This attack is a Steinitz. Old as history with Steinitz. I like classical moves and this is classical.

I think he SHOULD have gone d5. Now it looks a bit like the Morden or Pirc

I don't think this is like the Modern or Pirc, because there Black plays ...g6 instead of ...e6, and usually ...Nf6 can be played.

Now 2...d6 is different from 2...d5 as Black has the option to trade on e5.

When a pawn crosses over the field from the back four squares (ranks) it is a passed pawn.

No it's not.

nope it is passed when no pawn can stop it from queening...

It's not a passed pawn, just a far advanced pawn. @zwarwiz: yes, that's the definition I know.

It seems to me that White is two tempi down compared to the Rubinstein variation of the French, at least if he plays 6.d4 the position is the same as 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 but with the knight on b1 instead of e4.

Preparing ...e5.

Why not 9.Nc3? I assume because that blocks in the c-pawn?

My movement to d2 is to get to the right side of the board instead of putting a knight on the left side to sit and wait for something to happen like black's bishop to b4. After that where else can the knight go but to retreat of be traded at the cost of pawn stacking?

The "right side" approach allows this knight to be more effective while the French Defense grinds away time and position.

I think this is an inaccuracy. Black shouldn't have allowed that knight for bishop trade in my opinion..

I'd have to check an analysis to endorse your observation. However, my development is increasing my position and possibilities. I like feeling free to move like I can in the Caro-Kann defense, which is the better defense as far as I am concerned. I really don't care who endorses the French Defense because to me it is stiff and without options (freedom) to get the blood to boil. It is too slow and stalwart.