Probably the least effective way to advocate for the removal of the idiotic and counterproductive travel restrictions on Americans going to Cuba is to have a communist organization make a big splash about it every year.

Because then you get stuff like this:

“In the first 10 minutes, most of what you hear from the U.S. about Cuba is a lie,” Massey said.

Massey said that no one in this country hears about the education system or the free health care in Cuba. She also said a big misconception is the lack of an electoral process.

There is most certainly an electoral process. A single-party process with no competition or exchange of ideas.

A quick visit to the website of the Venceremos Brigade (that last word is a giveaway) reveals:

In 1969, a coalition of young people formed the Venceremos (”We Shall Overcome”) Brigade, as a means of showing solidarity with the Cuban Revolution by working side by side with Cuban workers and challenging U.S. policies towards Cuba

Out of curiousity, why didn’t the Buffalo News report on this mention that the group is a communist one? And what about Cuba did they “learn” was a “lie”, and from whom?

As an aside, I occasionally enjoy reading Generacion Y, written by a young woman from Havana. (Link goes to Google translated version).

Bush is at this year’s complete-waste-of-time-o-rama, the G8 summit, where he ended a meeting with a funny quip that might someday find its way onto the Times’ crossword puzzle:

The American leader, who has been condemned throughout his presidency for failing to tackle climate change, ended a private meeting with the words: “Goodbye from the world’s biggest polluter.”

He then punched the air while grinning widely, as the rest of those present including Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy looked on in shock.

Mr Bush, whose second and final term as President ends at the end of the year, then left the meeting at the Windsor Hotel in Hokkaido where the leaders of the world’s richest nations had been discussing new targets to cut carbon emissions.

Man, that’s funny. Climate change aside, pollution is something that intelligent people agree is negative. Why is the President behaving like an attention-starved eight year-old at a summit of the eight richest countries?

Not satisfied with just uttering Pythonesque absurdities, Bush also decided that it would be a swell idea to insult Italy and its Prime Minister:

Mr Bush also faced criticism at the summit after Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minister, was described in the White House press pack given to journalists as one of the “most controversial leaders in the history of a country known for government corruption and vice”.

Luckily, our long national nightmare comes to an end - regardless of the outcome of this year’s Presidential election - on January 20, 2009. Only 193 days to go!

This blockbuster video, shot and smuggled out of Zimbabwe by prison guard Shepherd Yuda with the Guardian’s help, is proof of just one of the many ways Mugabe ensured his “re-election” last week. Most chilling is the video where all the prison guards are told “Forward with ZANU-PF, down with MDC” and that “even if Tsvangirai wins the election…he will never rule this country.”

Of course, none of this is unique in Africa, so one of the questions is why we care and pay attention to this tip of the iceberg. When Mugabe traveled to the African Union summit in Egypt soon after his “re-election”, he was embraced, not condemned.

George W. Bush in May:

As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

(Note that the senator in question was a Republican Senator from Idaho

George W. Bush in June:

In more than two years of negotiations, the man who once declared North Korea part of an “axis of evil” with Iran and Iraq, angrily vowing to confront, not negotiate with, its despotic leader, in fact demonstrated a flexibility that his critics at home and abroad once considered impossible.

That is why Mr. Bush is likely to receive only grudging credit, if any, for the accomplishment, which could turn out to be the last significant diplomatic breakthrough of his presidency.

North Korea’s declaration — and the administration’s quid pro quo lifting of some sanctions — faced criticism from conservatives who attacked it as too little and from liberals who said it came too late.

“The regime’s nuclear declaration is the latest reminder that, despite Mr. Bush’s once bellicose rhetoric, engaging our enemies can pay dividends,” Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, whom Mr. Bush defeated in the 2004 presidential election, said in a statement after the declaration on Thursday.

“Historians will long wonder,” he continued, “why this administration did not directly engage North Korea before Pyongyang gathered enough material for several nuclear weapons, tested a nuclear device and the missiles to deliver them.”

For the record, I fully support the Bush administration’s efforts diplomatically to engage North Korea and Iran. It’s important to talk to our enemies in an effort to make the world a safer place. We cannot refuse to speak to certain countries out of some respect for morality or human rights - American history is replete with evidence that we are quite happy to speak with despotic regimes of all shapes and sizes, if not engage in full diplomatic relations with them.

I only wish that Bush wouldn’t trot out “appeasement” and Chamberlain and Munich and 1938 and Hitler as an adjective for talks with other enemies that aren’t North Korea. It is counterproductive, ignorant, and stupid. Also, KCNA doesn’t have anything up about it yet.

Oftentimes, diplomacy and moderation can trump aggression and extremism.

Although the opposition MDC candidate Morgan Tsvangirai won the first round of Presidential elections outright in late March, (and more likely than not with 50% plus one, which would have obviated the need for a run-off), that run-off is scheduled to be held on June 27th.

The entire thing appears to have been an opportunity for Mugabe’s ZANU-PF to basically kill or threaten to kill anyone associated with, or planning to vote for, the opposition.

Tsvangirai has dropped out of this complete sham of a race and sought sanctuary in the Dutch embassy. Sokwanele has been keeping track of anti-opposition government violence here. The brutality is medieval, and to make matters worse, Mugabe basically blames the opposition for it all.

Other sub-Saharan African leaders have become more vocal about Mugabe’s brutality, and even the UN Security Council got involved.

“The Security Council condemns the campaign of violence against the political opposition ahead of the second round of the Presidential elections scheduled for 27 June, which has resulted in the killing of scores of opposition activists and other Zimbabweans and the beating and displacement of thousands of people, including many women and children.

“The Security Council further condemns the actions of the Government of Zimbabwe that have denied its political opponents the right to campaign freely, and calls upon the Government of Zimbabwe to stop the violence, to cease political intimidation, to end the restrictions on the right of assembly and to release the political leaders who have been detained. The Council urges the international monitors and observers to remain in Zimbabwe while the crisis continues.

“The Security Council regrets that the campaign of violence and the restrictions on the political opposition have made it impossible for a free and fair election to take place on 27 June. The Council further considers that, to be legitimate, any government of Zimbabwe must take account of the interests of all its citizens. The Council notes that the results of the 29 March 2008 elections must be respected.

“The Security Council expresses its concern over the impact of the situation in Zimbabwe on the wider region. The Council welcomes the recent international efforts, including those of SADC leaders and particularly President Mbeki. The Security Council calls on the Zimbabwean authorities to cooperate fully with all efforts, including through the UN, aimed at finding a peaceful way forward, through dialogue between the parties, that allows a legitimate government to be formed that reflects the will of the Zimbabwean people.

“The Security Council further expresses its concern at the grave humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe and condemns the suspension by the Government of Zimbabwe of the operations of humanitarian organizations, which has directly affected one and a half million people, including half a million children. The Council calls on the Government of Zimbabwe to immediately allow humanitarian organizations to resume their services.

“The Security Council will continue to monitor closely the situation and requests the Secretary-General to report on ongoing regional and international efforts to resolve the crisis.”

Unfortunately, there is probably nothing the Security Council can or will do about this, because it is a wholly internal affair and does not threaten the security of the region or other nations, although an argument could be made that any dramatic increase in refugees from the violence might count.

Oh, and the image above is Mugabe’s his piss-poor full-page campaign ad, which blames the British, and promises Zimbabwe “it’s now time” to enjoy the “gains of independence”. Zimbabwe has been independent for 28 years. It was Africa’s breadbasket. It could be a relatively stable example of democracy like Botswana, but has instead become a mismanaged basket-case with a brutal totalitarian dictator and hyperinflation.

And I second what this HuffPo writer says. The crisis in Zimbabwe is artificial, reversible, and deserves far more attention than it’s currently getting:

What I am asking is whether Barack Obama will use his rapidly growing international credibility and speak out against the terrible cruelties perpetrated by Mugabe and his henchman. Will he put in a discrete call to Mugabe’s chief enabler, South African president Thabo Mbeki and demand that he stop supporting the thug over the border and instruct his U.N. ambassador to stop blocking the subject being brought before the Security Council. I know the candidate is busy but this is a crisis that just won’t wait.

In the interest of bipartisanship I ask the same question of John McCain.

Finally, in the interest of the New World Order, where politicians have less power than they like us to think, I ask Bill Clinton, Bill Gates and Bono if they would stop congratulating themselves for a few days and get on a plane to Harare — a city with all modern conveniences — and refuse to leave until a free and fair election can be contested.

First Lady Laura Bush is traveling around Afghanistan, and is traveling via troop transport aircraft.

The seats and atmosphere in said aircraft are, evidently, unfit for a First Lady, so special accommodations have been arranged:

As the always-entertaining and smug British press puts it,

With wood panelling, plush grey carpet, comfy leather seats and, most importantly, thick window shades, Mrs Bush could forget she was anywhere near the War on Terror being played out below the clouds.

While travelling she could have been entertained by her TV and DVD player, hosted cocktail parties or, alternatively, she could have a nap in a choice of two beds.

It is one of 11 ‘Senior Leader In Transit Conference Capsules’ the US government plans to position at various locations around the world, at a cost of £8,000 each.

That’s not the best part.

The best part is the name of the aircraft in which the Airstream trailer is found:

The Spirit of Strom Thurmond. No word on whether the aircraft is segregated by race.

All 14 episodes of the “Vice Guide to North Korea“. It’s simply indescribable.

(The embedded video is from episode 3 - Welcome to Pyongyang)

UPDATE: I want to promote this a little more because I’m simply fascinated by it, and because I gave it short shrift yesterday when in a hurry to post it.

Any sort of hermit kingdom/crazy nation always fascinates me, as does the prospect of travel to a country to which travel is prohibited. When I was a kid, I’d spend summers in Yugoslavia and wish I could go to then-forbidden Albania, just to see what a Stalinist paranoid kingdom looked like. I’d love to go to Cuba to see what Marxism-Leninism looks like in the 21st century. Are there resorts on Iran’s shore of the Caspian Sea?

North Korea, however, is the ne plus ultra of crazy, strange, paranoid, passive-aggressive Stalinist hermit kingdoms. I have scoured the internet for travelogues and photographs. I recall distinctly how East and West Germany progressed differently in the post-war era, but the difference was that most East Germans could get Western TV and radio, so they knew exactly what they were missing. Not so North Koreans, who are kept dirt-poor and ignorant. TVs show nothing but propaganda, and an errant aerial probably gets you thrown in jail. Radios get only official stations. Tourism is tightly controlled or non-existent. Journalists are let in sporadically.

The tale of Shane Smith’s visit - and internet documentary of it - is unbelievable, and I really urge you to watch it. Someday North Korea will be no more, and it will somehow, someday rejoin its richer brother to the South. Hopefully someday the people of North Korea will know some semblance of freedom as we know it - freedom to, rather than freedom from.

What makes this so amazing is its irreverence. Smith gets threatened with jail a few times during the video for perceived or real slights against the regime and Dear Leader. He refers to the famous Arirang mass gymnastic display as an “eyefuck” - a better description I’ve never read. He is brought down to an elaborate banquet hall on his first night at the hotel, and is the only guest. Despite that fact, the waitresses bring food to all the tables, and then carefully remove it shortly thereafter. It is all a choreographed show - to prove that the western lies and propaganda about North Korea’s food shortages are just that. Smith calls the food inedible, fried “matter”, and comments after a few days that his tour is little more than “crazy food, politics, crazy food, politics.”

He dances with a lonely tea shop girl along an empty four-lane highway. He visits a school where kids put on creepy, robotic shows. He sees the desks with adjustable height that was invented by the Dear Leader. He visits the Panmunjon DMZ from both the South and North, and shows you the differences. He sings karaoke - first trying out a North Korean song, which he pokes fun at, deeply insulting his host. He calls his political minder “Speedy Gonzalez”. He sings karaoke on his last night there - Anarchy in the UK. Totally surreal.

If you think of North Korea in the abstract, or you know of it only as a caricature of its real self (I’m thinking Team America World Police), take the time to watch all 14 episodes of this unique, groundbreaking, funny, and heartbreaking documentary. Seriously, it should be shown on Frontline or sold on DVD. It’s that incredible.

Also, make sure to read the bit on the website about how, exactly, Smith finagled himself a visa to visit the North.

Russia’s 17-year experiment in democracy has apparently come to an ignoble end. In the meantime, former President and current PM Vladimir Putin is gearing up for a reunion of Belarus (which has been run by a dictatorial communist madman since independence) and Russia, with him at the helm.

80s nostalgia - didn’t that come and go already?

Why does James Baker hate America?

UPDATE: Apparently, General Petraeus is also an America-hating, naive, inexperienced appeaser! CHAMBERLAIN!!@@##

Barack Obama will follow in the footsteps of the above-pictured reckless and inexperienced men:

Here’s the truth: the Soviet Union had thousands of nuclear weapons, and Iran doesn’t have a single one. But when the world was on the brink of nuclear holocaust, Kennedy talked to Khrushchev and he got those missiles out of Cuba. Why shouldn’t we have the same courage and the confidence to talk to our enemies? That’s what strong countries do, that’s what strong presidents do, that’s what I’ll do when I’m president of the United States of America.

Wow. A grownup treating grownup issues in a grownup manner, and speaking to us grownups as if we were grownups. It sure beats the jingoistic grunting we’ve endured for the last 7 years.

McCain wants a debate about dealing with countries that are hostile to us? Bring it.

President Bush took time out in Israel today by accusing Democrats of being modern-day Nevilles Chamberlain.

In a particularly sharp blast from halfway around the world, President Bush suggested Thursday that Sen. Barack Obama and other Democrats are in favor of “appeasement” of terrorists in the same way U.S. leaders appeased Nazis in the run-up to World War II.

“Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,” said Bush, in what White House aides privately acknowledged was a reference to calls by Obama and other Democrats for the U.S. president to sit down for talks with leaders like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

“We have heard this foolish delusion before,” Bush said in remarks to the Israeli Knesset. “As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American Senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

The remarks seemed to be a not-so-subtle attempt to continue to raise doubts about Obama with Jewish-Americans. Those doubts were already stoked by Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, when he recently charged that Obama is the favored candidate of the terror group Hamas.

We have not had diplomatic relations with Iran since 1979. Have we changed their regime? Have we changed Iran’s behavior on the world stage? Have we put a stop to Hezbollah or Hamas by refusing to talk with them? We have not had diplomatic relations with Cuba since 1961. Did that stop Castro? Did that democratize Cuba? What a load of ignorant horseshit.

In 1939, as Hitler began his march across Europe, there were many, many people who wanted to avoid another world war, given the utter devastation that the first one had had on the continent. The appeasers of that time actually ceded control of territory to Hitler based on his promises that he’d be all done grabbing territory once he had the, e.g., Sudetenland.

That. Is. Not. What. Is. Being. Suggested. Here. You know who’s saying stuff like, “maybe we give the Golan Heights back to Syria in exchange for peace?” Israel. That’s who.

What harm is there to hold talks with nation-states that are our enemies? That it conveys some sort of legitimacy to them? Their legitimacy - or lack thereof - is an internal matter. If a particular government holds a seat at the UN, or holds itself out to be the duly constituted representative of a country, there’s little we can do to change that. What basis does the US have to challenge the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad’s regime?

For too long, this country has held a country’s good behavior as a prerequisite to high-level discussions. (Except for poorly-behaving countries that have oil or are anti-Communist or otherwise agree to promote US interests in some way). So, we’re being hypocritical about it all from jump street.

Does it not cross anyone’s mind that talks might lead to good behavior? Yes, Syria and Iran are causing havoc in Lebanon right now. Well, the Lebanese government is useless, we don’t talk to Iran, and we’re loath to talk to Syria (even though the Israelis are working towards doing that, using Egypt as a go-between). These countries with whom we refuse to speak are like the problem kid in school who thrives on negative attention. Sometimes, the carrot works a whole lot better than the stick.

But…um…here’s my question. Isn’t what Bush did here supposed to be off-limits?

When a Dixie Chick - a Dixie Chick had the bare-faced gall to criticize Bush to a UK audience, she was excoriated for being a traitor, or worse. But the President of the United States - it’s ok for him to launch an attack on an opposing US party from a foreign country?

If Obama had launched an attack on George W. Bush from somewhere off US soil, the media - left and right - would have a fricking field day. George Bush? The one who honors dead American servicemen and women by not playing golf? It’s ok for him.

But the long and short of it is this: Talking with our enemies does not equal appeasing them.

Obama responds:

“It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack,” Obama said in the statement his aides distributed. “George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.”

January 2009 can’t come soon enough.

UPDATE: Check out Joe Biden’s reaction:

“This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in the Knesset … and make this kind of ridiculous statement…

“He is the guy who has weakened us,” he said. “He has increased the number of terrorists in the world. It is his policies that have produced this vulnerability that the U.S. has. It’s his [own] intelligence community [that] has pointed this out, not me.”

Biden noted that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have both suggested that the United States ought to find a way to talk more with its enemies.

“If he thinks this is appeasement, is he going to come back and fire his own cabinet?” Biden asked. “Is he going to fire Condi Rice?”

Burma (Myanmar) has been led by a brutal, genocidal military junta for decades. It was hit by a massive, devastating cyclone last week and hundreds of thousands of people perished.

Now, the world is trying to send aid, but the junta is only allowing some shipments of food into the country - not the aid workers to go with it. As one would expect, this means that the government is not getting the aid to the people, and the devastation is thereby worsened artificially.

Perhaps in the meantime we can offer our aid through intermediary countries that get along better with Burma, like China or India. It’s a terrible shame that this totalitarian dictatorship, chooses political self-interest over the interest of its people - but it’s hardly surprising. That, or maybe they hired Brownie to oversee their relief situation.

You can help at:

US Campaign for Burma
UNICEF / Direct Relief International via Google Checkout
Doctors without Borders
Avaaz

Robert Mugabe is one thug who won’t let a little thing like an election stand in the way of brutal repression of any opposition.

The former freedom fighter who has clung to power for 28 years and sports an anachronistic, eyebrow-raising Hitler mustache, quite clearly lost re-election on March 29th. We know that with clear certainty. We know it despite the fact that official results of the election have not been released. We know it despite the fact that Zimbabwe’s election commission is conducting a “re-count” of votes despite the fact that there are no results announced yet.

Why and how do we know it? We’ll let Jendayi Frazer, assistant secretary of state for African Affairs take that one:

“This is a government rejecting the will of the people,” Ms. Frazer said, referring to the Zimbabwe electoral commission’s refusal to announce who won the March 29 presidential election. “If they had voted for Mugabe, the results would already have been announced. Everyone knows what time it is.”

Bingo. If Mugabe had won, it would have been announced instantly. Yet here we are almost a month later, and Mugabe’s ZANU-PF has taken to totalitarian, terrorist tactics to silence the victorious opposition. What better way to try and consolidate your absolute power than to raid the opposition’s HQ and arrest everyone in sight? Oh, and don’t forget to beat them within an inch of their lives.

As a leaflet being distributed in Harare points out, “just because ZANU-PF and Robert Mugabe are thrashing about like a fish on a hook, it doesn’t mean that we have lost.”

On March 29th, the people of Zimbabwe voted for change; for a future. They voted to reject the old, brutal socialist and replace him with people who would look out for the people’s best interests. To climb out of inflation of over $100,000, and reclaim Zimbabwe’s historic position as the breadbasket of Africa.

Not unsurprisingly, Mugabe is back up to his old tricks.

In a democracy, the winners win and the losers lose.

From a South African radio station, courtesy of Sokwanele. Note the office hours of the “Zimbabwe Embassy”.

The opposition has won a parliamentary majority, and the Presidential results have not officially been announced. In any event, read this, which is the first blog post I can remember reading by someone looking forward to a day without dictatorial tyranny.

Possibly the most important election in the world right now is happening in Zimbabwe - a country that has gone from being Africa’s breadbasket to being Africa’s basket case. All thanks to the mismanagement and megalomania of one man, who at 84 has exceeded his country’s current life expectancy almost threefold.

I posted this from Josh Marshall yesterday:

I think Hillary Clinton is definitely qualified to be commander-in-chief of the US military. In fact, I think she’d make a strong one. She had a successful legal career. She participated in key decisions during the Clinton administration. And she’s beginning her second term in the US senate. Her husband was qualified to be commander-in-chief too — at 46 and having spent his whole political career in Little Rock.

But just what on earth is Hillary Clinton talking about when she says she’s crossed the “commander in chief threshold” which John McCain has also crossed but Barack Obama hasn’t?

There are two ways of looking at what’s required for this aspect of the president’s job. One school of thought has it that a potential president needn’t be an expert on military affairs or foreign relations any more than he or she needs to be an experts in economics. They need to be informed and knowledgeable. But what’s most needed is temperament, maturity and judgment. Detailed expertise can come from advisors.

Others think it’s precisely the expertise that’s needed. So someone like a Joe Biden is the kind of person you want — someone who’s deeply schooled in every aspect of foreign relations and has been at it for literally decades. John McCain has some of that and he was also career military which gives him, at least arguably, some special grasp of the military components of the job. Bill Richardson had at least some cred on that scale based on his time in the Congress, UN Ambassador and general ad hoc rogue regime diplomacy.

Hillary Clinton seems to think she’s a strong contender in this latter category. But that’s a joke. She’s starting her second term in the US senate, where, yes, she serves on the Armed Services committee. Beside that she’s never held elective office and she has little executive experience. I think she can argue that she’d make and would make a strong commander-in-chief. But she’s pushing a metric by which she’s little distinguishable from Barack Obama. I’m honestly surprised she’s not drawing chuckles on this one.

Well, running off that theme, read this Chicago Tribune article, which examines Clinton’s claims of foreign policy experience during her husband’s presidency, as well as during her Senate career. For instance,

Pressed in a CNN interview this week for specific examples of foreign policy experience that has prepared her for an international crisis, Clinton claimed that she “helped to bring peace” to Northern Ireland and negotiated with Macedonia to open up its border to refugees from Kosovo. She also cited “standing up” to the Chinese government on women’s rights and a one-day visit she made to Bosnia following the Dayton peace accords.

So, using that as a template, the Tribune asked people who were there:

But her involvement in the Northern Ireland peace process was primarily to encourage activism among women’s groups there, a contribution that the lead U.S. negotiator described as “helpful” but that an Irish historian who has written extensively about the conflict dismissed as “ancillary” to the peace process.

The Macedonian government opened its border to refugees the day before Clinton arrived to meet with government leaders. And her mission to Bosnia was a one-day visit in which she was accompanied by performers Sheryl Crow and Sinbad, as well as her daughter, Chelsea, according to the commanding general who hosted her…

…”She was especially involved in encouraging women to get involved in the peace process,” which was a “significant factor” in the agreement, Mitchell said in an interview.

But Tim Pat Coogan, an Irish historian who has written extensively on the conflict in Northern Ireland, said the first lady’s visits were not decisive in the negotiating breakthroughs in Northern Ireland.

“It was a nice thing to see her there, with the women’s groups. It helped, I suppose,” Coogan said. “But it was ancillary to the main thing. It was part of the stage effects, the optics.

“There were all kinds of peace movements, women’s movements throughout the ‘Troubles.’ But it was more about the clout of Bill Clinton,” added Coogan, who said Clinton administration decisions to grant visas to leaders of the Irish Republican Army’s political wing and appoint a U.S. negotiator were the keys to changing the political climate.

Beijing? She gave a rousing speech on womens’ rights, but it had nothing to do with managing a global crisis. Macedonia? They had opened the border with Kosovo the day before Clinton arrived. Here’s a contemporaneous NY Times story about the visit to Bosnia. It was a USO tour.

Let’s say it’s nowhere near as extensive or influential as she’d have you believe, and the idea that she has crossed some sort of magical commander-in-chief “threshold” that Obama hasn’t is ludicrous. She might be running against someone who has less experience in the Senate than she does, but why she feels the need to basically pad her resume is beyond me.

Some voters had fun with their paper ballots, via English Russia.

Kosovo is so dear to the Serbian heart that some young demonstrators showed their anger at the loss of the cradle of Serbian civilization by looting local stores for sneakers.

That’ll show them!

They approach the young woman holding just-looted shoes and ask her if she got the right size.

He later asks the blonde her name, and she asks him not to tape her. He then tells her that she and her friend are heroes of the demonstration.

That’s the word this Serbian paper used to describe the rioting in Belgrade today. One person was killed, and over 150 injured.

I haven’t seen it used seriously since this.