The Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead announced in Annapolis recently that "diversity is the number one priority" at the Naval Academy, where I have been a Professor of English for 22 years.

The Naval Academy superintendent, Vice Adm. Jeffrey Fowler, echoed him. Everyone understands that "diversity" here means nonwhite skins.

Fowler insisted recently that we needed to have Annapolis graduates who "looked like" the Fleet, where enlisted people are about 42 percent nonwhite, largely African American and Hispanic.

The stunning revelation last week was that the Naval Academy had an incoming class that was "more diverse" than ever before: 35 percent minority.

Sounds good, only this comes with a huge price tag. It's taxpayers who bankroll the military. Yet nobody has asked us if we're willing to pay this price. Instead we're being told there is no price to pay at all. If you believe that, you probably also believe in the Tooth Fairy.

This week's HFR is way, way more than half-full - it's overflowing. 

The delicious destruction of a Democrat fascist is so orgasmic it can't be confined to an HFR blurb, but deserved its own article:  The Real Spitzer Scandal.

The Hillary-Obambi Destruction Derby keeps getting better.  But as we enjoy Obambi having to fire his Israel-hating/Palestinian terrorist-loving advisor Samantha Power for calling Hillary a "monster" (you mean she isn't?  who knew?), and the PIAPS having to fire her advisor Geraldine Ferraro for pointing out that people pay attention to Obambi only because he's black (when everyone knows he's only half-black) - let's focus on the real cause of the mud fight:

There's no substantive difference between these two moonbats in terms of political principles or ideology or Big Brother/Big Government programs they both advocate.  Thus the only way to create a difference between them is through personal invective, attack, insult, and smear.

So far, even though Her Thighness had to grovel yesterday (3/13) to blacks in apology for Ms. Ferraro's telling the truth, Obambi has definitely been more damaged in the fight so far than she.

This week's HFR focuses on the Obamarama - or as Jack Kelly describes him, the guy in an empty suit with a glass jaw. 

Naturally, we're all dancing on the bar tables over Hillary's winning Texas and Ohio, ensuring a vicious catfight between her and Obambi from now ‘till Labor Day.  What fun.

It turns out, though, that Hillary has a woman on her side who is turning out to be one of her campaign's greatest assets, who just may ensure the Hildebeast's victory over Obambi and her nomination.  Nope, not Gloria Steinem nor Barbra Streisand nor Halle Berry.  I refer, of course, to...

***
...On the international scene, the HFR reports that Jews around the world rioted in violent protest over a British researcher's claims that Moses, the founder of the Jewish religion, was high on psychedelic drugs and hallucinated that he spoke to God on Mount Sinai.

It is hard to get there if you don't know where you want to go.

Despite the Democrats gaining control of Congress and his own previous mistakes, President Bush still has the opportunity to leave a constructive economic legacy, but to do so he must first clearly define his goals and determine what is realistically doable.

It turns out there is a trio of legacies - regarding reforming Social Security, excessive spending, and excessive regulation - being made available to him.

Grand Cayman, The Cayman Islands Turtle Farm.
If people were not allowed to own chickens and if chicken eggs and meat could not be legally sold, how many chickens would there be? 

The reason chickens, cattle, catfish, and goldfish are not endangered is because they are owned by private parties, bred and raised in captivity, and sold for commercial profit - hence there are billions of these animals. 

The poor sea turtle is endangered precisely because the global environmental lobby refuses to let sea turtles be commercially farmed and marketed like chickens and cattle and catfish.

Our effort in Iraq passed a major milestone this week: Our troops are leaving the cities.

Advisers remain in place. Joint patrols will still occur. And our forces will wait nearby to respond to Iraqi calls for support. But the last of the bases and US-only outposts within Iraq's urban centers will be vacated.

Terrorists have already begun testing the new security arrangements. Iraqi forces won't always pass with flying colors.

Yet this situation seemed a pipe dream not so long ago: Iraq's security forces, serving an elected government, assume primary responsibility for the good order of their own country.  It is an extraordinary achievement, the credit for which goes to President George W. Bush.

To borrow historian Niall Ferguson's metaphor, if finance is an evolutionary process, then regulation is its intelligent design - which, I would add, is a cognate of faith, not science.

Or, to take the observation of former Federal Reserve Governor Frederic Mishkin, if "the financial system (is) the brain of the economy," then, I would suggest, heavy regulation is its lobotomy; while it removes the emotional highs and lows, it also dulls the perception, facility and adroitness.

A century ago, medical science had faith in lobotomies. Today, it seems, Washington political science has faith in lobotomizing financial regulation.

I have been saving a very special bottle of wine - a 1992 Chateau Vieux French Bordeaux - for a very specific occasion:  to celebrate the death of Fidel Castro.  Looks like I'll be opening it soon - for the best news of the week is Castro's announcing he has one foot in the grave by ending his 49-year run as Cuba's El Jefe Maximo.

I chose the vintage not just because 1992 was a great year for French reds, but because I went to Cuba that year.  I told the story a couple of years ago in Cuba Libré.  A meeting with Castro had been set up, at which I intended to tell him the Cuban people would some day urinate on his grave.  He got wind of it and canceled the meeting.  My wife was very relieved.

Dagny D'Anconia explained the dictator's slow and awful descent towards demise some time ago in The Partial Assassination of Fidel Castro.  Drawn-out lingering nightmare agony - just the sort of hell a piece of murderous human garbage deserves.

What's hilarious is the lib media's portrayal of Raul Castro as a Cuban Mikhail Gorbachev reformer.  Raul is a 76-year old alcoholic who hasn't much longer to go himself.  The army and secret police still run everything, but with Fidel gone the regime has no legitimacy.  Odds will increase for a really bloody revolution.

There is a wonderful new book, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, by distinguished climate physicist Fred Singer and award-winning environmental economist Dennis Avery. The conclusion of their book in a nutshell is that, yes, the world is getting a bit warmer, but this is just the natural cycle.

They provide overwhelming evidence this warming would occur with or without mankind increasing CO2 emissions or doing anything else. The good news is that if we realize we cannot stop global warming, and concentrate on constructively dealing with the problems it causes -- which are all manageable at reasonable cost -- and then enjoy the benefits, mankind will do just fine.

We have already had two cycles in recorded history; the Roman warming (200 B.C. to 600 A.D.) which was a very prosperous period, and the medieval warming (900 to 1300) during which farms were created in Greenland and Iceland. The modern warming period began about 1850, well before mankind was producing massive amounts of CO2.

Assume you are a mid-level bureaucrat in a government regulatory agency, and you know your pay and title depend on how many regulations you are responsible for administering, and the number of people who work for you. Do you think you would push for more or fewer regulations?

Assume you are a corporate regulatory compliance officer, and again you know your pay depends in part upon the number of regulations you must comply with, and the number of people who work for you. Would you tend to favor a world with more or fewer regulations?

Or, assume you are an elected politician, and a major scandal occurs because a financial manager has embezzled funds. Are you more likely to get coverage on the TV news if you say, "We already have laws against theft, and the authorities will take care of it," or if you say, "We need more regulations to stop greedy financiers"?