You’ve probably seen this news, but have a dose anyway: “Protesters ran through Los Angeles streets Monday night, breaking windows, attacking people on sidewalks and at one point raiding a Wal-Mart store . . .”
Nothing says “Honor Trayvon” like vandalizing, accosting, and stealing, right? You can either laugh or weep — emphasis on the latter.
A headline: “Obamas to return to Martha’s Vineyard this summer.” (Article here.) And in a Bob Costa post, I read that more than 20 Democratic senators have already been in Martha’s Vineyard, holding meetings or something.
Never forget: The Republican party is the party of the rich, pampered, and carefree. I’ve heard it since childhood, and so have you, I bet. And Mitt Romney? Too “plutocratic” to be president.
This was interesting: A North Korean ship was returning home from Cuba. The Panamanians stopped the ship. There were sugar containers, as you might expect. But in those containers were parts for missiles. Well, we should expect that too.
Isn’t it nice that the Norks and the Castros are in bed? They are a perfect match. The Castros’ many, many supporters here in the U.S. must be proud.
The North Korean captain, by the way, tried to kill himself, as his ship was being searched. I take it he was following orders. (“If your ship is searched, off yourself, so you can’t talk.”) I wish some clear-thinking John le Carré — i.e., not le Carré himself — were around to novelize this.
With the Buckleys, I once sailed on a boat that had just been rented by le Carré. Interesting coincidence. Both WFB and le Carré wrote spy novels. Both were famous. But only one had eyes free of mud.
A further word on North Korea — recently, they launched cyberattacks on South Korea. This was on the anniversary of the Korean War. To read about it, go here.
The episode reminded me of something: Years ago, the sterling Sinologist Arthur Waldron got in trouble with his colleagues. They considered him outlandish. Because he stated, simply, that the North started the Korean War.
In some places, with some people, you can’t say Wednesday follows Tuesday.
Reading the opening paragraph of this dispatch, I thought of Margaret Thatcher. I’ll explain in a minute. First, that opening paragraph, out of Mexico City:
The capture of the notoriously brutal Zetas leader Miguel Angel Trevino Morales is a serious blow to Mexico’s most feared drug cartel but experts cautioned that taking down the group’s command structure is unlikely to diminish violence in the border states where it dominates through terror.
Well, the experts may be right, but still: Rejoice at that news. That’s what Thatcher said once, during the Falklands War: “Just rejoice at that news and congratulate our forces and the Marines.”
I must say, I almost laughed out loud at the opening of this dispatch. The laugh would have been bitter. Here’s the opening:
Secretary of State John Kerry is returning to the Middle East this week amid rising tensions in Egypt and deteriorating conditions in Syria that threaten to put his signature effort to re-launch Israeli-Palestinian peace talks on the back burner.
Yes, how rude of Egypt and Syria to put “Oslo,” sacred Oslo, on the back burner . . .
Remember how annoyed Obama seemed in the summer of 2009 when democratic protesters in Iran distracted from this attempts to make nice with the regime?
“Only lawyers now can argue before Supreme Court.” That was the headline over this article. I’m sure that the new rule makes sense: that you have to be a lawyer, to argue before the Supreme Court. The last time a non-lawyer argued, it was 1978.
Still, doesn’t the professionalization of everything make you slightly uneasy? Obviously, almost everyone who argues before the high court will be a lawyer, regardless. But once in a blue moon — wouldn’t it be sort of interesting, and justified, to have a non-lawyer?