A Jihad Against Tennis Players!

Sania Mirza and Shahar Peer are playing women’s doubles at Wimbeldon this year.

It’s not a big deal, unless you’re Islamic Rage Boy.

Sania is a Muslim from India, and Shahar is Israeli. What would normally be hailed as “dream partnership of peace” is instead attacked by the irrational.

The last time Mirza, a Muslim, joined forces with Peer at the 2005 Japan Open, their association was short-lived.

Under pressure from militants furious over a Muslim and a Jew playing together, Mirza called for some time out.

What was the religious affiliation of those militants, I wonder?

Car Bomb Diffused in London

And much loss of life was averted:

LONDON (AP) - Police thwarted an apparent terror attack Friday near the famed Piccadilly Circus in the heart of London, defusing a bomb made of a lethal mix of gasoline, propane gas, and nails after an ambulance crew spotted smoke coming from a silver Mercedes outside a nightclub.

The bomb in the city’s theater district was powerful enough to have caused “significant injury or loss of life” - possibly killing hundreds, British anti-terror police chief Peter Clarke said.

Heads up to the ambulance crew who saw the smoking vehicle. Given this action and the man with the smoking, unexploding backpack from the terror attacks on buses a little while ago, it seems that terrorists in London have problems with their explosives.

But leave it to politicians to totally miss the football:

Britain’s new home secretary, Jacqui Smith called an emergency meeting of top officials, calling the attempted attack “international terrorism.”

“We are currently facing the most serious and sustained threat to our security from international terrorism,” she said afterward. “This reinforces the need for the public to remain vigilant to the threat we face at all times.”

Doesn’t he realize that they’re not international terrorists? These guys are being bred in their own backyard.

Protesting the Establishment

One of the biggest ironies in life is that of the Anti-Establishmentarian. These are the people who protest the G8, constantly battle what they call “the establishment”, and protest having “rich old men” make decisions for everyone. They are the core of the “nutroots”, the Kerry supporter, the person with “Impeach NOW!” on their bumper. Republicans are bad. Rush Limbaugh is a drug-using blowhard. Only liberalism can save the world!

When you think of classic liberalism, especially in a historical sense, the liberal views were a rally against the conservative core. The Renaissance was the second real liberal revolution (the first being the Athenian period of philosophy). Ideas were expressed freely. Art exploded onto the world (although there were still great artists before the liberals made their mark). Great thinkers arose and battled the considered norms of society in order to affect a change that transformed their society into a truly progressive one.

Liberals wanted change. They wanted revolution. And they craved the freedom that would come with it.

A true liberal, one with an idea that would blow the top off of the capitalistic world, came around in the form of Karl Marx. He proposed that the class struggle eventually would lead to the Rich getting Richer and Poor getting Poorer until, at some point, a class revolution would occur which would lead to overthrow. The Great Union would be born where everyone would get an equal share. The government was really a commune of like-minded individuals, and thus Communism was born.

No struggle. No class envy. Everyone gets an equal share. Everyone is happy and nobody is treated unfairly. It’s the Communist model. It can even be called a “Christian” model.

And liberals grasped the idea and formed Communist parties as well as “baby” parties, or socialist parties. Communists took over Cuba, China, and Russia. And what we have are paragons of human rights, equality for all citizens, and modern marvels of technological wonder and peace. Yes, I’m being sarcastic. What we have are countries with oppressed populations run by a militaristic oligarchy who exploit the system for their own political and personal need. Doesn’t sound like an ideal system, does it? But this system has emerged in several locations and each time it degenerates into a system which is hardly the utopia Marx imagined.

Now let’s fast-forward into 2007. The liberals have just taken over Congress. No more war, they demand! They’ve fought the establishment and won. And what was the “establishment”? Republican senators and representatives. They had been established for 10-16 years. It was a good thing they were tossed out! We have new leadership in the Senate! Harry Reid, D-Nev, has been serving in the Senate for 20 years! He’s more establishment than the people who were the establishment!

And what about their Presidential nominees? The people who were supposed to rescue the country from the grip of the evil Republicans? Al Gore and John Kerry, both career politicians. Both are firmly entrenched in the Establishment.

What about this year? Hillary? Biden? Kucinich? Richardson? Are any of these people really Anti-Establishment? In fact, since these people are, in fact, the current Establishment, should an Anti-Establishmentarian being supporting Republicans in 2008?

The biggest icons of the US Senate are Ted Kennedy and Patrick Leahy, two senators who have been in the Senate for a combined 77 years! Talk about your establishment!

I find it amazing that the liberal-minded of us would be dead-set against one political party but wholly supportive of another, as both parties have contributed to what is now considered the establishment that is the US Government. Were they truly progressive or liberal, they would seek a change to the government, but instead they only want a change in one direction of the US Government. That doesn’t sound like someone seeking to revolutionize the way we do business, ala the Renaissance or the Athenian enlightenment.

In fact, it smells an awful lot like consolidation of power into one centralized party.

So is the goal of the modern liberal a Communist state? You should ask your friends and find out. Here are some questions to ask to ferret out if they are a true liberal or a communist in liberal clothing:

1) Is a vote for a Democratic nominee for President a vote against the Establishment?
2) Do you feel government would work much better if Democrats had super-majorities everywhere?
3) Is Ted Kennedy a good example of modern liberal thinking?
4) Is Bill Clinton? Al Gore?
5) Aren’t the Democrats embedded into the political process to a point where they are the establishment and they are just as stodgy as Republicans?
6) Shouldn’t a true liberal seek to change government than elect the same paragons of the Establishment year after year?

Here’s how a communist-in-liberal’s clothing would answer:
1) Yes. 2) Of course. 3) Absolutely. 4) They are both great examples of modern liberals.
5) No! Democrats are much better than Republicans! 6) Yes, and the best way to change government is to elect more Democrats!

A true liberal would say:
1) There is no real difference in the current candidates other than base ideology.
2) No. In fact, it may be worse as there would be a failure in checks on a single-party rule.
3&4) He, as well as Clinton & Gore, did nothing to promote a positive change in the US Government. And why should they? Would you change the system that’s put you in power?
5) Of course. There is little difference other than the lobbies who have the candidate’s ear.
6) Our current government has many problems and keeping the people who caused the problems in power year after year is not going to change the broken system. The only way to truly change the system for the better is for a new party to arise, challenge and supplant the old parties. Unfortunately, new parties are typically unstable and they are susceptible to massive implosion. Just ask the Reform party. This cannot, nor should it be, a rapid process.

What we’ve seen this week is a hopeful sign. Democrats and Republicans felt the heat from an enraged constituency on the Immigration issue. The conservative base rebelled against the Establishment and the Establishment, to a certain degree, listened. As for the “liberal” side of things? They’re still trying to get Bush impeached, something that doesn’t have much traction outside of the “liberal” community, mainly because they are no longer “liberals” but instead they are simply “anti-conservative”.

I never thought I see the day the Republican base would rise up against its leaders in a show of– liberalism. These certainly are strange times we live in.

What’s going on in Iraq?

People are out there declaring the latest troop surge a failure. Harry Reid is ready to surrender to Al Queda (I mean, if we’ve lost, let’s just go all the way with it, Harry).

But the operation isn’t about killing the insurgent heads in Iraq as much as it is securing the local population and removing the threat of intimidation. Sounds like Counter Insurgency 101 to me.

Go over to the QandO blog and read all about it.

********************************************************

Meanwhile, in neighboring Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is preparing for the coming of the Mahdi by rationing fuel. Maybe he thinks inciting the population to riot will bring the Mahdi’s coming?

Or maybe not. There are no gas stations on fire. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Enjoy the silence

Ah, Depeche Mode.

I dedicate this song to the Day of Silence that was, um, yesterday, as many internet radio broadcasters went silent to represent what will happen to them if there’s not a reversal of the CRB’s new insane royalty rates.

If you haven’t already, contact your congressman and express that you need his support for H.R. 2060 or S. 1353. I’ve conveniently linked them to THOMAS here. And don’t forget to visit savenetradio.org for the latest information.

*************************************

In a similar vein, it seems that Sen. Inhofe was correct when he overheard Senators Clinton and Boxer talking about wanting to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. (Clinton and Boxer still deny it, but come on, we know it happened.)

If you’re not familiar with the Fairness Doctrine, it demands that all radio broadcasters using the public airwaves must provide equal time to conservatives and democrats.

Now Sen. Durbin, Senate Majority Whip, is expressing his desire to see it revisited. And Sen. John Kerry is behind it, of course.

And television? Oh, hands off television. And bear in mind it’s the politicians who decide whether the content needs to be balanced or not. Rush Limbaugh? Needs a balance. Air America? No balance needed! Who’s going to decide if Dr. Laura needs a balance? What about Lou Dobbs? Glen Beck? Larry King? FOR GOD’S SAKE, WHAT ABOUT LARRY KING!?

Of course the radio stations won’t pick up Air America just so they can play Neal Bortz. One’s a loser and one’s a winner, but I don’t think Bortz gets enough listeners to justify a 12-4 timeslot for radio programming that’s as awful as AA’s was.

The Fairness Doctrine is inherently unfair to require a private broadcaster to follow rules that make him/her lose money just to make a political point. And let’s just say with sites like HotAir, Think Progress, Daily Kos, Instapundit, Drudge Report, The PuffingTons Host, and countless others, is there really a lack of information being disseminated to people in the information age that we have to legislate “fairness“?

********************************************

I dedicate this video to term limits.

Term Limits — Why They’re Important

I’ve got a bunch of stuff going on next week, so I doubt I’ll be blogging much. So I want to leave you with a few posts to think about.

Every 4 to 8 years our country goes bananas in a Presidential blitz that can only be called “The World Cup of the United States”. There’s conventions, debates, buttons, bumper stickers, and British hooligans getting into fistfights with Germans. It’s all good.

But there are 535 additionally as equal races that occur at these times, too. The races for the Senate and the House are nearly as important. The term for a U.S. Senator is 6 years and for a member of the House it’s 12 years. Here’s a list of the top 20 longest serving senators: (from wikipedia)

Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) 48 years (9 terms)
Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) 44 years, 2 months (8 terms)
Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI) 44 years (8 temrs)
Theodore F. Stevens (R-AK) 38 years (7 terms)
Pete Domenici (R-NM) 34 Years (6 terms)
Joe Biden (D-DE) 34 Years (6 terms)
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) 32 years (6 terms)
Richard Lugar (R-IN) 30 years (5 terms)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 30 years (5 terms)
Max Baucus (D-MT) 29 Years (5 terms)
Thad Cochran (R-MS) 29 years (5 terms)
John Warner (R-VA) 28 years (5 terms)
Carl Levin (D-MI) 28 years (5 terms)
Chris Dodd (D-CT) 26 years (5 terms)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA) 26 years (5 terms)
Arlen Specter (R-PA) 26 years (5 terms)
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) 24 years (5 terms)
John Kerry (D-MA) 22 years (4 terms)
Tom Harkin (D-IA) 22 years (4 terms)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) 22 years (4 terms)

Matter of fact, nearly half of the Senate has served over 2 terms, and many of the rest are already in their second term.

Here’s a list of the US. House of Representatives. It’s not in list of seniority, and I’d hate to wish that upon anyone. Pelosi’s been serving for almost 20 years. Murtha? 34 years! Boehner? 18 years.

The problem is that once you have unlimited terms, there’s no urgency. People initially get into politics because they’re fired up about something. They go to the city council and rail about an issue. Next thing they know, they’re running for office. Then they want to take their ideas to Washington, where the idea promptly dies and instead they worry about getting re-elected.

In order to keep the government from stalling as a group of old folks who have lost touch with the American people (and with an approval rating of 23%, I think we’ve hit that magic number) the Congress needs to be reinvigorated every so often, and that’s with new blood.

I recommend term limits for all elected officials. The Presidency should be 12 years (3 terms). A senator should serve a maximum of 12 years (2 terms). A Representative should serve 12 terms as well (6 terms). Nobody can be in the same seat for more than 12 years. That will prevent what we have now– people like Ted Kennedy essentially ruling the Senate. That’s not right.

We have an opportunity in the next decade to totally remake the composition of our government and enact into our Constitution safeguards that will prevent this stagnation from ever happening again.

It’s good for America, whether you’re Democrat or Republican.

Immigration Oddities

As I’ve said before, there’s nothing in this comprehensive immigration law that’s going to stop illegal immigration. Nor is there anything from the “stop illegal immigration” side that’s every going to pass, or if it does pass, it’ll take years to implement.

But it makes great political theater. Here are some highlights:

• The plan to send illegal immigrants home is defeated. I swear you can’t make this stuff up. What’s worse, it’s a temporary exile until the person can re-enter. Notice I didn’t say “legally” re-enter.
• Trent Lott is getting heat from his constituents. They have the gall to call his office and tie up his phone lines letting him know they’re unhappy about his support of the immigration bill! Silly constituents! The phone is for “people with concerns about Social Security or veterans’ benefits can’t get through”. Some of them are even using profanity! TERM LIMITS, people. See why we need it?
• The crux of the problem? It’s with Mexico. The country is rife with corrupt politicians, corrupt police, corrupt lawyers, judges, etc., all on the payroll of the drug cartels. And if you’re not on the payroll, you’re dead meat. Which would you rather be? Rich or dead? In the meantime, people go to work in the safest place around– America! Here they can send money back home to the family so they can bribe the local officials and live in relative safety. If we really wanted to stop the drug cartels, we should just reinvent the Monroe Doctrine and take military action against all drug cartels. Once a drug lord springs up, squash him. Zero tolerance.

People are leaving Mexico because they want to leave Mexico. If the Democrats were so unhappy after the 2004 election, why didn’t they flee to Canada or Mexico? Because the didn’t want to leave the U.S.! As bad as things are here, we’re not Mexico. Or Canada. (I’m just kidding– don’t send a curling team to whack my butt with brooms, ok, eh?)

So the solution is to make Mexico a place where nationals don’t want to leave. Once that happens, everybody will be happy. In the meantime, building a wall to keep the illegals out works to a degree, but they still play a vital role in the agricultural economy. So give them easy temporary visas (guest worker), track them, track their employers, and build a wall to force them to register as guest workers. If you bottleneck the route in, it’s easier to find out who’s coming in and out of the country. In the meantime, Mexicans can come in and work in the US in a legal manner.

The Chris Benoit Tragedy

I used to watch wrestling back when it was the WWF with my roommate from England. It was fun, and it beat watching Ally McBeal. And I remember Chris Benoit. He was a decent wrestler but didn’t really have the magnetism of a Mick Foley or Rick Flair.

To hear the news that Benoit killed his wife and 7-year old son in a murder-suicide is absolutely tragic.

But what’s worse is to air a “3-hour tribute” to Benoit as a wrestler.

The WWE canceled its live “Monday Night RAW” card in Corpus Christi, Texas, and USA Network aired a three-hour tribute to Benoit in place of the scheduled wrestling telecast.

I understand there’s money to be made, but the man just slaughtered his wife and his child before killing himself. That’s not something we should be offering a tribute to.

Dicatorships for Dummies

There are three dictatorships rising in the world (one’s rather old, but it’s worth a look) that are “new” to a degree but still consolidate power under one central source, and I thought it would be worthwhile to look at how they came to power.

1) Venezuela and Hugo Chavez: All democracy shams aside, Chavez is putting his Populist posterior in for life, and he’s getting there through a very familiar source: demonization of a convenient enemy. Chavez is now warning people that the US is going to invade the country, annex the oil, and turn the population over to Guantanimo medical researchers for experiments on making robot slaves. Maybe not the last part. But the rest is true. Some are even reporting that Hugo is planning an invasion with all of the recent orders of Russian military equipment. (The Purple Avenger says it’s Curaco, and I wouldn’t doubt it considering Hugo’s buying submarines.)

Hugo’s been demonizing the West for a while, cleverly selling us the oil we so desperately need. He knows there’s no invasion anytime soon, but it’s a clever front for selling massive arms purchases to his loyal fans. And the opposition? Quietly suppressed. I wonder how many have been secretly arrested. But you won’t hear that on Common Dreams. They’re all thinking, “My God, Chavez is right! Bush is going to invade Venezeula!” (In their defense, they think Bush is going to invade everyone at some point of time.)

But let’s go through the dictator checklist for Chavez. Consolidation of power? Check. Easy enemy to blame all nations problems on? Check. Suppression of the opposition? Check.

All that’s missing is an appointment as Leader for Life, and I have a sneaking suspicion that can’t be more than a year away.

2) Russia. Vladimir Putin, duly elected ex-KGB President of Russia has been slowly rebuilding the Kremlin into an institution with one sole purpose– energy domination of Asia through the national company Gazprom. I’ve been blogging about Gazprom for a while, and their energy resources are large enough that they can influence policy in other nations. They’re even planning on energy deliveries to the UK, which I counter with a “No, don’t do it!” Oil, natural gas, coal– it runs the region. And let’s face it, natural resources are the only industry that Russia can compete with on a global level.

When Russia started seizing (I mean, nationalizing) foreign-based oil and gas platforms, you had to think something was up. And indeed, something is up.

Putin has even been eliminating people who could be costly for him. Polonium poisoning? Wow.

He plans on stepping down at the end of his current term (there’s a two-term limit), but he hasn’t ruled out a 2012 return to office. In the meantime, he and his party can prop up a useful idiot to do their bidding, all the while having Putin pulling the strings. In the meantime, Gazprom grows larger, slowly consolidating all Eurasian energy sources and making the region dependent upon its untapped natural resources.

As for a common enemy, Putin’s been putting it to the West for a variety or reasons, and he’s probably selling it big back home with his controlled media. The US is an old enemy, so the sell isn’t hard, and people will rally behind their nationalistic dreams.

Dicatorship checklist: Consolidation of power? Check. Demonizing a common enemy? Check. Suppression of opposition/press? Check. Dictator for life? No, but that doesn’t mean he’s not running things from the shadows– a perfect place for an ex-KGBer.

3) Iran and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This is a little tougher to call, as Mahmoud has certainly lost much popularity recently. One important facet of a successful rise to power to make sure the people think they’re better off after you’ve taken over.

Mahmoud is certainly sticking it to the Jews, and he and his hard-line Islamist religious backers have made no secret of their disdain for Israel. The common enemy is an old one and easy to rally against, but the economy has really suffered under the diversion of infrastructure to the nuclear program. Gas prices have skyrocketed and there’s been a crackdown on the “un-Islamic” in their nation. Unfortunately, you don’t score many points when you’re arresting suspected Israeli spies and women who aren’t being as totally modest as they should be at the same time. The moral equivalency falls flat, and it really seems to resonate with the Iranian people.

Mahmoud was very popular at first, and his rise to dictatorship seemed to be fast-tracked by the clerics and people. He consolidated power (well, the power was pretty much already centralized), suppressed opposition, and controlled the press, especially the foreign press who called him a “master diplomat”. But he hasn’t secured the population yet, and until he does, he’s going to have problems that could culminate in a revolution. The “modesty patrols” are the tip of the iceberg– those who aren’t hardcore Muslims in the eyes of the Ayatollahs are going to be the first who are rounded up. And guess who aren’t hardcore Islamists? People who don’t wear the traditional clothing.

So begins the crackdown on the rabble who oppose Mahmoud and his Clerics. Will there be a subsequent revolution? Only time will tell.

No Rosie

Sounds like there was an offer out there, but Rosie didn’t want to leave New York.

Bullet dodged. My childhood is secure.

My money is on Todd Newton. He’s like a young Barker, even though he’s bought into the global warming thing. But I’ve liked his hosting style since day one, and politics shouldn’t be a factor in whether or not you get TPIR hosting gig.

Update: Sounds like Rosie is getting her own talk show. Big surprise there. You know what that means– more showtunes!