Does Julian’s Assange in a Sling?

Julian Assange continues making headlines over a threat that exists only in his mind. He insists that he is the target of the American powers that be and that he “...could face possibly face the death penalty if convicted,” no charges in any U.S. Jurisdictions are pending for anything, not even fly-tipping. Oddly enough, and perhaps the mainstream media should consider this before printing all of those attention-grabbing headlines, you cannot extradite someone if law enforcement doesn’t want them. Looking beyond the hype, the American justice system has prosecuted much bigger fish than Assange for acts of espionage (A quick internet search of Aldrich Ames, Jonathan Pollard, and Robert Hanssen makes for far more entertaining reading than anything a poseur like Assange can create.) yet, none have been executed. Assange is in no danger of American reprisals because nothing he has published or posted has risen to anything other than a bit of an embarrassment to the establishment. If he were anyone else, the media would be reporting that he has evaded capture, demanding his immediate deportation to answer the charges against him. He is no journalist, no freedom fighter, just a shameless self-promoter who makes for an easy headline.

Paul Ryan? Isn't it obvious?

Well the nail-biting is over and Mitt Romney has decreed that Paul Ryan is the best choice for Veep. A lot of people are finding fault with his pick, but not me. I get it. Why wouldn't you pick the guy who can assure that the solid south will vote GOP (God's Official People.) Just because these states have almost always voted Republican since 1980, Romney couldn't take the chance on a sudden, unforeseen, completely unlikely mass exodus to the Dems. Makes perfect sense. Moreover, why waste the pick on someone like Florida's Marco Rubio? Rubio could have unified minority support for the Republicans, possibly taking some Latino votes away from the opposition and could have helped secure the Sunshine State's twenty-nine electoral college votes. Obviously, those questioning the decision cannot see the genius behind this decision. Failure to pick Ryan could have cost Romney those much-needed ten electoral college votes Wisconsin has to offer. Thank God, Mitt didn't listen to the urging of his foolish pollsters and struck out on his own to make this sound decision. Were it not for this kind of macho independent thinking, we might still be threatened by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Were then would we be? Bravo, Mr. Romney! Your success is assured.

A Word on Semantics.

We live in strange times and things can get a little confusing especially when writers can't agree on terminology. Take for example the armed thug. Since the beginning of the war on terror, I have seen at least half a dozen titles for the non-state soldier. In the heady early days of the Afghan campaign, I recall constant reports of Northern Alliance "fighters" as they clashed with Taliban "gunmen." Oh, I need to know what separates "insurgents" and "militiamen" from "rebel forces?" Just this week in a report from Karachi, Pakistan,"paramilitary soldiers" were filmed in some nefarious activities and in Somalia, "security forces' had a shoot out with a terrorist leader, a title which may also need to be included here. From a British point of view, didn't that title apply to some of the American Founding Fathers? Wouldn't Ord Wingate's Chindits in WWII qualify as terrorists and gunmen to the Imperial Japanese Army? I need some aspirin.

Britain's Secret War?

Just noticed the Mirror's headline "Britain's Secret War" and was intrigued. I should not make a habit of soiling my fingers with any red top, but sometimes morbid curiosity gets the better of me. They somehow managed to break the incredible story that private military contractors are training the Libyan rebels. INCREDIBLE! Is anyone naive enough to be shocked? Sending a few special operators now obviates sending battalions of conventional troops later. Soon, the Mirror will be giving us the big expose' that war is bad and bullets kill.

The House of Lords: Can Old Ideas Still Make Sense?

The PM and his deputy are setting the stage for a radical restructuring of the House of Lords, but will this yield the rich rewards promised? The glaring question is...WHY? The current system works well and has done so for generations. Fair laws get passed and bad ideas tend to be short lived. Only about half of the Lords bother to take an active part in the few duties of their house, so there is a minimum of congestion and overcrowding is no more an issue than it has ever been. If the two houses are equal, tie-breaking votes and who should cast them will surely become problematic. Finally, demanding elected Lords deprives parties the power to reward their faithful and generous with peerages, which can only mean passage of the election proviso equals dumb politics. Why give up the chance to distribute such political pearls? A balanced bicameral legislature, the logical result of Lords reform isn't a good fit for the UK. Lords reform needs to be scrapped. The current arrangement still works and it still makes sense.

She Who Knows No Shame Thunders On.

Sarah Palin made news recentlyt with her appearance at Rolling Thunder, the event that spotlights and honors American Veterans. According to the Hill, many attending the annual Memorial Day event in Washington, throught Palin should have stayed home. Apparently cheers and applause were far outweighed by boos accompanied by apathy. No one, not even those gathered there who might support her, could have actually been fooled into thinking anything other than her appearance was blatant self promotion. Putting your own agenda ahead of those who have served and died is appalling. The stunt isn't likely to cost her many votes, but is indicative of how self-absorbed and desperate this would-be 2012 hopeful has become.

It's Time to Think Globally

After the 2008 election, the rest of the world breathed a collective sigh of relief knowing we hadn't actually been stupid enough to elect a ticket that included Sarah Palin, but the world was still accustomed to watching the output at the White House with the same curiosity reserved for an episode of Jerry Springer. Once it emerged that we could elect a president capable of speaking with dignity and intelligence, the world began to give the America a proper second look.
Under President Obama's leadership, the economy has begun to show signs of recovery and he is steadily restoring dignity to America's highest office, yet the Republicans find fault. Why? In the months following the Obama inauguration, Dick Cheney and others went on and on about his failings to fix the economic mess they made. Then they spoke ill of his handling of the war they complicated with an unnecessary and arguably illegitimate foray into Iraq. Now, the ever-thinning herd of 2012 GOP hopefuls are gathering what ammunition they can for more pointless rhetoric about why Obama doesn't need a second term.
American voters seldom consider foreign policy, but as the world continues to shrink in the age of international commerce and communication capability, it is more important than ever to elect someone who can inspire confidence among our allies; who can meet our enemies with strength and resolve. The incumbent has proven his ability on each of the points. The opposition has proven...?