Russia is laying claim to a vast swath of the Arctic, and the oil and natural gas that lies beneath it. You have to give them credit for being inventive.

One writer, sensing the possibility that NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg might run for President, sees a historical parallel with 1912. Of course, the third party candidate in that election, former President Theodore Roosevelt, still failed to achieve a victory.

John Podhoretz sees the defeat of the immigration bill as the political end of the Bush presidency. I think he is correct.

Former Defense Secretary Melvin Laird reminds us that we did not lose the Vietnam War because it could not be won, but because Congress chose not to fund our allies when they were invaded by troops from the North. He is correct.

Worried about illegal immigration from Mexico? Don't sweat it, because according to this piece, birth rates are plummeting south of the border and soon the Mexicans will be just as desperate for young, strong laborers as we are.

H.D.S. Greenway writes a tribute to the U.S. Navy.

John Leo writes about the troubling research that shows how diversity within a community causes alienation and friction.

Four Sunni sheiks who were helping us defeat al-Qaeda in Iraq are killed by a suicide bomber.

Michael Barone tries to untangle the polls. It is a good analysis (as always). My own interpretation of the polls is, to put it simply, it's too soon to tell. Republicans are looking for Reagan and Democrats are looking for a winner, any winner, which is why Hillary continues to hold a solid, steady lead. Richard Cohen looks back at 1972 for a winning paradigm for the GOP, although I don't buy it. If anything, 2008 is 1968. 2012 will be 1972, as President Hillary Clinton continues to fight a war in Iraq, while telling the public she is trying to end it.

Newt Gingrich says we are fighting World War IV, and doing so with incompetent and borderline cowardly leaders. Like the prominent neo-cons, Gingrich believes the Cold War was World War III, and the Islamist jihad is World War IV. The problem with their analogy is that the majority of the American people aren't buying it and won't, at least until we are hit with another devastating attack here at home.

Andrew C. McCarthy says the Bush Doctrine is dead. That's been apparent for some time.

Various operatives working for his GOP rivals have tried to bring up Mitt Romney's Mormonism as a weapon against him. Each time, they have been forced to retreat. It is simply not politically correct to take aim at a candidate's religion. Eventually, the other campaigns will rely on outside groups to bring it up, which will be a frustratingly indirect way to get at him, so I expect more operatives will stumble all over themselves trying to use the issue. By the way, being a Mormon didn't seem to effect Romney's efforts as Governor of Massachusetts, so I don't see why it would make a difference if he became President (I suspect having been Governor of Massachusetts will have a greater negative effect on his campaign than his religion).

Here is a list of journalists who have made political contributions in recent years. Of course, the overwhelming majority contributed to Democrats, rather than Republicans.

John Zogby thinks New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has a chance of winning if he decides to run for President as an independent. Historically, third party candidates have not fared well. I am keeping an open mind, however, until the Dems and the GOP choose their candidates, and until I find out what great idea or ideas Bloomberg will run on, if he runs.

Ralph Peters says we are finally trying to win the Iraq War. Unfortunately, the war was lost long ago here at home.

My WBZ colleague Paul Sullivan has decided to stop doing his nightly talk show. Here is the audio interview he did with morning anchor Ed Walsh. I have had the chance to fill-in for Paul a couple of times, and I have done the Steve Leveille broadcast as a fill-in numerous times, so I have had many conversations with Paul as we transitioned from the end of his show. His courage and sense of humor while facing cancer has been inspirational to all.

ABC News is reporting that they have a video which shows suicide bombers being sent on their way to Europe and America. If true, and they succeed in carrying out some attacks here in the U.S., then the whole dynamic of the political process in this country will change overnight. An immigration bill without a true border fence? Fugghedaboudditt! The peace party (Democrats, of course) in a walk in the next election? Not so fast, re-run breath. McCain a dead duck in the GOP race? Hold the phone, Eileen.

A big offensive is under way in Iraq. Michael Yon is with the troops, and he describes the action so far in this post.

Ralph Peters knows why Hamas won in Gaza.

Victor Davis Hanson writes about the hypocrisy that destroys civilization.

Fred Thompson's entry into the GOP presidential race could be a turning point.

The Muslim world is infuriated by the knighthood bestowed on Salman Rushdie.

Michael Barone hopes the confusion caused by the leap-frogging of states in the presidential primary process will lead to a more orderly system. Don't hold your breath, Michael.

First she loses an election, now she loses a long-time-live-in-might-have-been-a-husband.

Abu Mazen has formed a new cabinet for the Palestinian Territories. Of course, it only has real power on the West Bank, as Gaza is now Hamastan.

After Gaza, Peter Brookes says Lebanon is next.

Another report that indicates the Israelis are preparing for possible military action in Gaza.

An interesting report from an Israeli in Ramallah.

The Israelis might be better off waiting a bit for Fatah to consolidate its hold of the West Bank and then getting private assurances that all will be quiet before taking action against Hamas in Gaza. Perhaps they are in the process of doing just that.

In Gaza, Hamas emerges triumphant. John Podhoretz says that one result of their victory will be an end to the phrase "Palestinian state" for a very, very long time. Martin Indyk has thought on the result, as well. I am of the view that the result is not necessarily such a bad thing, both for those Palestinians who really want a peace deal with Israel and for the Israelis themselves. Now that Hamas has won in Gaza, they will have to govern. I suspect that things will get pretty bad there, a process that may turn more Palestinians against Hamas. In any event, if Fatah can consolidate its position on the West Bank, the Israelis may be able to make a separate deal with them. Of course, if the Iranians can find a way to continue to support Hamas in Gaza, then all bets are off.

Joe Lieberman writes an op-ed about what he saw in Iraq. Bill Kristol and Fred Kagan say that al-Qaeda's recent atrocities are part of a "slow motion Tet" designed to win the war by defeating us here at home. They are both correct, it seems to me. We are making progress in Iraq against al-Qaeda, while we continue to lose ground politically here at home. Like Vietnam, the Iraq War will be lost on the home-front, not by the soldiers in the field.

Con Coughlin says Israel is now surrounded on all sides by Islamic fundamentalists.

Here is a must-read piece about America's fading martial spirit, which explains very well the growing disconnect between our military and the society-at-large and why wars such as Korea, Vietnam and Iraq are difficult to prosecute while maintaining public support.

David Chase, the creator of "The Sopranos", speaks about the end of the series and the controversy it has generated.

In Japan, a grand-daughter of Hideki Tojo calls for the scrapping of the U.S.-drafted constitution and a restoration of Japan's army. If it were ever to come to pass it would cause a great deal of anxiety among the neighbors.

Some conservatives have drafted a litmus test for potential GOP presidential candidates. They want to limit presidential power and, so far, they only have Congressman Ron Paul on their side among those running for the nomination.

Speaking of conservatives, Newt Gingrich blasts the Bush Administration for attempting to revive the immigration bill. Gingrich may yet jump into the race.

Anne Applebaum reminds us of the seemingly forgotten threat.

Today's must-read, from the op-ed page of The New York Times. "After the Bomb" discusses why the Federal Government should begin planning on how to deal with a small nuclear blast in the heart of an American city. I have been preaching from that hymnal for some time now. I am convinced that the Islamofascist terrorists are working very diligently to try and acquire a nuclear weapon. Once they succeed, they will use it. So I agree with the authors that we should begin planning for that day, and the day after. Many lives could be saved with adequate planning. But what the authors fail to do is take into account the emotional, political reaction in the rest of the country. They seem to discount retaliation, which is the standard line in these exercises, "Well, who would we retaliate against?", goes the common refrain. To that, I simply ask one to recall the reaction of Americans on the day of and the days after 9/11. Imagine that reaction multiplied several times. After 9/11 the President had to retaliate, and he chose Afghanistan under the logical assumption that Osama bin Laden was being given sanctuary there. After the nuclear 9/11, the American President will once again need to retaliate. He (or she) will pick a target (Iran, anyone?). The people in the targeted nation will suffer, the innocent and the guilty alike. A conflagration will be sparked that will cause millions to die in the years thereafter. Which is why I believe the efforts of our current President need to be seen in that context. While Iraq has turned into a political blunder, it was carried out with the best of intentions. The President and his people believed that the way to prevent the spread of Islamofascism and, therefore, the exponential increase in the likelihood of its fanatic adherents obtaining and using a nuclear weapon, was to spread democracy in the Islamic world. So far, it is not working. Future historians may very well speculate about the course of history if it had succeeded, a course that would have been far more peaceful than the alternative.

Last night marked the end of a landmark television series, "The Sopranos". The episode has created controversy, with some folks condemning it, and others praising it. I, for one, count myself among those who find that the last episode, especially the last scene, perfectly fits within the spirit of the series as a whole. It was unconventional, thought-provoking, conversation-inducing, and left the viewer without the solace of a tidy, made-for-TV ending which we, as Americans, have become so used to since the debut of the first commercial TV programs back in the late 1940s. This, of course, has been the essence of the Sopranos since its debut in 1999. Series creator David Chase, who wrote and directed the final episode, has consistently resisted the convenient and comforting TV-show paradigm that has marked so many shows over so many decades. He created an anti-hero, a sociopathic New Jersey mobster who time-and-again showed us why we should loathe him, but we rooted for him anyway, right up to the end. Our reaction to Tony Soprano as an audience was brilliantly mirrored by Chase through the character of Agent Harris, the FBI agent who was part of the team that tried to bring Tony down, until the character was transferred to anti-terrorist duties after 9/11. Harris has slowly, reluctantly, been feeding Tony information about the conversations going on in Brooklyn among the rival family members who wish him ill. In the final episode, Harris warns Tony again, which saves Tony (but not brother-in-law Bobby, or Silvio Dante). When Harris finds out that the rival mob boss Phil Leotardo has been whacked (after Harris provided Tony with the information necesary to find him), Harris exclaims, "We won!" Harris is us, the audience. We know we should wish Tony ill, either a long prison term or two in the hat, but we still want him to win.

The last scene brilliantly ends the series on an unorthodox note, which characterizes the series at it's best. Tony, wife Carmella, son A.J. and daughter Meadow are going to meet at a local restaurant where they eat regularly. Tony arrives first. Chase builds the suspense as he focuses on different people in the restaurant, or as they enter. Is this how it ends, a typical mob hit inside a restaurant? Will the Italian-looking middle-aged guy emerge from the restroom and kill Tony in front of his family, just as Leotardo was killed in front of his? How about the guy in the baseball cap, or the two guys who look like gang-bangers? Chase builds the tension in Hitchcockian fashion, as Meadow struggles to parallel park outside. Just at the moment when Meadow runs toward the door, Tony looks up and then.....cut to black. No music, nothing. My wife stormed out of the room, "I hate that". Chase, no doubt, would be pleased.

Unorthodox. Brilliant.

Here is the AP story on last night's GOP debate here in NH. Unfortunately, due to a prior commitment, I missed the broadcast. Hopefully, it will be re-broadcast on C-SPAN or otherwise become available so that I can see it, and then post some comments.

Dick Morris has this column in which he says that Iraq will become "Hillary's War" if she becomes President. He is right, unless the Congress does force a unilateral and complete withdrawal before 2009, which I still think is possible, although Morris does not.

Robert J. Samuelson writes about the equality quagmire.

Arnaud de Borchgrave writes about the consequences of the Six Day War in 1967.

U.S. Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY) has died. Apparently, although the governor is a Democrat, he will choose a Republican replacement, so the balance of power remains unchanged.

Victor Davis Hanson (who, by the way, I will get a chance to meet when we interview him for our Bloomberg radio show in NYC next week) says we have the power to defeat the Islamists in Iraq and elsewhere, but he also describes the conditions that make it unlikely we will do so.

A U.S. court has rejected FCC broadcast decency rules. This will certainly go to the Supreme Court.

The Democrats plan an assault on Capitol Hill this Summer. No, not against our Islamist enemies, but against the GOP. By keeping up the pressure they hope to peel off enough Republicans so that they can get a withdrawal from Iraq. I believe it will work, because polls like this one show the public increasingly weary of the war.

Michael Yon, as always, does some of the best on-the-scene reporting from Iraq that one can find anywhere. This time, he is travelling through the desert with some of Her Majesty's finest.

Yesterday, the New York Times reported on why the surge is not working. Today, Frederick Kagan tells us why the New York Times is wrong.

If you read the New York Times, you know (again) that the surge is not working.

Also, if you read the Times, you know that Moqtada al-Sadr is actually a good guy.

I watched the Democratic Presidential debate last night, which was held at St. Anselm's College in Goffstown, NH and carried live on CNN and WMUR-TV. First, kudos to my friends Scott Spradling and Tom Fahey for their participation as the journalist questioners, working through mic problems to ask good questions. Second, I think the format was quite good. With so many candidates, having a two-hour debate makes perfect sense. It also makes sense to not have bells or lights that hold people to hard time limits. A good moderator (and Wolf Blitzer did a good job) should be able to keep things moving while giving the candidates time to state their case. Finally, I think the debate allowed voters here in NH the chance to get some idea, beyond sound-bites, of who these people are under the lights. It allowed Senator Obama to look like a reasonable, intelligent and competent man, which is his burden of proof as the newcomer to the national scene. It allowed Senator Clinton to bolster her credentials as a person of gravity, and gave some of the others a chance to show themselves to a wider audience. Of course, John Edwards used the debate as an opportunity to try and take it to Clinton and Obama, which he did with some success. If for no other reason than it gave the audience an opportunity to re-assess him, I think Edwards "won" the debate, if we can even worry about winners and losers for a debate so far removed from actual voting (which I think we cannot).

As a New Hampshire Republican, I will, of course, not take a Democratic ballot in the New Hampshire primary. I will, therefore, be paying closer attention to the GOP debate tomorrow night. But, as a casual observer, I think the Democrats were given an opportunity last night to consider their options with care. While Clinton and Obama did nothing to cause a re-consideration of their candidacies, and Richardson, Biden, Dodd, Kucinich and Gravel did nothing to allow them to break into the upper tier, John Edwards gave folks some food for thought. In 2008, with the Republicans still standing, like it or not, as the party of the current (terribly unpopular) administration, it still is not a slam-dunk for the Democrats. They might want to consider a Southerner, especially if the GOP discards its current front-runners and nominates a former actor from Tennessee.

That TB patient tells ABC News that doctors told him it was safe for him to travel, and he can prove it. This story just keeps getting stranger.

A look back at the surprise comeback victory for the GOP in 2008.

In the NY Post, John Podhoretz says when considering the President's political problems it's all about Iraq, and Ralph Peters cogently argues that the Islamists have a sound strategy for defeating the U.S., while we still do not have one for winning in Iraq.

Here in New Hampshire, two examples of why this state is more Libertarian than traditionally Conservative or Liberal, as the State Senate rejects a mandatory seat belt law and the Governor signs a same-sex civil unions bill into law.

Finally, in a must-read column, Peggy Noonan explains why President Bush has lost his political base. I agree with her, which is why I believe the Republicans will block his immigration bill and will abandon him on the Iraq War in September.