Again, Russia Lurches Towards Authoritarianism

The Russian Duma has recently passed a law that will "widen the definition of extremist crime to include offences committed for political motives." Obviously this is a disturbing development, and one aimed (without much in the way of obfuscation) at silencing Putin's opponents. But what does the West say? Not much of anything. One wonders how much longer the EU, the US, and others will go on coddling Putin.

On demographic grounds, Russia is a dying nation, so perhaps this is only a short-term problem (short-term being a century, so this is all rather tongue in cheek). But that same argument suggests to me that Russia has only a limited claim to keeping its permanent seat and veto on the UN Security Council. Or perhaps this is another argument about why we should disband the UN?
(h/t PaperChase)

Another Summer of Violence in Lebanon?

MEMRI suggests there's reason to worry that Hizbullah, Syria, and Iran (all essentially the same entity) are going to raise some more hell in Lebanon this summer. Obviously they haven't simply come out and said as much, but there are fragmentary reports that when put together paint a rather sinister picture. If I were a government minister in Tel Aviv, I might find this a rather perverse opportunity for action; this is especially true if one acknowledges a closing window of opportunity before Iran develops nuclear weapons. IDF forces could topple the Little Ass(ad) regime in Damascus without too much trouble, and any overt Iranian reaction may be limited by the presence of US warships off the coast. Of course if it so much as lifts a finger, Israel will be castigated in the media and the UN.

Librarians as Social Activists

Or so says the New York Times. Personally, I'd be happy if librarians were more at home with the Loeb classics collection than with the latest e-cause. Of course there's also a bias issue with leftist librarians - they filter (subconsciously or not - and I'm leaning towards not) the sort of information they expose their patrons to. That danger is borne out if one browses through the institutional reports over at Campus Watch, where it becomes evident that politicized librarians produced politicized resources - like the resource website created by a Duke librarian that referred to Hamas and Fatah as political organizations. Keep an eye on your local bookworm, though if their head is buried in Chomsky, I'm not entirely sure who you should complain to.

(h/t The Corner)

Another Anti-Fred Offensive

We're six months out from Iowa, sixteen from the general. Yet that hasn't stopped the New York Times from already going after families and spouses - this time Fred Thompson's second wife Jeri, whom they have the "class" to call a trophy wife. They go on:

The question may seem sexist, even crass, but serious people — as well as Mr. Thompson’s supporters — have been wrestling with the public reaction to Jeri Kehn Thompson, whose youthfulness, permanent tan and bleached blond hair present a contrast to the 64-year-old man who hopes to win the hearts of the conservative core of the Republican party. Will the so-called values voters accept this union?

Thanks to CQ for picking up this story, and Captain Ed is right to note "the concern that Susan Saulny and the Paper of Record show for "values voters", a group that normally received little but scorn and ridicule from Pinch's crew." Yup. Of course to many in America, an attack from the Times is akin to an endorsement. And if you're going to attack one candidate's spouse, wouldn't you pick the one who isn't a high-powered media consultant?

It's a Mad, Mad World

I didn't bother to blog much on the revelations of the McCain campaign's crash diet or its paltry fundraising success. But this I do find noteworthy: "Republican" [nutjob libertarian] Ron Paul has more cash on hand ($2.4 million) than John McCain does ($2 million).

$2.4M vs. $2M is pretty paltry when the next guy, Romney, is sitting on $12 million. But having more to use than McCain does give Paul a certain credibility, and means that we may have to endure his bizarre opinions for a few more debates. However, it remains to be seen if there is anything behind this - whether his poll numbers jump, whether he's building viable organizations on the ground in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina. I'm curious about how much of his fundraising totals came from non-Republicans (in terms of registration), but that's something FEC disclosures won't cover.

Paul also talks about how he feels like he's on the "upslope" compared to some other candidates who are already lagging - McCain - but as I said I don't think there's currently any metrics to determine the veracity of that statement. I do, however, think that all of McCain's recent troubles give more credence to the rumors that he'll quit the race by summer (unless of course Fred pulls out and endorses McCain, though is it possible the opposite could also happen?).

ACLU Wiretapping Case Thrown Out

The ACLU, defender of civil liberties (so long as you're not conservative, white, male, or Christian), sued the NSA over the supposed illegality of the NSA's executive-ordered wiretapping. The case was thrown out by a federal court in Cincinnati on the grounds that the plaintiffs couldn't actually prove that they were being wiretapped and thus had no standing. It seems a bit of a hazy ruling on some level - how do environmental groups who aren't actually developing cancer thanks to industrial waste get standing to sue? But the judge's ruling in the matter concisely lays out why they couldn't hear the case and overlook the plaintiffs' lack of standing:

The plaintiffs allege that the President, as an actor in our tripartite system of government, exceeds his constitutional authority by authorizing the NSA to engage in warrantless wiretaps of overseas communications under the TSP. But this court, not unlike the President, has constitutional limits of its own and, despite the important national interests at stake, cannot exceed its allotted authority. . . . It would ill behoove us to exceed our authority in order to condemn the President or Congress for exceeding theirs.

(emphasis my own, h/t Bench Memos)

Albania's Long-Lost Roman City

BBC's Malcolm Billings finds his way to Butrint, an almost-forgotten Roman city buried in the forests of the Albanian coast. It's a brief but interesting read about some of the challenges of post-communist historical preservation and archeology. To name one considerable hurdle, native archaeologists are practically non-existent so that in addition to work on the site, they must be trained. The entire preservation effort is the product of the passion of two British lords and an American entrepreneur, something of an odd alliance but engaged in some very important work. The ruins sound spectacular and clearly illustrate the sweep of the region's history - Roman ruins, a Venetian fort, an Ottoman bastion, strong points from Enver Hoxha's Communist regime.

It's unlikely that I'll find myself traipsing through Albania anytime soon, but suffice to say if I do Butrint will be on my list of destinations.

Most Americans Don't Understand Government?

Or that's what a poll regarding impeachment tells me. On the question of impeaching Bush, the public is split, 45% for and 46% against; Cheney's significantly less popular, with 54% in favor and only 40% of those surveyed opposed.

Now part of me asks what in God's name do most Americans know about impeachment and impeachable offenses? I find it unlikely that those surveyed were sufficiently well-informed to make any sort of honest judgment on the matter. That, of course, may just be the reactionary in me speaking.

It's unlikely that the Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill will actually pursue such an extreme course of action, but if they do there are two schools of thought on the consequences. On the one hand, Democratic analysts suggest that forcing Republicans to vote against impeaching a highly unpopular politician (most likely Cheney) would hurt them at home in an election year (or alternately force them to support the measure). For Republicans, however, a well-played media strategy could result in the spotlight being focused on some of the loonier Democratic members, potentially producing party-wide blowback.

But let's admit that there's an easier way around all of this. Cheney should resign (Bush can appoint him Master of the Universe or whatever title he chooses); Lieberman should be nominated to fill his seat. Democrats could really be hung out to dry if they refused to confirm him, and no doubt 51 votes could be found. That, of course, would leave a Senate vacancy - in a blue state with a Republican governor. That'd produce a fifty-fifty split, but I'm not sure which way Lieberman would vote. Anyways, it'd be an introducing move.

RINOS and RATs

I think most of us are familiar with the derogatory acronym RINO - Republican in Name Only. I'll now add another one, for which I can sadly take no credit: RATS - Republican(s) Agreeing to Surrender. Lugar, Voinovich, Hagel, and now Domenici can all be classified as this rare species of vermin.

I've never been particularly fond of the term RINO just because "in name only" is really a matter of perspective and opinion - because I'm not unflinchingly pro-life or anti-immigrant, some might call me a RINO. RATS, however, seems far less subjective. (But perhaps change agreeing to amenable?)

Two Relevant Speeches Worth Reading

Calvin Coolidge's "Speech on the Occasion of the One Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence"

Ronald Reagan's "Independence Day - 1981" speech

The second is less well-known than it should be, the first almost forgotten. So let's change that - read both.

Brown Americanizes Britain

New PM Gordon Brown has floated a series of "reforms" designed to introduce "accountability" into British government; these would include

giving members of parliament the final say on declaring war and the ratification of international treaties, allowing US-style confirmation hearings for certain public officials, consulting with the public and other political parties on a possible "British Bill of Rights and Duties" or a written constitution, moving election days to weekends and creating a national security council. Some of the reforms address complaints made over Britain's commitment of troops to the Iraq war; others continue the governing Labour Party's turn toward US-style political and administrative institutions. All appear to be in response to criticisms over Labor's apparent centralization of power.

Yikes. They're facing the prospect of a low-level (or worse) civil war and Brown's suggesting they essentially hamstring their ability to wage such a conflict effectively. Our founders gave the ability to declare war to both chambers, understanding that a more deliberative body than the mob-like mass of the lower house. Of course Britain long-ago unjustly castrated their House of Lords, many of whom must be spinning in their graves at these recommendations.

J.A.R. means "Republican" - but could also be "republican" or "reactionary." Brown wants to take Britain down a dangerous road; a complacent government and seething masses in the street isn't a good time to be introducing these sorts of reforms.

Liveblogging the Continental Congress

A great piece of historical writing by Rick Moran over at the Right Wing Nuthouse - check it out here (July 3rd); July 4th is here - read both of them!

Today is Indepdence Day

Because on the fourth of July, 1776, fifty-six boldly affixed their signatures to a Declaration of Independence, knowing that their future had only two possibilities: Liberty or death.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Musical Evidence of South Park Conservatives?

A punk-rap band by the name of Stuck Mojo made waves recently with a music video for their single "Open Season." Basically it's an attack on militant Islam and terrorists invocation of the cloak of Islam as a religion of peace. Check it out.


(h/t LGF)

Iraq? Surge? What Surge?

White House Press Corps has gone loony for Libby, as John Hinderaker notes. Check it out here.

Democratic Base Solid

Barone analyzes party ID numbers from Scott Rasmussen's polls; seems that despite an impotent Democratic Congress, the party's base remains solid; however the gap between them and the GOP is at its narrowest in the past year - a Republican revival? Too soon to be sure.

"Art" in the Loosest Sense of the Word

New Criterion's James Panero has filed two (really three) dispatches from Venice's Biennale, documenting the state of avant-garde art - specifically its anti-American and antisemitic components.
Part one (from the WSJ) is here.
Part two (from NC's blog) here.
Part three here (chronologically the first though most comprehensible in the context of one and two).

Pigs Fly

And I recommend an article from the New York Times: US Says Iran Helped Iraqis Kill Five G.I.s

Pots and Kettles

Hillary criticizes W's pardon of Scooter Libby...because Billy Bob never pardoned anybody. And by anybody I mean 140. Check out what Captain Ed has to say about it here.

Prince Harry's Shoutout to his Men

From the concert for his mother at Wembley the other night, Prince Harry acknowledged his band of brothers currently serving in Iraq, lamenting the fact that he wasn't there. Worth watching. Note too the enthusiastic reaction from the crowd.

Were we fighting a human, civilized foe, no doubt Harry would be over there. The prospect of his being taken prisoner, however, is too much. Remember, when royalty were captured on the battlefield in earlier ages, they were treated as royalty.

Iran in Iraq pt. 2

Just for amusement (and to stick another thumb in Greenwald's blindered eyes): the BBC, imperialist, reactionary war-mongering news outlet that it is, also presents the story of Iranian involvement in Iraq as pretty plausible.

Britain's Vanishing Military

Some MPs are voicing concerns over declining enlistment rates in all branches of the British military; among the cited reasons are "heavy workloads, frequent overseas deployments and impact on family life." No doubt.

Truly gone are the glory days of British arms. Presently, troops can look forward to tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, or elsewhere lasting months and with many comforts while off-duty. At the height of empire, enlistment was something like ten (fifteen?) years, and deployments on far-off posts in unhealthy climes (India, West Africa, etc.) were measured in years. During the Napoleonic Wars, sailors of the Royal Navy could go years without setting foot on dry land (and could go almost as long without their food being refreshed).

I've begun to think that war debts and a whiny Left (including the transmission of various nationalist doctrines into colonies) were only two of the most obvious causes of the decline of empires post-1945. Other under-studied causes could very well include the development of communication technology and rise of the welfare state. The second of these meant that men had a choice between starvation and service (which often wasn't a whole lot better). The former meant that overseas policy was conducted more cautiously by government bureaucrats rather than those on the front line. If he'd been blessed (cursed?) with satellite communications, no doubt Clive never would have fought Plassey. Instead, when England next heard from him, he'd annexed a large swath of India on his own initiative. It used to be that when troops were deposited on some distant shore, they acted as they saw fit until such time as they perished or received further "orders" (often hopelessly obsolete) from Europe. Compare that to LBJ's micromanagement of Vietnam!

What does this all mean? Perhaps national service (broadly construed) should be made a prerequisite for welfare benefits. Of course that would be seen as aimed at the lower classes, which is unfortunately true. A culture of public service needs to be inculcated into national elites, so that they too do their part (though aristocratic officers were often far more trouble than they were worth). Perhaps I am just a man born in the wrong time.

Defeatocrats

I noted the other day that Democrats are again trying to retreat; one means to this ignoble end is a "readiness" measure that wouldn't permit troops to return to combat until they'd spent an equal time in the US (so six months in Iraq, followed by six in the US). The Standard takes a look at it, listing Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) among its proponents. The other day I mentioned that one flaw in our Vietnam operations was the definite time line for any troops to be in theater (a year). Webb's a veteran of that conflict, yet refuses to acknowledge how these kinds of strictures destroys the effectiveness of our troops. If troops in Vietnam had had a vested interest in ending the conflict, not getting out in a year, then perhaps things would have been different.

Iran in Iraq

The Weekly Standard's got a good roundup of the allegations of Iranian involvement in Iraq. Apparently they're looking to turn Iraq into another Lebanon, with all the social and economic turmoil that involves, to say nothing of the country's becoming a playground for terrorists. Oh and of course Democrats in Congress would like nothing more than to enable them in this effort.

Republican Money Game

So the news about Hillary and Obama's fundraising successes have been well-documented in recent days. Now numbers from Republican candidates are coming out: Giuliani raised over $17 million, with $18 million on-hand; Romney raised $14 million (plus a $6.5 million loan) and has $12 million on hand.

What I'm still waiting to see are the numbers from Fred Thompson's as-yet unofficial campaign; some rumors have him as high as $10 million. Not bad for a guy who's not officially running.

Michael Yon Update

I noted Michael Yon's latest (and perhaps most disturbing) dispatch the other day; now he's updated, with an open offer for the media to publish it and get the news of this atrocity into the public eye.

Muslim Prayer in Schools

In San Diego. Although they can't determine whether or not the students were led in prayer by school officials, what's not disputed is that there is a fifteen-minute afternoon break for student prayer.

To me this pushes the envelope - and if these were Christians, there's no doubt that the ACLU and media would be all over it.

Though for what it's worth, the San Diego Union-Tribune did cover this - but not much elsewhere.

Apologies

Sorry about yesterday's relative silence, I was doing that whole "being productive" thing.

I'll play some catch up right now.

Politics Makes Strange Bedfellows

Though that phrase doesn't usually refer to husband and wife opponents. Both are running for the "moderate party" nomination and the honor to get beaten by Melissa Bean in the Illinois 8th. Bean's probably pretty well invulnerable this time around (the GOP's best chance of unseating her was last year), and it says something about the district that the Moderate Party can take more than five percent in the general.

(h/t PJM)

Okay It's Official

I've given in and am supporting Fred Thompson for the Republican nomination. I like Rudy Giuliani a lot, but the man has a lot of baggage. For a lot of reasons, I think Fred has the best shot of winning our party's nomination, as well as winning the White House in 2008. I hope you'll do the same.

[Yes, this means there will now be a Fred Thompson post tag. Yes there will be a lot more articles.]

Illinois's Incompetent GOP

A professor once described the North Carolina Republican Party as a circular firing squad. The same could be said of the Illinois GOP, split as it is between moderates and conservatives, and with the threat of fractures emerging even among conservatives. Of course Rick Pearson's right, there is no better time to launch a revival than when the state's Democrats are at one another's throats in Springfield. There are also bigger underlying pressures - for example, Senator Dick Durbin and Mayor Daley aren't exactly warm friends, representing different wings of the Democratic Party. Chicago's collar counties are slowly going purple, and Republican incumbents at both the state and federal level there may come under serious electoral pressure if that shift isn't reversed.

A truly visionary program would focus not only on reviving the GOP's fortunes in suburbia but also trying to make inroads into Chicago's minority communities. Any statewide candidate has to win roughly a quarter of Chicago's votes (legal, that is, not the "vote early vote often" ones), which is presently almost impossible unless of course they effectively reach out to the city's blacks and Hispanics.

Things You Won't Hear on the Evening News

Civilian deaths decreasing in Baghdad. A sign that the surge is working? Perhaps; unless you're a Democrat (or Dick Lugar), in which case we can't possibly wait long enough to find out.

Pennsylvania House Races

Townhall's Salena Zito has a good roundup of this cycle's top House races in Pennsylvania. Sure it might seem absurd to focus on only one state, but there are eight potentially "in play" seats in the Keystone State.

Four of these (4th, 7th, 8th, and 10th) were Republican until 2006 when they went blue. I blogged about the 4th the other day, where Democrat Jason Altmire might be in serious trouble if former Pittsburgh Steeler Lynn Swann decides to get in. Zito suggests that Altmire will only have to worry if Swann runs a "top-notch" campaign, an assessment I agree with; his gubernatorial bid last cycle was marred by gaffs and missteps, making a tough race nigh-on impossible. She also argues (I agree) that Iraq veteran Pat Murphy in PA-8 is basically invulnerable, with Joe Sestak in the 7th only slightly less so. That makes, in her eyes, Chris Carney in the PA-10 the most vulnerable.

Of course how vulnerable is up for discussion. The 10th district went for Bush by comfortable margins in 2000 and 2004 (56-40 and 60-40 respectively) and is more rural than the suburban parts of the state trending purple (i.e. Philly suburbs). Don Sherwood, who Carney defeated, was also a less than stellar candidate, seeing as he had to admit an extramarital affair while denying that he'd assaulted his mistress. A lot will depend on who's on top of the ticket; I think Hillary hurts Carney while Giuliani or Thompson helps his eventual challenger.

Zito also looks at four Republican-held seats she thinks could be in play: Phil English (PA-03, Pittsburgh-area), Jim Gerlach (PA-06, southeastern part of the state), Charlie Dent (PA-15, Allentown area), and Tim Murphy (PA-18, southern Pittsburgh). Demographics would suggest that Dent or Gerlachhave the greatest challenge; Gerlach was heavily targeted by the DCCC in 06 but he survived 51-49, but he's battle-tested and has a savvy staff (including consultant Mark Campbell, also Rudy's national Political Director). Dent for his part has a purple district but is no ideologue and probably can't get tarred as out of touch. Murphy's got some ethical clouds on the horizon but fits his district, while English has had it easy the last couple of cycles and will need to get in fighting trim (simple sloth probably cost the GOP the 7th district last year). For what it's worth, a friend from English's district discounts the possibility of it going blue anytime soon.

While I generally agree with her logic, I think the presidential nominees will be a huge factor in any of these races. Fred or Rudy will likely attract moderates and energize the base, making things easier for all four Republican incumbents (especially Dent and Murphy), and turn the heat up on Carney and Altmire; that dynamic would also likely force the DCCC to play defense in some of its newly-conquered territories, again reducing the pressure on the Republicans. I also feel like in a lot of these blue-collar districts (often purple), Hillary Clinton won't go over well.

Last year was a massacre for the Pennsylvania GOP but it has to be seen as a perfect storm rather than a sign of things to come. Lynn Swann's gubernatorial bid was clumsy, Rick Santorum was a mite too conservative for the state, and the war was bad for everyone. Republicans shouldn't rest easy because of that, however - next year is their best chance to reverse some of these losses before the Democratic freshmen entrench themselves.

Fred's Take on Darfur and Global Warming

I noted the other day that the UN was laying at least part of the blame for Darfur on global warming. Well, Fred Thompson's not buying any of it:

Why, then, would the new UN Secretary General blame climate change? I think it’s pretty obvious.

Blaming the Islamic government and groups that have manipulated events in Sudan will get him nothing but enemies. Blaming global warming, however, is basically the same thing as blaming America. America is by no means the only major source of greenhouse gases, but we've taken the most political heat. The reason is that congress rightfully balked at ratifying the Kyoto international climate treaties during the Clinton presidency.

There is simply no downside to blaming America, because Americans don't punish their ideological foes. From the UN, we don't even require sanity sometimes. And there might even be an upside to blaming us, since there are Americans who suffer from such ingrained feelings of guilt, they’ll support increased aid to both the UN and Sudan.

There is a lesson to be learned here, though. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is arguably the most powerful man in the international community today. We know he's unwilling to blame those who actually gave the orders to commit genocide in Darfur. And apparently he's happy to shift the blame for ongoing deaths to those living peaceful, productive lives in the West.

Now hopefully we can work toward international cooperation with regard to environmental policies that make sense. It’s not very encouraging though when the head of the world’s leading international body uses climate change as an all purpose excuse in order to avoid hard realities.

I just have to agree; I'm tired of the media giving China and India a free pass for their CO2 emissions, and Fred's right to point out that "global warming" is in some ways code for covert anti-Americanism.

Senator Kennedy of Louisiana?

It may just happen, according to Bob Novak. Louisiana State Treasurer John Kennedy - currently a conservative Democrat - is rumored to be on the verge of switching parties and running against Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu. Even with this development, the Fix only rated the Louisiana Senate race the third most competitive, after New Hampshire and Colorado. Colorado's debatable, but Democrats still don't have a candidate to challenge Sununu in New Hampshire; furthermore, Landrieu has looked pretty vulnerable for a while. Her latest financials (out tomorrow?) should be telling about exactly how vulnerable.

Mayor Livingstone: Muslims More Law-Abiding

"Red Ken" whitewashes Islamic terrorism, gives cover to extremism.

Our Inhuman Enemies

More Michael Yon from Iraq: accompanying a mixed force of US and Iraqi troops, they stumble across an Iraqi village where al Qaeda had butchered the inhabitants, beheaded the children, and slaughtered the livestock. The buildings were left standing and the entire village filled with IEDs, a booby-trapped community which thankfully didn't take any soldiers' lives.

The brutality and "scorched earth" aspect of AQ's tactics is suggestive to me. It would seem that as their popular support wanes, they've resorted entirely to brutality in an attempt to cow the local populace. This in itself shows that the surge is working (sorry Democrats), though the spin on incidents such as exactly the opposite. But what this really demonstrates is the fate of Iraq should we quit the country.

[Warning: the photos are pretty graphic]

Thoughts on Glasgow and London

While no one is talking about the race of the two (?) thugs who rammed their SUV into Glasgow airport, it's pretty obviously Islamist terror; even the New York Times (!) admitted as much, reporting that bystanders heard one of the two men shouting "Allah, Allah!" while throwing punches and on fire. This last point makes me wonder whether these were wannabe suicide bombers whose nerve failed, or whether they were "homicide" bombers who were just incompetent.

I'll also be interested in the specific demographics of these two plus anyone arrested in connection to the unsuccessful London car bombings. Were these Arabs, "Arabized" South Asians, converts? Immigrants or citizens? Homegrown or veterans of Iraq, Afghanistan, or Chechnya? Based on bitter experience, I'd suggest the following profile: Pakistanis corrupted by Wahhabism, likely British-born, and perhaps not with any real experience of jihad but no doubt influenced by al-Qaeda (Lord Stevens, Britain's terror chief, said as much).

Meanwhile, Gordon Brown has shown that he like his predecessor can string words together, proclaiming that "We will not yield, we will not be intimidated and we will not allow anyone to undermine our British way of life." But, and pardon me for being so damnably contrarian, isn't the reality that homegrown terrorists (as was the case in the 7/7 bombings, several other thwarted plots, and likely this one as well) have come to be in part from an undermining of their British way of life? That mushy multiculturalism has already taken hold to such an extent that these immigrants (or their children) can reject a British identity and wrap themselves in an Islamic, often Wahhabist, identity and ideology? What Brown should have said is that they will not be intimidated and they will work to restore their British way of life.