Quick Thought on the Beckham Media Blitz

So tonight British soccer player ("footballer") David Beckham first took the field ("pitch") for his new team ("side") the LA Galaxy. No doubt Americans everywhere changed the channel. Beckham is the LA Galaxy (and in a way, Major League Soccer's) $250 million attempt to bring the sport into the mainstream. But the fact of the matter is that Beckham ain't all that great. He's past his prime and he more often made headlines for his off-the-pitch antics than for any match heroics (i.e. marrying Posh Spice, getting his hair redone, etc.) Don't take it from me, rather take it from the late George Best, a truly great soccer player ("footballer") from Northern Ireland:

"He cannot kick with his left foot, he cannot head a ball, he cannot tackle and he doesn't score many goals. Apart from that he's all right."

Read it again. This is the Galaxy's $250 million investment, their bid to make soccer really matter in America. The US Women winning the World Cup a few years ago helped; so does the fact that satellite television makes it possible for stupid Americans to watch the World Cup and to watch good soccer on Fox Soccer Channel and other networks. But is there a place for soccer in the galaxy of American sports? Arguably, in a day and age where everything from competitive eating to curling to bowling can have its day on ESPN (and even get talked about on Sports Center and PTI), yes.

But will we ever be much more than the NFL Europe of soccer? Probably not. That doesn't mean you should shut your eyes to the sport. It just means that instead of watching a boring MLS match (they usually are) or a Mexican League match on Univision, the only part of which you understand is "GOOOOOAAAAALLLLL," find a way to watch a Premiership match. Or a UEFA Champions League match. Watch two truly great sides go at it for ninety minutes with Old Trafford, Emirates, or another of the legendary stadiums reverberating with the roar of the crowd, and understand why it often deserves its title of the beautiful game.

"John Doe" Amendment Dead

The John Doe amendment, which would shield citizens who report suspicious activity from lawsuits, died yesterday in both the House and Senate. Michelle Malkin's got a roundup on it, including votes. Hopefully the bill this is attached to will suffer at the hand of the president's veto pen, though we'll see. What is certain is that Democrats have shown that they value political correctness more than national security.

Of course liberals will get really and truly steamed when the public wises up to the fact that potentially the greatest domestic Islamic terror threat isn't your stereotypical Arab but rather black Muslims, oftentimes converted (and radicalized) in prison. Then people will start reporting suspicious African-Americans and the NAACP and Al Sharpton will get in on the act.

One final thought on the matter: if I'm not mistaken, Republicans could offer this as a separate bill in either chamber, because it was merely an amendment when it was struck down last night. The Senate Homeland Security Committee is chaired by Joe Lieberman, who was one of the few Democrats to vote in favor last night. As a separate bill, it might also garner more attention and thus force Democratic Senators to listen up for once.

Two Complementary Pieces on E-Jihad

The Economist has put together a readable and important survey on e-jihad (which may again be subscription only - if so, apologies). It looks how the inherent characteristics of the internet make it an enormous asset for jihadis and would-be jihadis, providing a secure means of communication (thanks to the proliferation of top-end encryption software), a forum for indoctrination and recruitment (including the usual appalling videos of killings and beheadings), and a means of disseminating information and tactics.

Meanwhile, the latest issue of Middle East Quarterly includes My Cyber Counter-jihad. The author, Shannen Rossmiller was an unremarkable individual, a municipal judge in Montana until she began infiltrating jihadist websites (by posing as a sympathizer). As part of her efforts, she learned Arabic and then began cooperating with the FBI in building cases against would-be jihadis, including one soldier who was looking to betray his comrades. Sadly (but unsurprisingly), Rossmiller is now forced to have permanent security for herself and her family.

Obama: Genocide? So What?

Bill Clinton said "Never again" in Rwanda; today's Democrats are hardly so principled. And Barack Obama is bordering on downright crazy. Today in New Hampshire, Obama said that "There's no doubt there are risks of increased bloodshed in Iraq without a continuing U.S. presence there." Really? I'm glad you're bright enough to realize that. But (brace yourself for this bit): "It is my assessment that those risks are even greater if we continue to occupy Iraq and serve as a magnet for not only terrorist activity but also irresponsible behavior by Iraqi factions." I don't even know how to respond to that. He also has the "wisdom" to claim that we haven't lost in Iraq - no Senator, but you want us to - and that a withdrawal would leave troops in the region to intercede (with international help). Where have we heard this before? Maybe Murtha's proposal to redeploy to Okinowa?

This is wrong-headed, short-sighted, and truly does abandon America's position of leadership in the world (as well as our credibility in opposing genocide).

More Russian Shenanigans (with update)

I noted yesterday the Russian Foreign Minister's absurd comments, blaming the tit-for-tat expulsions between the UK and Russia on Gordon Brown. But in terms of what Russia's up to these days, it's just par for the course and a couple more tidbits simply reinforce that impression.

First off, the Kremlin continues to refuse a British extradition request for ex-KGB spook Andrei Lugovoi, who may have been involved in the Litvinenko assassination. However, they assure the UK that Comrade Lugovoi will be investigated in the Russian court system...which I don't find very compelling.

Second of all, Russia has been meddling in the Balkans again, threatening to veto any UN resolution calling for an independent Kosovo. The province, presently under a UN mandate, is technically still a part of Serbia; though its population of ethnic Albanians want independence, the Serbian minority there (as well as the Serbian government and its Russian allies) are opposed to such a development.

Meanwhile, a worthwhile piece in the Economist (subscription only?) chronicles Serbian divisions over that stance, given that a restive Serbian Kosovo may sink any bid for them to join the EU. Some (who no doubt still morn Milosevic's demise) feel that keeping Kosovo is worth such a price; others are more focused on the EU and willing to deal on Kosovo. But of course Russia isn't interested in seeing events in the region proceed without their approval; Putin recently claimed that the Balkans were a "sphere of Russian special interest and that it was 'natural that a resurgent Russia is returning there.'" Or perhaps a Kosovar put it more succintly: “we are just the first victims of the new Russian imperialism.”

The EU, US, and UN need to find a way to resolve this Kosovo impasse; perhaps unilateral recognition of the province's independence is the best remaining option. But Russia needs to be made to understand that it can't influence the Balkans as it used to (and it's unlikely that the Red Army could march on the Bosphorus as it did in the 1870s); indeed they really need to understand that theirs is an alcoholic, dying country, propped up by oil and gas revenues, but hardly mattering in the grand scheme of things. And the international community should recognize that and admit the authoritarian nature of its regime - expel Moscow from the G8, help Europe diversify its gas supplies, and staunchly support anti-Russian governments throughout the former Soviet Union. So long as Russia is allowed to throw its weight around, it will do so; how much longer that will be permitted can only be answered in Washington and Brussels.

UPDATE: Ed Morrisey's take on the situation, and the revelation (which I'd missed) that Russia has announced it will not cooperate with the UK on intelligence matters. While he's right in noting that this sort of controlled escalation tactic is also old hat, oft-used during the Cold War, it doesn't change the fact that Western governments seem to be deluding themselves as to the true nature of the Russian government (Bush has never been more wrong than with his Putin "I looked into his eyes" schtick).

The Earmark to Nowhere?

Say what you will about Ted Steven's infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" - at least we knew what the money was being spent on. The same can't be said of an earmark inserted by John Murtha, potentially among the most corrupt members of Congress: no one actually knows if the recipient
organization actually exists.

But it's only a million dollars, right? Being such a paltry sum, Congress didn't bother to look into it too much, and overwhelmingly passed the bill.

Now here's the big question: is there more here than meets the eye? Is Murtha channeling money to nonentities for personal purposes? The man is corrupt, as well as inept, so I'm hoping someone looks into this; though despite the Democrats' love affair with subpoenas, I hardly expect them to bestir themselves for this.

Post-Lax Review of Durham PD Begins

It's about damn time: a formal review of the Durham Police Department's handling of the Duke lacrosse "case" begins today. From the beginning, police conduct was too often unprofessional and biased, without regard for due process or the presumption of innocence. The most egregious example of all of this was the police lineup for "victim" Crystal Gail Mangum in which she was shown only pictures of lacrosse players - no one else. The Police Department assumed that someone on the team had raped her, the only question was her. I'm looking forward to the results of this review, though I admit I haven't the greatest expectations; it is Durham after all.

Rematches

Given how many close House contests there were last November, it's no surprise that many losers (on both sides of the aisle) are back for another go. CQ's got what looks to me like a pretty good list. Most are to be expected, though I feel that there should be more freshman Democrats in marginal districts on the list. As for the narrowly-victorious Republicans, a friend of mine who worked on the Seals campaign wasn't too optimistic - she felt that in many races (likely including most of the ones on this list), Democrats had missed the boat. Whether or not she's right remains to be seen, though the enormous Democratic financial advantage may partially mitigate a more balanced environment (which is itself an enormous assumption).

Dumbest Comment of the Day?

And no it's not from a Congressional Democrat!

Rather, the winner is Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Lavrov had the temerity to claim that the recent tit-for-tat expulsion furor between his country and the United Kingdom was the product of Gordon Brown's ascension. Not the fact that the Russian government killed Alexander Litvinenko and won't admit it while stonewalling an extradition request. Nope, it's all Gordon Brown's fault.

Russia's nearly as thuggish as it ever was back in the bad old days of the USSR, and many of the old institutions are back, albeit under new names. It's subscription-only now, but there's a worthwhile piece on Putin-worshiping youth organizations with more than an eerie resemblance to the Young Pioneers of old. Murdering dissidents and playing coy about it is old hat, no doubt something Putin picked up while working at the KGB (indeed, the Litvinenko assassination strongly resembles that of Bulgarian dissident Georgi Markov in London in 1978, also using poison).

It also prompts another question: when are we going to stop deluding ourselves about the nature of the Russian government and start treating them like the autocratic thugs they are?

Congressional Democrats Get Really Serious About Surrender

Seventy Congressional Democrats have said enough is enough, they really want to surrender; or as they euphemistically state, they "will only support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of all our troops out of Iraq before you leave office."

It would seem to me that in the space of two paragraphs, Politico succeeds in contradicting itself; they first cite the last fight over Iraq appropriations, in which a defeatist revolt almost undercut Pelosi. They then claim that this sets the stage for a battle royale between them and the President. Sorry but I think it's one or the other. If Pelosi offers a bill similar to the one she offered last time, and they rebel again, it's a battle between factions of the Democratic Party. Unless, of course, Pelosi follows her heart and supports them. But if reports from Iraq continue to improve, she may be hard-pressed to do so. This could be fun...

Pentagon to HRC: Shut Up!

The Pentagon, or at least Undersecretary Eric Edelman, gave Hillary Clinton a piece of its/his mind; it/he had enough of her Iraq rhetoric, specifically in regards to plans for withdrawal. Edelman's response is worth quoting at length:

"Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia,"

While I entirely agree with Edelman's sentiments, I don't believe they should be coming from anyone at the Pentagon. That being said, Clinton shouldn't have been asking such questions to begin with.

Edelman's comments, and the fact that he is a protege of Cheney's, will no doubt stir up a hornet's nest on the left; unsurprisingly, the Senator's staff responded very sharply.

Another Reason to Call/Write Congress

Democrats in Congress have cut the language that would give anyone reporting suspicious behavior immunity from the sorts of lawsuits that CAIR is trying to file in the "flying imams" case. This, of course, is the same party that lauds governmental whistle blowers. Although the language went to conference at 1pm, there's no promise that it's been finalized. If your Senator or Representative is on the list below, contact them and let 'em know whats at stake.
Senate

Democrat	Republican
Joseph I. Lieberman Chairman (ID) (CT)	Susan M. Collins Ranking Member (ME)
Carl Levin (MI)	Ted Stevens (AK)
Daniel K. Akaka (HI)	George V. Voinovich (OH)
Thomas R. Carper (DE)	Norm Coleman (MN)
Mark L. Pryor (AR)	Tom Coburn (OK)
Mary L. Landrieu (LA)	Pete V. Domenici (NM)
Barack Obama (IL)	John Warner (VA)
Claire McCaskill (MO)	John E. Sununu (NH)
Jon Tester (MT)

House - Democrats

Bennie G. Thompson (MS-2)
Chairman of the full Committee on Homeland Security.

Loretta Sanchez (CA-47)
Vice Chair of the full Committee and Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism

Ed Markey (MA-7)

Norman D. Dicks (WA-6)

Jane Harman (CA-36)
Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment

Peter DeFazio (OR-4)

Nita Lowey (NY-18)

Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC)

Zoe Lofgren (CA-16)

Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection

Donna Christensen (USVI)
Rep. Donna M. Christensen continues to distinguish herself as a leader in the United States Congress. As a Member serving her fifth term, she is the first female physician in the history of the U.S. Congress, the first woman to represent an offshore Territory, and the first woman Delegate from the United States Virgin Islands...

Bob Etheridge (NC-2)

James R. Langevin (RI-2)
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology

Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency Communications, Preparedness, and Response

Christopher P. Carney (PA-10)
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight

Yvette D. Clarke (NY-11)

Al Green (TX-9)

Ed Perlmutter (CO-7)

House - Republicans
Peter T. King, New York, Ranking Member

Lamar S. Smith, Texas Christopher Shays, Connecticut Mark E. Souder, Indiana Tom Davis, Virginia Dan Lungren, California Mike Rogers, Alabama Bobby Jindal, Louisiana

Dave G. Reichert, Washington Michael T. McCaul, Texas Charlie Dent, Pennsylvania Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida David Davis, Tennessee Kevin McCarthy , California

Twits A-Twittering

Excuse the alliteration. Anyways, Valerie Plame's lawsuit against the administration for outing her has been tossed. Ergo twits a-twittering. I still don't entirely believe she was undercover, though that's not an argument to be had here. What everyone needs to admit (and only the right has been able to do so thus far) is that this was from day 1 a politically motivated affair; no great conclusions should be drawn from any of it, and Scooter Libby should never have been found guilty.

Anyways, Sandy Berger removed classified documents in his pants and later destroyed them. Where's the furor about that breach of national security?

Keith Ellison: 9/11 = Reichstag Fire?

And thus Bush = Hitler? Or so says former (?) Nation of Islam member-turned-Congressman Keith Ellison. I've been sort of ignoring this story, mostly because the rest of the blogosphere has been doing a great job covering it. But now I thought I'd provide some roundup. First of all, check out the video (it's long and painful, I'm sorry)

This is, mind you, an elected member of the United States Congress (and one whose own party apparently views him as something of a loose cannon). When Ellison first uttered this garbage, the media continued to blather away about their usual nonsense. The first time I saw the story picked up was a column in the Minnesota Star-Tribune. Unsurprisingly, the STrib edit board later ran a piece saying "okay, he was hyperbolic - but he had a point." The MSM as a whole, however, ignored the story - perhaps their silence was tacit agreement with his outrageous comments? But when Ellison starts feeling the heat and issues the de rigeur kinda/sorta/wishy-washy apology, the media notices.

This whole incident is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, there's no chance that Ellison's constituents will return his sorry ass to the Land of a Thousand Lakes in 2008. They're just that crazy (Cindy Sheehan might do well there). On the other hand, this whole brouhaha again underlines the power of the blogosphere: without the internet and the new media, this would have been a non-story and Ellison would have gotten away with peddling this drivel. Instead, he sort of apologizes. If only we could get a real apology out of him.

This Actually Infuriates Me

Ted Rall is a vile human being; that, I think, is widely accepted. Except now he's managed to hit a new low. As NewsBusters so succintly puts it, "[i]n one fell swoop, Rall has offended our military, their families, religion, patriotism, our educational system, our president, and our very way of life." He has also just proven every stereotype about the left. Oh and he continues to push the discredit "poverty causes terror" meme.

(h/t LGF)

UPDATE: Apparently Rall has a blog of his own, and its bile-flecked and venom-filled response to those who can't believe his assault on our troops is here. For those with strong stomachs, it's almost worth reading.

What the Hell?

Are the British thinking? Apparently one of their jailed jihadis whiled away the hours by building a jihad website - as he was imprisoned in Britain's "most secure" facility. Wow.

A Lament and Request

If I were to blog every post/article/comment/"thing" I found of interest, I would have to be as prolific and pithy as the peerless Glenn Reynolds. Sadly, Instapundit I am not.

I also have a backlog of over 1900 unread articles on Bloglines. And folders full of links I want to post.

Any ideas on how I can make your experience here better? Let me know.

Michelangelo's "Creation of Man (Adam with a Diet Pepsi)"

Or at least NEA chief Dana Gioia on the destruction of American culture. I never thought I'd agree with a chief of the National Endowment for the Arts.

Oh and I don't think I could name too many living American artists, and it's not because I'm particularly nekulturny - it's because they're not particularly noteworthy.

A Stunner in Georgia

You probably had never even heard of Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-GA); never knew he died either, I suspect. But now his replacement has been chosen by a special election, and it's not who anyone expected. There are some interesting lessons from the race, namely don't get sloppy!

Welcome to Washington, Mr. Broun.

[Georgia's delegation having four doctors is like Louisiana's having two Rhodes Scholars - entirely unexpected]

Duke's iPhone Headaches?

Apparently iPhones can kill wireless networks - or at least that's what it's doing to Duke's. A tech-heavy article here (h/t Instapundit) or a more layman-friendly article here. The latter notes a real concern, that we're seeing this problem with only 100-150 phones on campus right now - next month with everyone back, things could get absurdly overwhelmed. I won't even comment on the absurdity of as many as 150 iPhones (retailing at $499-$599 a pop) already being on campus in the midst of summer school.

Clearly Apple didn't think through all of the issues its little baby could cause; hopefully they'll continue their commitment to service and help defray the costs (perhaps not at Duke, but if it overwhelms municipal wireless services for example).

Hyperbolic Harry and Other Fun

I missed Majority Leader Harry Reid's absurd comments on the Democratic Senate blog yesterday, but Rick Moran over at Right Wing Nut House didn't - and now Harry's hearing about it. Check it out. Oh and Carl Levin rightfully gets an earful as well.

I'm reading this after watching Band of Brothers last night, specifically the episode where Easy Company is ordered to Bastogne with limited ammo, no winter clothing, etc.; would Harry have cried about them lacking the proper equipment? Probably, if he could have scored political points in doing so.

Bill Richardson: In a Hurry to Surrender

Bill Richardson's got a new ad out, calling for a complete and immediate withdrawal from Iraq. On the one hand I have to give Richardson credit for being honest: while many of his competitors might agree with him, few have been so bold as to say it.

But it pains me to see him say this as well. Of all the Democratic candidates, Richardson has perhaps the most experience, especially when it comes to foreign policy. For him to be so misguided, as well as misusing his experience and talents, is a real waste.

Just How Far Outside the Mainstream Are the Democrats?

And I'm not saying this without reason either! Planned Parenthood's annual conference was held yesterday, and the usual Democratic dog and pony show ensued. All of the candidates no doubt overflowed with enthusiasm for "choice" and a world with on-demand abortions (without widely-supported provisions such as parental notification). This of course provides plenty of space for them to say something stupid and show how much they agree with the abortion absolutists - and thus are out of step with the majority of Americans. Both Obama and Edwards (or at least his wife acting in his stead) proclaimed their support for federally-funded abortions, something that may be back this year if Congress succeeds in passing the relevant appropriations bill. Obama went the extra mile and said that kindergartners should have sex-ed class. Yowza. Never mind that sex-ed seems unnecessary at a time when kids think the opposite sex has cooties.

There's a lot to be made of all of this. First of all, it can be (and often is) argued that it is their stance on abortion that drives people of faith away from the Democratic Party; their support for abortion also makes statements of faith by the Democratic front-runners ring rather hollow to many voters. Second of all, in their absolutist approaches to abortion (bemoaning, for example, the Supreme Court's outlawing of partial birth abortions, a procedure opposed by the majority of Americans), they cater to a rather fringe element that thus succeeds in alienating many other voters. Further in bemoaning judicial restrictions on abortion - and promising to appoint justices who would do away with such restrictions - they are effectively admitting this isn't popular (because if it was, it could be passed like normal legislation). Indeed it's their support for partial-birth abortion that renders me incredulous, and I am by no means an uncompromising pro-life advocate. The procedure is barbaric, and according to doctors, alternative practices are available (but what do they know); Democrats argue otherwise.

So when November comes around and Democrats can't figure out why they lost the White House again (which I still think is the more likely outcome), they should think back to days like today. And realize that until they stop catering to their extremist base (or at least do so behind closed doors), they only alienate mainstream America.

An Unsung Hero Passes

Blackfive notes and mourns the passing of General Wayne Downing, Special Forces soldier extraordinaire - and a soldier's soldier.

More Congressional Harassment

Veterans for Freedom, a group that understands that the blood of Americans spread in Iraq cannot be in vain, is launching a push of their own to give our troops the opportunity to win. Check out their ten-week plan here. If you're a veteran, I'd urge you to get involved; they're doing great work and they rightly note that their strength is their numbers. And again, feel free to give a piece of your mind to your Senators, especially if they're spineless cretins like Reid (apologies to honest invertebrates everywhere).

The Senate Votes

Of course referring back to my previous post on the consequences of our withdrawal, that day may not be coming as soon as the fools on the (Capitol) hill might wish. The Levin-Reed withdrawal amendment went down in defeat today, with 52 voting for cloture (and thus seeking to raise the white flag) and forty-seven showing some evidence of spine. The yeas and nays are below (or here); if your Senator refused to second-guess Petraeus, call him or her and give your thanks; otherwise call and give them a piece of your mind (Invertebrate Republicans in bold). Find their contact info here (phone and email).

YEAs ---52
Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Clinton (D-NY) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Dodd (D-CT) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL)	Feingold (D-WI) Feinstein (D-CA) Hagel (R-NE) Harkin (D-IA) Inouye (D-HI) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Klobuchar (D-MN) Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lincoln (D-AR) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA)	Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Obama (D-IL) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Sanders (I-VT) Schumer (D-NY) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Webb (D-VA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---47
Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Barrasso (R-WY) Bennett (R-UT) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID)	DeMint (R-SC) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Kyl (R-AZ) Lieberman (ID-CT) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN)	Martinez (R-FL) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Murkowski (R-AK) Reid (D-NV) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA)

Not Voting - 1

Johnson (D-SD)

[Oh and for the record, Surrender Harry had no change of heart - unsure whether he's got one - instead, he voted against it on procedural grounds.]
UPDATE: As someone commented, I forgot Hagel the first time through; Freudian slip?

The Consequences of Quitting Iraq

A stark statement of the facts: we can't flee and let utopian idealism convince us that everything will turn out for the better. We did that in Southeast Asia and two million Cambodians are dead.

From (of all places!) the Boston Globe!

Catholicism Returns to Its Roots

In a move much reported (and much maligned), Benedict XVI has announced that Catholic priests can celebrate the traditional Tridentine Mass in its original Latin if they so desire; previously bishops had to approve before priests could do so. Sadly, the wailing and gnashing of teeth has drowned out any reasonable commentary on the matter, which I finally found here. Arroyo makes several good points, most notably that it speaks to the church's international character; Benedict cited this as one of his motives. It also serves to reconnect Catholicism to its history which though filled with darker periods (most notably the Inquisition) also served as the foundation of Western Civilization for centuries.

I was also amused to note that the most vehement opposition to the move came from clergy in Western Europe. While they bemoan the return of traditionalism, their flocks are disappearing; if the pews are empty, what does the language matter? Indeed perhaps a Catholicism showing a little bit of spine and tradition, in the process rejecting the relativism that has become the norm in Europe, might actually draw people back.

On a practical note, I feel that having Latin masses more widely celebrated might spur some form of Latin revival in schools; no doubt the youth of the world would benefit from that.

I should also note that I'm not a Catholic; nor have I had the opportunity to sound out many of my Catholic friends on the matter. But given that they run from the most extreme cafeteria-variety to (I kid you not) members of Opus Dei, I'll be interested to hear reactions.

A Truly Great Historian

"Historians" such as the peerlessly awful Howard Zinn are the darlings of the intelligentsia, which is in itself tragic. But what's equally tragic is that truly brilliant (and right-minded) scholars such as Gertrude Himmelfarb are thus overlooked or ignored. Her brilliance is on display in a review of Michael Barone's latest book, which itself looks appealing. Most notable is her second paragraph, a call to arms which should be heeded:

In academia today, narrative history is as unfashionable as Macaulay himself. It is said to "privilege" political events over the social and economic forces that truly drive history, and, worse still, to privilege the individuals and elites that happen to dominate politics over the "anonymous" masses that are, or should be, the proper subjects of history--"history from below," as is said. The public has no such qualms. The histories that grace the bestseller lists are, for the most part, narratives, written by nonacademics and a few dissident academics. Barone's book is unashamedly and unapologetically in this genre. It is a detailed chronological narrative of the events (political, diplomatic, military) and the individuals
(high-born and high-powered) that contributed to the English Revolution --a tale well told.

Oh and as I said, she also makes Barone's book sound eminently worthwhile!

[Just for amusement's sake, I'll note that Himmelfarb is the wife of Irving Kristol - and thus the mother of the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol.]

Priceless Political Cartoonage

Don't know what kinds of copyrights I'm breaking by posting this, but enjoy. Original is here.

Yon on Strykers

Michael Yon has another worthwhile piece, though this one is substantially different from some of his other dispatches to which I've linked in the past. He continues to cover what most of the media ignores, but instead of terror or barbarism, it's something more mundane to troops on the ground: their Stryker combat vehicle. Recently introduced, the Stryker was plagued by criticisms during its development and its baptisms by fire. The story Yon tells is fundamentally different: whatever bean counters and pundits may think, troops love the Stryker and it returns the love, getting them home alive despite situations which seem unsurvivable. On a personal note, last fall I spoke to an officer who served with the first Stryker brigade in Iraq (and who will be returning to command them in his third tour). When I queried him, based on those criticisms I'd heard in the media, his response was largely similar to what the troops told Yon. He loved the things.

I also think I overstated Yon's feelings towards the media in an earlier post. The more of his dispatches I read, the more I realize the depth of his ambivalence. I think he's got a love/hate relationship with both embedded reporters and everyone stateside because although they often surprise him with the fairness of their coverage (a topic he touches on in a Glenn & Helen podcast from March), at other times their willful ignorance seem to anger him (as when no one really picked up the massacre he reported). It's all part of the complexity that makes him one of the best (if not the best) people reporting from Iraq.

Dennis Miller Destroys Harry Reid

So I generally despise Fox's "Half-Hour News Hour" - it's a poor imitation of the Daily Show and Colbert report which succeeds in being many things - glib, self-satisfied, shallow, pathetic - without ever nearing funny. That being said, Dennis Miller destroyed Harry Reid there recently, and I felt it was worth sharing.Oh and note to the "Half-Hour News Hour" folks: you may think you're necessitated by the evil liberalism of Colbert and Stewart. But if they're so evilly liberal, why has Rahm Emanuel attempted to keep all of his Democratic reps from appearing on those shows? Is it perhaps because they're equal opportunity evil? Therein lies the beauty.

More Orwellianism

I've become increasingly suspicious of Democratic usage of words like "choice" and "fairness." Time to add "responsible" to the list. As in the "Responsible Redeployment from Iraq" act that the House passed on Friday. Why include it? Because there's no such thing as a responsible redeployment. And if they were to be linguistically honest, it'd be called either the Iraq Retreat act or the Iraq Surrender act.

Who Does Bloomberg Hurt?

No answers of course, just more fuel for the fire: a poll has Hillary winning Ohio with a 40% plurality if it's her, Giuliani, and Bloomberg. What's significant is that it's Ohio, one of those infamous "swing states." But I still have a feeling that should Giuliani win, he puts some traditionally blue states (Illinois, California, New York) in play, making Ohio more or less irrelevant.

Also: can anyone think of a state other than Virginia that has been so much a center of national politics? And that was in the late 18th/early 19th centuries.

The Other Senator in Hot Water

While McCain's campaign meltdown continues apace, David Vitter (R-LA) also finds himself in trouble. In bed. Oops. His number appeared on those call logs recently released by a DC madam. On top of that, the proprietor of the House of the Rising Sun (or a similar establishment) also acknowledged that the Senator had frequented the place before he was elected in 2004. There were also apparently rumors back when he briefly sought the governor's mansion in 2003. For a party that's wallowing in scandal, I have to give Vitter credit for differentiating himself from the rest of the pack.

But the pressing question is whether or not he can survive. I originally thought so, based solely on the sordid nature of Louisiana politics; a friend of mine who's an astute observer of her home state's politics and an article in the Times-Picayune backed that up. But a more scientific argument for survival comes from Chris Cilizza:

First, he is not up for reelection until 2010. That means he has roughly two-and-a-half years to rehab his image before he has to face voters. Three years is a long time in politics, and while the issue seems like a silver bullet for Democrats (or a possible GOP challenger) now, it might not be so potent down the road.

Second, Louisiana is a state not unfamiliar with political scandal. The most prominent example was four-term Gov. Edwin Edwards (D), whose campaign slogan in his 1991 reelection race against former Ku Klux Klansman David Duke (R) was "Vote for the Crook, It's Important." Edwards won that race, only now he is incarcerated after being convicted in a racketeering case.

The sheer number of Louisiana politicians who have come under investigation from either state or federal authorities has, frankly, numbed the state's voters to scandal. A story like this could be absolutely devastating to Vitter in a notorious good government state like Wisconsin or Minnesota; in Louisiana, it might well pass for standard fare.

Third, the Louisiana Democratic Party is in dire straits. Their strongest candidate for governor this year -- state Sen. Walter Boasso -- was a Republican until a few months ago. Vitter's 2004 victory, coupled with Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco's (D) struggles in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, have created a power vacuum. Old hands like Breaux seem inclined to stay out of the fray as evidenced by his decision not to run for governor after Blanco stepped aside. A fresh face like former Rep. Chris John saw his image badly tarnished by the less-than-stellar Senate campaign he ran against Vitter in 2004. As the old saying goes, you don't beat something with nothing.

I especially like "Vote the Crook, It's Important." Every time I think Chicago has a lock on the depths of corruption (running a drug ring out of the city water plant, anyone?), something in Louisiana robs me of that delusion. With luck, Vitter will survive. If not, Cilizza's right: can the Democratic Party really get rid of him?

Cry Me a River

From Western Resistance: a wannabe terrorist imprisoned in Britain is attacked and "scarred for life" and now seeks "differential treatment" because he's "subjected to differential treatment within the prison system." Well it's not every prisoner who's interested in setting off a dirty bomb in the US, so yes he's different. No word on the identity (or race) of the attacker, though I suspect it would be something like a white supremacist. In countries without the death penalty (the UK among many others), I've wondered whether terrorists who would otherwise merit the needle shouldn't simply be imprisoned alongside neo-Nazis and others who might want him dead. Not our fault, right?

Brown's Got it Right

British PM Gordon Brown often says things related to terrorism and Iraq that I don't agree with. But this time, he's right: Britain would be targeted by al Qaeda regardless of the war in Iraq.

As for the continuing presence of UK troops in-country, the PM also wisely rejects any "artificial" timetables. Again, bravo. Churchill once characterized Britain's policy on the frontier as "butcher and bolt;" today many in Britain would prefer the second part only (and I don't want butcher, just pacify).

Britain Stirs

Many people I've talked to (I hesitate to say experts, because that assumes previous examples) about the seemingly unstoppable collapse of Europe have said that any reaction will not begin with the government but with the common people.

Apparently that's happening in Britain, where as the BBC reports more than 255,000 people have signed a petition on 10 Downing Street's website stating their opposition to the mega-mosque planned for East London. This is the same mosque that will overshadow the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games in 2012. Some officials quoted in the article are engaged in the usual games, claiming that it's "only" going to cost some 75 million pounds - not the 100 million that critics claim, rather than answering real questions about the project. And of course London's Red Mayor, Ken Livingstone, is on the side of the Muslims. The BBC also mentions the group behind the project, Tablighi Jamaat, without ever mentioning its ties to terrorist groups and the fact that some jihadis captured in Afghanistan were recruited by them. Typical.

The petition itself can be found here, though only British citizens can sign (and if you are and you haven't, I urge you to do so). Ironically, the petition's text calls for more money to be spent on the NHS. So let's not go forward with a development that will provide a meeting place for terrorists, but let's just import more from Pakistan!

But hey, it's a start.