While Obama can certainly win there are Problems

Not the least of which are Syria and those nat'l security leaks.  There's a reason many are accusing the White House itself of taking a leak, all the leaks are positive in Obama's favor and help burnish his image.  Who knew he was engaging in cyberattacks against Iran and every Tuesday shuffles a deck of terrorist playing cards and decides who's gonna get droned that day? but I don't hear the liberals complaining because hey it was quick and they weren't waterboarded like under Bush.  The atrocities continue in Syria on an almost daily basis.  Bashar al-Assad needs to go, everyone on the Planet except Russia and China seem to agree but Syria is fast becoming Obama's Rwanda.  Then there's Barbara Walters who helped get Assad's former press aide and political adviser/spinmeister into Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs because young 22-year old and Playboy material Sheherazad Jaafari helped land her the big interview with Assad, that's not Obama's fault of course but Walters has always annoyed me.  I thought she had a View to do but whatever.  Apparently Putin's Russia is sending the former ophthalmologist and current psycho leader of Syria attack helicopters and we're learning all about Assad's militia the Shabiha, a pack of low-IQ killers on steroids doing his really dirty work like massacreing women and children in the villages.  So who's supplying the 'roids?  The leaks, Assad and the Economy not necessarily in that order but ya just know some highbrow moderator at one of the first prestigious presidential debates is gonna ask him about fat kids and soda:)

The Obama Platform is what exactly?

I mean when things finally get down and dirty between him and Mr. Romney what is it shaping up to be or to put it another way why is it self-evident we should reelect the man? He can't run on the strength of his first term because there wasn't any at least that's not the word that comes to mind I'm sure even among his most ardent supporters. His main achievement would seem to be health-care reform and a majority of Americans are hardly behind him on that one so should he push it even if the SCOTUS strikes him down? He can always trot out of course the OBL Card but even here that video the news networks keep showing of bin Laden talking and the other one of him watching the boob tube wearing a wool cap looks like some B-actor out of a bad spoof (he found time to watch porn too?), too SNLish to have the gravitas of a world-master terrorist at work and maybe if I were the networks I'd keep it in the can. There's Obama's race to consider naturally and the nostalgia born from the historic and emotional moment of this country finally electing the first black president hasn't worn off and this is understandable, it was a good moment historically and it's like you want Tiger Woods back in the game. You can make the case that he played a major role in Khadafy's demise but even here he has been pretty much laid back on Syria and the regime of Bashar al-Assad. I believe at last count the death toll there of the citizenry stands like 9,000 or something so maybe when it reaches 10,000 he'll get off his duff. Taken as a whole, snowballing it altogether is all this reason enough for those who voted for him the first time to do so again? Of course for Shaw et al. it's a no-brainer but why would you not have a Democratic primary season especially when your main guy is so weak? My Dad who served in the Navy during WW2 and is as rock-ribbed conservative as they come said to me one day Hillary would've been a far better president than Obama. All you liberals out there make the case here because I'm not getting this one, it's way over my head:)

So why can't liberals give Bush the Obama treatment?

You see this is why I HATE politics, it all boils down to you hate our president and we'll hate your president. Political debate in this country is still in its infancy, nothing new but browsing through some left-wing blogs here the other day the main point seems to be we're not giving President Obama a fair shake. We're not basing our POVs on Fact and we're blaming him for things he really has no control over like high gas prices and how he deals with foreign affairs. Basically we just hate the man and deep down we probably don't like blacks. OK ok ok I get it but by the same logic liberals need to go back and retract some of the things, many of the things they said about Bush. That'd be Bush Jr. of course but why complain about our treatment of Obama now but we shouldn't complain about their treatment of President Bush then? Politics seems solely based on emotion these days but look I'm gonna take them up on their offer to go easy and cut some slack where justified for the current president ONLY if they go back and take back some of the things said about Mr. Bush.

(silence)

So as I was saying I can't stand President Obama because......

What will an Obama 2nd Term look like?

(Of course the following depends on the makeup of Congress over the next four years)
He'll be a lame duck as Beth has pointed out. This is only a hunch but I think he'll be pushing abortion big-time in a second term. Birth control/contraception now and in the rad-fem universe you can't have the Pill without rampant feticide. Let's remember before he was even elected to his first term he promised Planned Parenthood he'd sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) into law as one of his first acts as president. He kinda reneged on that but it's almost as if the whole Sandra Fluke thing is laying the ideological groundwork and the msm will of course do its usual job of glossing over the real issues and present the issue as one of the moderates vs. the extremists as they always do. There will be more Supreme Court justices and federal judges too in the Elena Kagan/Sonya Sotomayor mold but I would have thought the nation's first black president would have been more of a uniter, a healer rather than a divider and polarizer. Even Bill Clinton was not unresponsive to conservative concerns at times as witness the passage of welfare reform and you still see those workfare signs while driving on the thruways. Granted he had to deal with a Republican Congress led by Newt Gingrich but Dick Morris his chief political strategist was big on what came to be known as Triangulation or splitting the difference between conservative and liberal concerns and issues. President Obama is not a triangulator by any stretch at least I'm not seeing it but rather pure hardcore ideologue and he seems to enjoy kicking around the embers of the Culture Wars. I don't buy the argument for a minute he didn't see the controversy coming that his whole contraceptive mandate would cause religious institutions and since he made time to call Ms. Fluke perhaps he can get around to calling a few war widows too. I make no political prognostication here, he may well win a 2nd term and then a Sandra Fluke clone will appear before a Congressional body on why we need to pass the FOCA now, hell it may well be her again as she's the leader of some campus group called Reproductive Justice or something. Obama's Justice Department under AG Eric Holder has even expressed interest in probing the NYPD's spying on Muslims which really splinters up the whole kind of concerted effort we need to win the War on Terror, just what we need at this time. I could go on but I'm voting for Romney.

Kony 2012:)

The whole taking out Ahmadinejad's nuclear program thing

Obama has said to Bibi I got your back, I think he also said wait 'til after the election. Dealing with Iran - on paper it makes perfect sense but something tells me it's not a good idea. Israel or rumor has it has already taken out at least four Iranian nuclear scientists or those in charge of its burgeoning nuclear program, preferred MO seems to be two guys on a motorbike attach some kind of remote control device to the bad guy's sedan and KABLOOEY like a Jason Bourne movie so Israel seems to be doing a good job all on its own. OK so we'll have a more secure world in the future, maybe, but you think you're paying alot in gas now! Also watch for world markets to destabilize and tumble and an increase in terrorist attacks. WHO will replace Ahmadinejad btw and I think it's safe to assume he'll be part of some overall collateral damage? I mean are there alot of moderates waiting in the wings here, some burning lava lamp of democratic fervor bubbling beneath the Iranian soil? We've had a dubious relationship with our nominal friend and ally Pakistan, if they turn totally rogue do we do them too since they already have the nukes Ahmadinejad has only been dreaming of? Again it's not my call but are any of you getting antsy about this?

Obama - more concerned about birth control than rising gas prices

It'd be like if JFK were more worried about fat kids during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Obama's Political Understanding of Sex: Get Involved. Do you really want government in the bedroom though telling insurance companies they have to pay for contraceptives for women? Now to me Sex is a private affair and I wouldn't think of walking around White Plains all day begging for a handout to pay for some rubbers and a tube of Astroglide but they're saying now gas is gonna hit some kind of record this summer, might reach $5/gallon and this of course has to do with Iran (many say oil speculators - http://weblogs.wpix.com/news/larrymendte/2011/05/wall_street_does_it_again.html). Now you'll notice once Khadafy bit the dust the price of regular began to dip ever so slightly but Jim Cramer of Mad Money said this morning on the Today Show that as long as Iran has its nuclear program gas will be a problem, oh God you mean 'til the End Times!?! True Iran only exports about 2.5% of its oil to the US but the bulk of it goes to Europe and then there's the critical Strait of Hormuz to consider which Iran has threatened to cut off. So what does Obama do? he grabs the horns of the Catholic Church over an issue formerly understood and settled, Don't Go There. Pick a fight with the RC Church in an election year with gas set to hit $5/gal - WTG!!! your political advisers must hate you. BTW congrats to His Eminence from NY Cardinal Dolan. I was reading in the paper the other day that David Brock of Media Matters is literally spending millions of dollars to get more favorable media coverage of Obama (HUH?). They'll be more than happy to do it for free David with Brian Williams sucking on his left nut and Rachel Maddow directing the jizm onto a poster of Rick Santorum. Just read on Drudge the European Union has just approved a whopping $172B bailout for Greece. Of course there has to be some deep cuts and oversight......hey Obama are you following any of this? Now I realize many of the Kool-Aid drinkers out there still see Obama as some kind of Savior but even as Messiahs go he's pretty weak. I think Dolan sucked all his charisma out of him and I just know he has a big old cold one on tap if Obama goes down to defeat.

Would libertarians have gone to war against Hitler?

I was pondering this thought today and I think not. The fact that 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust would have been deemed an internal affair by the libertarian/isolationist mind and in this thought experiment I have to kind of leave out Japan and Pearl Harbor since even Ron Paul I believe would go to war if our country were directly attacked. What's up with China and Russia these days, are they some sort of evil Axis or something? Maybe there's some truth to the various evangelical/ultra-traditional Catholic apocalyptic scenarios that they're gonna be two very heavy players in the End Times and not in a good way. Syria's Bashar al-Assad continues to kill innocent Syrian anti-government protesters practically on a daily basis now, the UN finally gets some gumption to at least condemn his tyranny and to call for regime change but China and Russia shoot it down by exercising their vetoes. In fact some Russian minister explained the decision by saying the proposed UN resolution amounts to a call for regime change, well DUH!!! The guy's a despot and mass murderer in the best mold and then President Obama who has finally gotten somewhat heated over the situation says a military option is off the table. That would be grudgingly respectable had he not gone after Col. Moammar Khadafy but consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds as they say. I do agree with Ron Paul on a number of things, turns out the Bunny Ranch in Nevada is enthusiastically supporting his candidacy because he's for states' rights and has said you can't legislate virtue. I'm not so sure if I'd want the 'hos and potheads behind me though but he's ultimately unelectable imo and I believe that is due to his extreme isolationism and the Hitler question proposed at the top there would be an excellent excellent question to pose to him in debate again leaving out the whole Hirohito angle and truthfully I don't think the Jewish issue was why we went to war in the first place. Hitler did in fact pose a grave threat to the entire world if you understand your History but the salient point here is even if a libertarian were to say it was right to go to war against Germany the Jews would not enter into the equation and that's what I'm getting at which brings up the whole other issue of anti-Semitism. Apartheid in South Africa and the government killing of anti-apartheid activist Stephen Biko and the imprisonment of Nelson Mandela, was that our concern too? Rwanda? Yes for me at least but a libertarian is apt to say no so that brings up that whole other can of worms regarding Race. I'll let soapie sort out the fine print, I'm only posing the Questions.

The death of Khadafy which begs the question......

why all the instantaneous graphic imagery but not with bin Laden? We were even treated to a bullet hole in the head shot but we STILL have nothing on any bin Laden death photos, in a vault somewhere. Shaw has recently taken some of us to task because we conservatives don't want to give Obama credit for taking out bin Laden. Speaking for myself it's not that I don't want to honey it's just that OBL's death was never independently verified by objective sources other than the government. Oh yeah another difference, the Libyans still have Khadafy's body whereas bin Laden if it was him was thrown overboard practically 12 hours later. Yeah we're all happy about the latest developments but on the flipside Bibi has just released about 1,000 Palestinian terrorists in exchange for one young Israeli soldier held by Hamas for five years. A word about NATO, ostensibly when the Libyan rebels began to gather steam in the latest chapter of the Arab Spring NATO was simply supposed to enforce something called a No Fly Zone, that's it, now they're kinda in the assassination racket sort of. Osama bin Laden, Anwar al-Awlaki, Khadafy all on Obama's watch and I heard the faintest stirrings in the msm this morning that he's somehow being credited with the death of the mad Colonel as well. Ah well Happy You Tubing!!!

If Obama were Bush......

You see this is why I REALLY hate politics, folks can't admit the obvious. Let's say everything that's happening under Obama's term now happened to Bush, the 9-9.2% jobless rate, the historic downgrading of our credit, entering into yet another recession (actually in my view the old recession never really ended just that the "experts" pronounced that we were out of it, remember that one?), the failure of our mission in Libya however you define it, our Syria non-policy, troop surges in Afghanistan and the two wars never really ending...well I daresay liberals would most assuredly hold Bush responsible, the buck stops with him and that's right and proper (disagree with me if you like but I'm consistent). OK let's just focus on the unemployment rate and that historic because it never happened before S&P downgrading of our credit rating since those are the two biggies here the fact remains that this happened on Obama's watch just like if they happened on Bush's watch it would be fair to say there was a lack of leadership. You see it's like this, let's say you have a store manager or a branch manager or even a company president. Charles is a swell guy, quite popular, chats with the workers around the coffee machine every morning, is good for morale, honors their birthdays when the time comes and all the other positive stuff but some of the workers aren't doing the right thing, some of the department heads ain't doing the right thing either. The place isn't functioning quite right, profits are down, maybe you can't put your finger on it but would it be fair to hold Charlie personally responsible? YES, a 1,000X yes because when anything bad happens in a business or government entity or a religious institution (e.g. the Church sex abuse scandals) the buck has to stop with someone and that someone is the head, it happened on his or her watch, he or she didn't lead, didn't have oversight. Democrats like John Kerry can call it the Tea Party downgrade if they like but that doesn't change the fact that the S&P action happened on Obama's watch and no other president's watch. What I see in President Obama is a lack of leadership, a failure to take personal responsibility and they're not the qualities and virtues I look for in a leader. What I also see is an incestuous relationship with Hollywood. Now Sony Studios which has been the biggest booster of Obama in Hollywood has a movie in the works about the raid that killed bin Laden (of course the events of that day are highly questionable but that's another blog for another day so for now just to make a point). Rep. Peter King is rightly indignant about all the leaking of classified information that's going into the making of the movie but here's the kicker, it's due to be released to the general public about a month before the 2012 elections. I've rambled on long enough but the death of bin Laden doesn't somehow magically delete the S&P downgrade or create millions of new jobs. I think race is a factor too. We all want the nation's first black president to be a success, to be more than a footnote in History or a piece of trivia in an almanac but it ain't working out that way. It's just way past time for liberals to man up and admit the obvious:)

Our Syria non-policy

What if we had gone after Syrian president/dictator Bashar al-Assad instead of Libyan leader Moammar Khadafy? well about 2,000 Syrian protesters might still be alive today. What if we didn't have wars going on in Iraq and Afghanistan at the moment maybe we could have gone after BOTH. Maybe if we didn't get involved in any of this mishegas we could devote full-time to the escalating crisis in Somalia, a country without a functioning government where 30,000 children have died from cholera there in just the last 3 months alone in this the land of Famine and Drought. The Arab Spring has turned into the long hot summer. We preferred to do business with Assad instead, Hillary even referred to him as a "reformer" not that long ago but here's a great way to cut federal spending and put a dent in the debt and deficit at the same time -- STOP ALL WARS! Just sayin'. BTW has "just sayin'" become an annoying catch phrase yet? just sayin':)

The tragedy in Oslo

It is now just coming to light that the 32-year old man Anders Behring Breivik wanted to target ex-PM of Norway Gro Harlem Brundtland who led 3 Labor Party governments in the 80's and 90's and is known as the "mother of the nation." All told 76 people tragically lost their lives last Friday and after bombing Oslo, Norway's capital Breivik gunned down scores of Labor Party youths on the island of Utoya. Apparently he left alot and I mean alot of online rants, manifestos on the Web filled with hateful and violent and extremist rhetoric which begs the question with such a lengthy cybertrail were authorities asleep at the switch? I mean how could he do what he did, was nobody keeping tabs on the guy? Well now we know Breivik is some kind of right-wing fanatic motivated by anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim sentiment and according to Liberal Theory there exists some kind of mysterious, mystical connection between all right-wing groups. In other words we are all guilty, somehow implicated, Palin/Bachmann so please Curb your Free Speech. Breivik wanted to spark some kind of Crusade and transformation over there, prevent "cultural Marxism" and Islamism from taking over Europe. Expect liberals to make hay and politicize Tragedy here:)

Will liberals continue to use the race card?

Proba-blee. Now by any objective standard Obama's first term has been more than a bit of a dud, even the alleged bin Laden slay doesn't seem to have any staying power. The nub of the matter, Obama is not a good president. Conventional political wisdom says people vote mainly on the economy, economy still ain't doing so good and the jobless rate is up to 9.2% with only 18,000 new jobs added for the whole month of June. I don't care if the guy is black, white or polka-dot you can't vote for the guy. The Obamanauts will though and they'll make a whole racial thing about it but how can I in good conscience vote for a black Jimmy Carter? Obama doesn't suck because he's a black guy, he's a black guy who happens to suck. He made History though, duly noted for the Almanac:)

The Government Conundrum

BB-Idaho used a most interesting example of what happens or what can happen when a country, in this case Somalia, has absolutely no government (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4017147.stm). It's obvious why BB being a liberal used this example and it strongly buttresses his case. The man is not wrong and yet on the other side of the coin soapie seems to have been advocating lately no government whatsoever, anarchy if you will and he has a point, not about the anarchy but about the government (it fucks things up). So why does Government exist in the first place? I would submit human nature being corrupt it exists to rein in our baser instincts. You can get into a whole discussion here if you want that most people are good by nature, the Rousseau version but Christianity says otherwise and basically government exists because we know that people left unto themselves being inherently sinful if you want to get all theological about it will do Bad Things. So that's the premise here and that's the real reason government, any government exists (I know I know there have been legions of corrupt governments from the getgo down through the ages whose sole purpose seems to be to pillage from the people but I'm talking on a theoretical level here). Now the following point I can't take total credit for, I think Beth made it back in the day BUT the government is made up of human beings, not perfect automatons, not computers, not cyborgs (although I realize Mayor Bloomberg looks and acts like a cyborg). Human beings are corrupt hence the government will be corrupt (think JFK coverup or any other example that tickles your ivory). It's a circular argument but we still need government even though that government will tend to be corrupt over time. Without any form of government you get Somalia, it desperately NEEDS an official government and yet you can wind up with an Idi Amin or a Robert Mugabe or a Charles Taylor which leads me to my next blog and that is my distillation of what I've seen and read here and elsewhere since Oct. the 23rd, 2006......

Fresh from the bin Laden kill Bam thinks he can solve the Mideast Crisis

Every president has to give it a shot, it's the irresistible political version of Rubik's Cube. President Obama has told Bibi to go back to Israel's pre-1967 borders before the Six-Day War. This apparently didn't go over too well, guess Obama has more important votes to get than the Jewish bloc. WHY do we have to spend so much time on this subject? Don't other parts of the world merit attention? I mean yeah they get covered like the Ivory Coast but they don't turn into foreign policy obsessions. Immigration reform and the Mideast, Obama put alot on his plate just now. Why not wait 'til a second term unless, unless...you don't think the World is ending soon do you?

I'm really not getting anything out of all this bin Laden coverage

Everyday it's something new. A diary, bin Laden porn and you don't even know if it's all true or not. Long Island Congressman Peter King has said he saw those pictures. Apparently there's some small cell of a room select Senators and Congresspeople go into and it's like the Third Secret of Fatima. You have to leave your cell phone outside so you can't send an image to the outside world. Mr. King said part of bin Laden's forehead was blown off which begs the question how can we positively identify him now? not that anybody's tallying all the contradictions. Then there's all the versions of the Story. Please can we settle on one positive official White House version of the Events for all posterity even if it is wrong? Let's say he was reaching for a strap-on harness and they thought it was an AK-47 ya know?

Will the bin Laden execution anger Obama's base?

Yes and No. Actually there are two left-wing bases we're talking about here, there's the base and then there's the base-base. The first base, maybe the majority are what I call the liberal pragmatists despite their various moral intonations from time to time and I include several prominent bloggers here. So long as Obama supports gay marriage or rights, health care reform, economic and social justice, whatever their issues are then the dubious and murky events in that compound in Abbottabad don't bother them in the least. In fact they're happy about it, will use it to their advantage and will quite joyfully point out that it was their man Obama and not the hated Bush who finally got the bastard and meted out justice. I used to think most liberals were alike but many of them will show the same bloodthirstiness they often bemoan conservatives as having. Conservatives may be pro-war but the more traditional ones from the Old School anyway are also pro-the laws of war meaning you don't kill an unarmed man no matter how bad. It's just the way it is as my Dad who served in the Navy during WW2 and who is as far from a liberal as you can get explained to me. Now the base-base, I think they're smaller than the pragmatists but they do take their principles very seriously and while they are all for the gay marriage, health care reform, economic and social justice and all the rest of the first group with which you can agree or disagree to your heart's content but they also have a certain moral compass that doesn't waver, one that eschews violence whenever possible and may even tend strongly towards pacifism re war and foreign policy in general. I know how we all feel about Michael Moore but he's mad about what Obama did. Say what you will he's consistent. Finally about the Event itself I've come to this conclusion: the government is probably telling the truth that bin Laden was killed, is dead. I choose to believe it and yet I can't fault those who don't or who at least question it and here's why. They got rid of the body so damn quickly, put it on the USS Carl Vinson, said something in Arabic we're told after wrapping him in a white sheet and then dumping him overboard. Basically what we have here is the government or those acting on the government's behalf telling us that bin Laden was shot to death but the evidence, namely the cadaver is gone so that no independent entity or more objective group of observers can verify that this is indeed what happened. You can make fun all you want, knock yourself out with your pejorative of choice and be clever but in the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of truth this is no small problem. Surprised nobody foresaw this. So who's on first?:)

Why Bush didn't go to Ground Zero

He knows something ain't right. Bill Clinton another one, scheduling conflict. Chatter at work and wherever I go, something weird went down. There's a surreal vibe in the air, visions of Eric Holder under oath, a Congressional investigation? IMO President Obama authorized this kill mission to boost his poll numbers and to seal his reelection, to give his presidency a certain historical gravitas that has been sorely lacking until now. Spokesman Jay Carney who is a joke at this point called it a "legal kill." What are we on safari here hunting lions on the Serengeti? Speaks volumes but listening to Rush Limbaugh's childish commentary yesterday afternoon reminded me of why I don't listen to the man anymore. His take: liberals (his fave word) saw him as a kind of faculty lounge wuss and the Osama kill made a man out of him. Whatever, a more incisive commentary would have been government is corrupt and Obama who campaigned as a fresh moral voice in Washington has lost his innocence as they all do. Osama's death, like curing cancer sure it helps humanity but it also helps you and many times we make moral decisions out of supposedly altruistic reasons but the hidden moral calculus is how it really benefits us. I Killed Osama will be a kind of unspoken campaign slogan next year, may as well say that in response to each question in the presidential debates but folks are starting to ask questions and word on the street is he won't win reelection ("I don't think he's gonna make it" one woman said to me). This is not a transparent government, which government is? Final Word: Bush would have done it differently:)

The reluctant conspiracy theorist (an abridged reader)

Although to be sure there are inconsistencies. Now unless the unarmed Osama at 6'6" was a mystical Bruce Lee figure who could pull off some fancy Matrix moves there's nothing those Navy SEAL hunks in that room couldn't have handled with a little Krav Maga action? Did one of the SEALS lose his cool the way Magnum P.I. once shot that Nazi at the end of that classic episode? Worked a little late last night and on the drive home tuned into Mark Levin, wasn't gonna listen but it turned out to be a fascinating discussion. A former Navy SEAL called in and said are we to believe that AG Eric Holder would let them just walk in and kill a man in front of his whole family? The burial-at-sea, as one commentator wrote this was a mistake and gave the impression that Osama was a good and practicing Muslim being buried according to Muslim law and we might add why so quick to make him shark bait? Obama has told Steve Kroft of "60 Minutes" that they've made the official decision to not release any of the Osama death photos (ahem), cadaver images even though CIA head Leon Panetta said just the other day he wouldn't be surprised if a photo emerges. They're afraid of inflaming the Muslim world but here's the thing. Obama is exhibiting a pronounced anti-Muslim bias here, most are bad and can't handle the pics goes the thinking but somehow they can stream live videos of actual beheadings and we get those put on on right-wing websites like Savage. The Administration now has an image problem which begs the question HOW do you exactly fuck up a good thing?

The Royal Flush

Imagine if Donald Trump's lavish lifestyle were funded by the American taxpayer, Warren Buffet's sons were Princes and Oprah Winfrey were the Queen. American Royalty. Well that in a nut is the situation in the United Kingdom and you can't bitch and moan about tax cuts to the wealthy here and then get all misty-eyed about the celestial nuptials this Friday over there. Contradiction in terms, at least our well-to-do have earned their riches the honest ones anyway. Kate lost alot of weight, stress? William already has a receding hairline and I get the sense he's bored looking for things to do else why trek up the Arctic and have a dog outside your tent at night in case a polar bear is lurking? The roots of my conservatism are more primeval and explains my distaste for the Royal Welfare. It's not that I'm pro-work, not at all. Kyle Smith recently wrote a piece about why we love the rat race, I don't think so Kyle but if I have to suffer, if I have to work then so do the rest of you, princes and paupers alike. Get off your Royal Ass and get a job! They seem like nice enough kids though:)

The Ivory Coasters

Why not throw a dart at a board and help the Ivorians? Almost one million people in the Ivory Coast in southern Africa are now refugees and are fleeing in droves especially from the main city of Abidjan. There has been a four month power struggle going on between the incumbent leader Laurent Gbagbo and his opposition rival Alassane Ouattara due to the disputed election of last November but Ouattara is internationally recognized as having won. Gbagbo has refused to go saying the election was rigged and the U.N. has accused pro-Gbagbo forces of shelling pro-Ouattara areas. Things are on the verge of an all-out civil war and many health centers no longer operate because staff have left and they lack basic drugs and medical supplies. There's a 12,000 strong U.N. peacekeeping force with calls to strengthen that and here's what French President Nicolas Sarkozy had to say: "At a minimum there should be no heavy weapons in Abidjan. We're talking about helicopters, mortars that could shoot on the population. It should be declared illegal by the international community." France has already drafted a U.N. resolution dealing with this. The way I see it to be constantly intervening and never intervening are two extremes, false options as Obama rightly noted in his address to the nation the other night regarding Libya. We've never been overly interested in the African continent imo, it's all the Middle East 24/7 and that consumes the better part of each succeeding president's foreign policy efforts. Africa's a tragic continent always relegated to the Third World, so much potential and yet so many dictators and bad apples throughout its history. As a sidenote I used to work with a young woman from Malawi, brought back pouches of Malawi gin one day. Not bad:)