignored it.

          What did he do? Accuse me of being a millennial, a Patriots fan, and a troll.

          I’m actually a Gen-Xer according to the most common year delineations. The last time I was in New England was when I lived there briefly in 2006 for a few months. Before that I was there last in 2003. Have not even so much as passed through the area on an airline flight since. Troll? Well, when you have no other rebuttal, why not use that one.

          So it is easy to see that Robert is actually using the same logical fallacy he was accusing others of using, more cracks in that double doctorate degree.

          So, yes, I think there is a deficit of Men around, particularly here.


      • John Doe says:

        I forgot to add the link to the 538 article…


  4. Pingback: My Article Read (7-14-2015) | My Daily Musing

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s