Muslims Now Offended By Sharia-Compliant Minny Mouse

Do these people even know what they are angry about?  Via Anorak:

One of Egypt's richest men has been accused of mocking Islam after tweeting cartoons of Mickey and Minnie Mouse wearing conservative Muslim attire.

Telecoms mogul and Coptic Christian Naguib Sawiris apologised for re-posting the images on Twitter a few days ago, saying he meant no offence.

But several Islamic lawyers have filed a formal complaint and there are calls for a boycott of his businesses.....tens of thousands of people have joined groups on Facebook and other social media condemning him.

"There's a fine line between expressing your opinion/freedom of speech and being flat out disrespectful," said one woman.

Shares in Mr Sawiris' telecoms company, Orascom - Egypt's largest private employer - have already fallen as a result of the row and subsequent calls for a boycott.

The prosecutor general's office said a group of Salafist Muslim lawyers had filed a complaint accusing Mr Sawiris of religious contempt.

"How can a man like this make fun of Muslims, in a country on the brink of sectarian discord," Muslim cleric Mazen el-Sersawi said in a television interview.

"If this is just joking, why don't you depict Mickey Mouse as a monk or a nun?"

Well, I couldn't find Micky Mouse dressed as a priest, but I found a bishop dressed as Mickey Mouse:

As far a being a nun, well, Mickey Mouse is a boy, and so....well, I suppose I understand the confusion, what with sharia-compliant women dressed essentially in sacks, but trust me, my Egyptian friends, male mice do not wear nun's attire.

But to get back to my original point...isn't the image of the dhimmi Minnie deferential towards Islam, as it subjugates her to it's 12th century attitude towards women?  Is this image not an example of religious respect, as opposed to contempt?  What they hell is there to be angry about?  Are the people of Islam so beaten into submission that they will anger simply when told to do so, even when it completely defies even the most basic logical premises?

And why do we pay these people any mind whatsoever?

The Obama Press Conference: A President On The Verge Of A Nervous Breakdown?

Yuval Levin on Barack Obama's disastrous press conference yesterday, the one that led erstwhile lover Mark Halprin to call him a "dick":

The President came before reporters without any news to make. He seemed to want to vent a kind of unfocused rage at Congress for something—criticizing congressional leaders at various points for taking too many breaks, for failing to take up patent reforms and free trade legislation, and generally ignoring the fiscal crisis (all of which, we can only assume, were criticisms of Democratic leaders). And when he turned to Republicans, he argued that they were not making serious proposals in the debt-limit talks. They were failing to lead, he said repeatedly.

It all had the feel of a childish tantrum by a person who desperately wishes he were living in a different reality—one in which he is the heroic man of action and his opponents are irresponsible and weak. But the fact is, the president and congressional Democrats have so far utterly failed to offer any path out of our fiscal problems—problems that they have greatly exacerbated....

But overarching all of this there seemed to be a deep rage against the realities of the moment he has found himself in, and the part he has found himself playing in that moment.

Now let's go to the whispers of a White House insider back in November, who claimed even back then that the president was "losing it":

I don’t have a problem saying that the president is losing it...When you take away the crowds, Obama gets noticeably smaller. He shrinks up inside of himself. He just doesn’t seem to have the confidence to do the job of President, and it’s getting worse and worse.
Case in point – just a few days before I left, I saw first hand the President of the United States yelling at a member of his staff. He was yelling like a spoiled child. And then he pouted for several moments after. I wish I was kidding, or exaggerating, but I am not. The President of the United States threw a temper tantrum.
 The jobs reports are always setting him off, and he is getting increasingly conspiratorial over the unemployment numbers. I never heard it myself, but was told that Obama thinks the banking system is out to get him now. That they and the big industries are making him pay for trying to regulate them more. That is the frame of mind the President is in these days....

Sean Hannity, around the same time:

“There are some Democrats that cue me into things. I got to tell you that the feeling among some people in the White House is that this president is unhinged, that he’s detached, that he’s losing it, he’s obsessed with critics, very specifically obsessed with Fox News, he can’t stand Biden, he hates the Clintons, the Clintons hate him. That the only thing he is passionate about seems to be ESPN and playing golf and and playing some basketball, the only thing that gets his interest."

"Narcissus Unhinged", indeed.  Was the bizarre press conference yesterday the first outward sign that our cerebral, cool-as-a-cucumber president is beginning to crack under pressure?  Is he so intellectually inflexible - an ideological brother to a religious zealot - that upon seeing the inefficiency of his long-held socioeconomic theories, he crawls into a corner, beats his fists and shrieks in rage and despair rather than attempt to think his way out of the box?

After long years spent worrying about a madman with his finger on the button, it turns out our nightmares have borne fruit.  Alas, our madman is not a Mullah or a tyrant, but a deranged Democrat, who may well destroy us all rather than admit his pet theories are failures...

Obama's Fundraising Fail

Via White House Dossier, we get a copy of an email Barack Obama sent out to his increasingly nervous campaign supporters:

We’re closing the books on the first fundraising quarter of the 2012 race at midnight tomorrow.

A lot of folks will be interpreting our numbers as a measure of this campaign’s support.

They’re not wrong, but they are wrong about why.

We measure our success not in dollars but in people — in the number of everyday Americans who’ve chosen to give whatever they can afford because they know we’ve got more work to do.

Just another case of Obama changing the metrics of success in order to claim victory?

Too bad his campaign put forth loud and clear that they expected to raise a cool $1 billion for the re-election campaign, including shakedown money, fraudulent credit card transactions, and illegal overseas contributions. While the media likely will not report on any of the failings of the Obama campaign machine, a sharp drop in fundraising prowess will certainly embolden his adversaries.

Jeez...in retrospect, maybe it might not have been too smart for Barack Obama and the Democrats to alienate the entire Jewish community after all...



UPDATE 12:12PM - And the headlines are in!

Romney’s Fundraising Comes Up Short

Would you like some smoke with those mirrors, gentlemen?

The Obama Press Conference: Someone Left The Gaffe-O-Matic on High...

...because the stupidity flowing forth from The One seemed to reach new heights this morning:

President Obama called on Congressional Republicans to raise taxes on “corporate-jet owners” to decrease the deficit in a press conference at the White House this morning.

Yeah, I'm sure that's make a huge dent.  Like throwing a rock at the Death Star.  But the stupid goes way deeper than that:

Just a few months after lawmakers scolded auto executives for flying to Washington in private jets, Congress approved a tax break in the stimulus package to help businesses buy their own planes.

The incentive - first used to help plane makers recover from the 2001 terror attacks - sharply reduces the upfront tax bill for companies who buy assets such as business planes.

So I guess Barack forgot he was the one who offered that tax break to billionaires to begin with in his stimulus package. Either that, or he thinks the economy is in recovery mode, and doesn't need the help.

Then he turned the Gaffe-O-Matic up to...11:

Citing former GOP senators Alan Simpson and Pete Domenici, Obama insisted that “every single observer . . . who’s not a politician says we can’t reduce our deficit in the scale or scope that we need to without having a balanced approach that looks at everything.”

Really? Let's ask Ben Bernake - or better yet, let's allow Democrat Gerry Connolly to ask himself, and expose himself for the fool he is:




And the dumb-beat goes on - via Legal Insurrection:

He had the audacity to say with a straight face that his administration is trying to remove burdensome regulations, when in fact Obamacare and Dodd-Frank alone impose vast regulations (most of which have not been written yet, which freezes business investment) on virtually every area of the economy.

And then, in typical Obama fashion, he whined like a little bitch about it:

Later, the president, who stressed he would revise any cumbersome regulations, flashed his frustration with the business community’s complaints about red tape. “The business community is always complaining about regulations,” he sighed. “Because frankly they want to be able to do whatever they think is going to maximize their profits.”

Apparently, the president doesn't understand how profit-taking relates to job-making.  At this point, the Gaffe-O-Matic exploded, leaving confused handlers waving their arms and shouting, "this press conference is over!"

I'm sure the media won't report much on this latest show of illogic, ineptitude, inconsistency, and overall....flakiness by Barack Obama.  After all, there are stories about Michele Bachmann to file...

Why Michele Bachmann Can Win It All....

Matthew Continetti, subbing for Jen Rubin at Right Turn, quotes Jeffery Bell on why a more right-wing Republican can (and should) emerge from the primary and take it all in November 2012:

"... [T]he road to the next cycle of Republican success might be a more ideologically comprehensive and radical one, the road of Reagan rather than of Nixon or the Bushes. In a context of increased political polarization, [the] emergence of a more integrated and consistent Republican agenda, far more militant on economic and social issues, would be no great surprise—particularly in the wake of the analogous Democratic transition from the strategically eclectic, tactically nimble 'triangulation' of Bill Clinton to the ideologically consistent left agenda of post-Clinton candidates like Howard Dean and Barack Obama."

Continetti comments:

If Bell is right, then Washington's conventional understanding of the Republican party is way off the mark. Since President Obama's election, conventional opinion has held that the GOP will have to "moderate" if it wants to win. The opposite has happened, of course: The GOP has become more ideological on economic issues. And 2010 was one of the Republican Party's best cycles in decades.

The only question remains the role of the media in the 2012 election.  As their relevance continues to diminish, their ideological fervor has risen, and they see - perhaps more clearly than most of the establishment  - the threat that Michele Bachmann represents.  Hence the swinging of the guns away from Mitt, Tim, and even to a certain extent, Sarah (abashed, perhaps, by The Great Email Fiasco?) and the turning of all fire upon Michele.  Obama's horrible miscues, brutal economic record, and insanely corrupt administration are simply ignored while layers of sweating newsroom fops pore over Bachmann's every word looking for a hint of a faux pas that can be used to discredit her and reinforce the "flake" memo going around the media.  I've noticed too that even internet seach engines such as Bing and Yahoo flood us with negative headlines on Bachmann, going so far as to cite leftist bloggers as "news" as they post their screaming headlines on the top of the pile...

                   Media asks: Is Michele Bachmann a nut, or a slut?

How successful will it be?  Well, it destroyed Sarah Palin, but no one was prepared for the ferocity of that particular attack.  Michele has been forewarned, both by past events and by current media (think George Stephanopulous foreshadowing the investigation of her foster children), of the volley that is coming.  Her ability to win, and fulfill the prophecy above, is dependant on her smarts and savvy.  If she can see the shots coming, and duck them, and dodge them, and return fire in an effective manner, she can come out of the primaries unwounded, and be ready to present a fair case to the American people.

Barack Obama, when asked about his qualification while on the 2008 campaign trail, pointed to the fact that he was running a campaign as evidence enough of his capacity to lead the nation.  If Michele Bachmann can get past the unthinking, drooling hatred of the media mob, she will have already presented a better case for the presidency than Barack Obama ever did...

Obama to negotiate the debt ceiling through the media?

It's the time-tested ploy of the professional athlete at the end of his contract and looking for a big payday...bring your case and demands (all quite reasonable, of course) to the sports media, where you can talk directly to the fans, push the ownership into a corner, and get some positive coverage from writers looking to get the next big quote.

Apparently, Barack Obama is going the same route as he butts heads with Congressional Republicans on the debt ceiling:

President Barack Obama scheduled a news conference for late Wednesday morning, his first formal question-and-answer session since high-stakes debt and budget negotiations began.

Obama was expected to open with comments about spurring the economy and job growth, and touch on the deficit talks that have occupied Vice President Joe Biden and congressional leaders over the past several weeks.

Obama’s last full-blown news conference was in March...Obama has been stepping up his promotion of job creation initiatives amid evidence that the state of the economy has weakened his job approval standing with the public. Obama, no doubt, will also have to address the status of negotiations with Congress over long-term deficit reduction and an increase in the nation’s borrowing limit.

Looks as if Obama, who has been ducking the media for over three months, believes he can use them as a weapon against Republicans, assured they will carry his message - which will consist of demonizing conservatives while asking for just "a little more time' to turn the economy around (what, you expected a plan? Please...) - to the American people essentially verbatim.

And maybe he's right. But the problem with negotiating through the media, as many of the aforementioned athletes can tell you, is that sometimes instead of making ownership more pliable, it instead forces them to dig their heels in, out of either emotional resentment or as a long-term business strategy (if it succeeds once, you can bet it will be repeated).

And since the Republicans hold the House, and they are under limited contract to the American people based on their ability to perform to their specifications, well...I wouldn't be surprised to see this tactic backfire.  Both parties have way to much to lose if they fold to a media-generated dog and pony show at this critical juncture... 

TBS: Think Before Speaking

To See the Video, Just Click on the "PLAY SIGN" 

Sarah Palin Loves The Jews More Than The Jews Love Themselves

I happened to see this picture in the elevator today, as Captivate was using it to illustrate a "Sarah Palin Goes To Iowa" headline.  It appears to be a few weeks old, but it is interesting nevertheless:

Yeah, that's a big honking Star of David around her neck.  How many other presidential candidates (or non-candidate political figures) will be seen showing that type of solidarity with the Jewish people?  Even better - how many Jews these days display their own heritage so proudly?  I can tell you, even living and working in the heart of American Jew-dom, I can say...very, very few.

Were it any other type of religious or ethnic symbol, that group would swoon, and even if they did not support her political positions, would openly appreciate the show of respect and love.

Not us Jews, though.  We are too damn smart.  You see, we know someone who loves us so must be not just firmly rejected, but hated, with an outspoken vigor to match that of the most liberal Democrat and/or anti-Semite (as if there is a difference).

Jennifer Rubin, in her waning days at Commentary back in early  2010, wrote at length about the Palin/Jew disconnect:  Some highlights:

For her detractors, both conservative and liberal, she is uncouth, unschooled, a hick, anti-science and anti-intellectual, an upstart, and a religious fanatic. There is no group so firmly in the latter camp as American Jews....

Palin calls herself a “hockey mom” and brags aloud about the athletic prowess of her children, while Jews are more likely to sport “My child Is an Honor Student” bumper stickers. Palin’s oldest, Track, has joined the military, while many Jews lack a family military tradition. Not for the Palins the quiet pride in good grades and good boards; the family’s esteem is tied up more in Sarah’s husband Todd Palin’s “iron dog” snowmobile racing skills.

And, of course, there is Palin’s youngest. Pro-life Americans saw Palin’s son Trig, born with Down syndrome in April 2008, as an affirmation of Palin’s deeply held beliefs, a rare instance in which a politician did more than mouth platitudes about a “culture of life.” But in affluent communities with large Jewish populations, Down-syndrome children are now largely absent due to the widespread use of diagnostic testing and “genetics counseling.” Trig was not a selling point with many Jewish women who couldn’t imagine making a similar choice—indeed, many have, in fact, made the opposite one.

And there is the matter of social class. As she recounts in Going Rogue, Palin and her husband had labored at jobs most professional and upper-middle-class Jews would never dream of holding—waitressing, picking “strawberries in the mud and mosquitoes?.?.?.?for five cents flat,” sweeping parking lots, and many “messy, obscure seafood jobs, including long shifts on a stinky shore-based crab-processing vessel.” Her populist appeal and identification with working-class voters are rooted in a life experience that is removed by one or two generations from the lives of most American Jews. Her life is what they were expected to rise above....

But despite Sarah's own "disconnect" from Jewish life, and the land of Israel, she staunchly supports them both, because it is the right thing to do -  the Jews are in danger of being engulfed in a virulent anti-Semitism like nothing seen since the 1930's, and that same perfect storm is hell-bent on handing over Israel to barbarians who have vowed to push every last Jewish man, women, and child into the sea.

The Jews are in a foxhole right now, even though we delude ourselves, like we did in the 1930's, that it is all just talk, that nothing will come of it, even as our hero Barack Hussein Obama demands that we start their negotiations with the Palestinians with their heels in the Mediterranean.

And when a voice rises in the wilderness to defend us, we spit in her general direction, because she is so dissimilar to us, and we can't be troubled to take the time to think thru the differences. Better to be in the foxhole to face the charging hordes alone. Better to react with hatred, so that Palin's enemies - and they are legion - perhaps will see that the Jews are on their side after all!  Too bad, of course, that the mass of the Palin-haters could also slide easily into the Jew-haters camp without even a change of their hats...

And what the Jews don't realize is that when others see us ripping one of our staunchest defenders, it inhibits them from defending us, silencing perhaps astute voices that might rise to our cause. And it gives courage to our enemies, when they see that we are as willing to be led to our own self-immolation as they are to lead us there.  How can one argue that Jews deserve to live in peace when we fight to silence the voices that speak for us the loudest?

Should there be a Second Holocaust - and that's a 50/50 proposition at least, if not better - Jews cannot wail to the sky and ask why God has brought such vengeance upon them.

By siding with their enemies, they have brought it upon themselves.


And for the critics calling Sarah Palin a suck-up and a show-off, be aware that this is not the first time she's worn the Star of David proudly:

She's with us.  Are we?

Obama Wants 56 MPG Cars? Why Not Flying Carpets?

I suppose this falls under the old saw of "liberals want what they want, reality be damned", but this flight of fantasy is just a bit too much, and may destroy what's left of Detroit and the economy along with it.  The Detroit Free Press reports:

The White House is ramping up its discussions with automakers and elected officials regarding fuel economy standards for 2017-25, and informed the Detroit Three that the government is considering boosting those requirements to 56 miles per gallon by 2025.

Why not 75? Why not just demand mass-production of the winged Pegasus, flying ET-style bicycles, and just to be multi-cultural, some Arabian-style flying carpets? The Left wants what it wants, to paraphrase a certain perverted producer, and reality is just an intrusion upon their own warped fantasies.

Of course, since we are dealing with the Obama Administration, a certain amount of duplicity is involved:

According to three sources familiar with the matter, White House officials began meeting with several members of Michigan's congressional delegation Tuesday, but did not reveal specifics on any target number they were considering.

On Wednesday, however, mid-level administration officials held separate meetings in Washington with Detroit's automakers -- during which they floated the figure of 56 m.p.g. Leaders of the UAW also were separately briefed on the matter.

...which pissed off a certain high-powered Democrat:

On Thursday, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., unexpectedly broached the issue during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing -- venting his frustration with Cass Sunstein, a regulatory administrator with the Office of Management and Budget.

"My questions to Cass Sunstein on Thursday were prompted by my surprise to learn that the administration had decided to lay down a scenario for regulation of vehicle fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions after telling us just the day before that no 'decision' had been made relative to those issues," Levin said in a statement. "While the administration's statement was technically accurate that no final decision has been made, I was surprised to find that they obviously had made a 'decision' -- to suggest a numerical scenario the very next day."

The White House would not comment specifically on whether administration officials had raised the prospect of 56 m.p.g. Spokesman Matt Lehrich said "no decision has yet been made yet, but our goal remains to propose the rule this September.

"No decision has been made" means "a decision has been made" in Obama-speak, and even our jilted Democratic Senator knows that. They quite blithely lied to him, of course, knowing he would object upfront, while being well aware that he will do very little to stop them besides fume and fester.

Will this miracle by government fiat be free? Ah...no. Via Ricochet:

The fuel efficiency technology also drives the cost of vehicles upward at a rapid rate. And with this utterly soviet standard, the increase will be astronomical. A study put out by the National Research Council last year estimated that a full hybrid vehicle could cut fuel use by about 50 percent -- but that it would drive the vehicle's price up by about $9,000. That may sound like a world in which we're all taking out second mortgages to drive a Prius, but keep this in mind: even that most iconic of hybrids (average of 50 MPG) doesn’t meet the administration’s proposed standards. And focusing on the retail price also doesn’t factor in the safety risks that often accompany more fuel-efficient cars (the efficiency is often achieved in part by creating a lighter – and thus more brittle – auto body).

And speaking of safety, I'll bet you fee much safer already, knowing that your new car will no longer contain a spare tire - all in the name of "efficiency", of course:

That spare tire in your trunk may be going the way of the typewriter and transistor radio.
Automakers are selling more cars without an extra wheel to trim weight, boost gas mileage and shave a few bucks off their costs.

But last month, about 13% of the more than 1 million vehicles sold in the U.S. did not offer an extra tire as standard equipment, according to a Los Angeles Times review of vehicle specifications and sales data.
And here's the kicker:

Spare tires are not required by federal regulators because they are not considered an essential safety feature.

That's Soviet-style "efficiency", folks. "Smart Government", and the such.  While Obama and Lisa Jackson laud themselves for implementing regulations inconsistent with reality, your wives, daughters, and girlfriends will be driving around without a spare tire, the most basic of automotive fixes.

Will Obama and Lisa pat themselves on the back for adding even more innocent American bodies to the trail of the dead their policies leave behind?

Maybe not, but they won't feel a shred of guilt about the death of your kid sister on the side of the road, either, because their intentions were good, don't you know....

How Can We Defeat Socialism? With One Word...

Victor Davis Hanson boils the tragicomic socioeconomic system down to one human frailty: Ego gratification.

So what is socialism? It is a sort of modern version of Louis XV’s “Après moi, le déluge” – an unsustainable Ponzi scheme in which elite overseers, for the duration of their own lives, enjoy power, influence, and gratuities by implementing a system that destroys the sort of wealth for others that they depend upon for themselves....

Who are socialists?

There are none. Only technocratic overseers who wish to give someone else’s money to others as a means of winning capitalist-style lifestyles and power for themselves — in a penultimate cycle of unsustainable spending.

But how do the unrestrained egotists that represent the "socialist class" manage to convince the rest of us to go along with a system that will eventually destroy everybody?  Is it...guilt?

...expectations for far more always keep rising, with a commensurate plethora of new justifications, usually in the realm of someone else having more than the recipient, always unjustly so. The endangered aid recipient is always seen as being pushed off a cliff in a wheel chair — therefore, “they” can afford to give “me” more; things are not “fair”; there is no “equality.”

What did Ayn Rand say about this?  Oh, a lot, actually, as the quote below from Rand is essentially the basis of Atlas Shrugged, and is given as the reason for the Fall of Man:

The worst guilt is to accept an unearned guilt

There is more along the same vein from Atlas Shrugged:

Evil requires the sanction of the victim.

I refuse to accept as guilt the fact of my own existence.

And Mr. Galt himself:

"We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. We are on strike against the dogma that the pursuit of one's happiness is evil. We are on strike against the doctrine that life is guilt."

 And this final one, of course, which strikes fear in the heart of techno-socialists everywhere - should it be realized, the Ponzi scheme is over. Which is why the Democrats, incidentally, have nothing left but baseless accusations of racism and shriller and shriller attempts at fear-mongering, mixed with a dash of fear tactics instilled from their enforcers in the unions:

…guilt is a rope that wears thin...

And the Socialists know it. They are already fighting against it, but - to quote a certain orator - we are the ones we have been waiting for. Only we can cut the ropes the Left have bound us with, and free ourselves from our self-imposed slavery to them.  And all we have to do is stand up an declare "We are not guilty..."

"...the dance of the low-sloping foreheads...."

A racist remark by a teabagging wingnut? A geography lesson from the Gaza Strip's highest-rated children's show, perhaps?

Nah. That's the New York Times' David Carr, talking about the residents of Missouri and Alabama, in an unbiased and impartial way:

New York Times columnist David Carr responds to Bill Maher implying Alabama and Kansas are not the "smart states."


David Carr: "If it's Kansas, Missouri, no big deal. You know, that's the dance of the low-sloping foreheads. The middle places, right? [pause] Did I just say that aloud?"


Yeah, you did, douchebag.  And if you don't believe it, video is at the link.

Incidentally, I lived in Missouri, about 35 miles out of St. Louis, in 1998-99. Remember landing at the airport and grabbing my rental with a grimace, expecting to have to weave my way through buck-toothed, slacked-jawed, John Deere riding locals on barely paved dirt and spit roads. Instead, I was sandwiched between Jaguars, BMWs, and Benzes on a nice five-lane highway.

Turns out that St. Louis has an incredible medical establishment, including some of the best children's hospitals in the world. And doctor money is doctor money, and they spend it, and so there were plenty of folks living quite nicely, with homes twice the size of a Jersey standard at half the price and with one-quarter the taxes. And they were quite happy to lead quiet, well-off, lives, undisturbed by the local governments and unseen by most of the nation.

Like folks such as the aforementioned David Carr, who obviously has never been to Missouri, but feels free to smear them with a semi-racial slur despite being in complete ignorance of who they are and what they believe.

Some background on David Carr below.   No surprise a guy with this much of hard-left background would make the asinine remarks above.  But the Times...this is their go-to "Culture" guy?  Jeez, those guys are even more far gone than I ever imagined: 

David Carr writes the Media Equation column for the Monday Business section of the New York Times that focuses on media issues including print, digital, film, radio and television. He also works as a general assignment reporter in the Culture section of The Times covering all aspects of popular culture.

Before coming to New York, Carr served as editor of the Washington City Paper, an alternative weekly in Washington D.C. for five years. From 1993 to 1995, Carr was editor of the Twin Cities Reader, a Minneapolis-based alternative weekly, and wrote a media column there as well...

Anna Kournikova

Anna Sergeyevna Kournikova is a Russian professional tennis player and model. Her celebrity status made her one of the best known tennis players worldwide. At the peak of her fame, fans looking for images of Kournikova made her name one of the most common search strings on the Internet search engine Google.

Although also successful in singles, reaching No. 8 in the world in 2000, Kournikova's specialty has been doubles, where she has at times been the World No. 1 player. With Martina Hingis as her partner, she won Grand Slam titles in Australia in 1999 and 2002. Based on their looks, Hingis and Kournikova facetiously referred to themselves as the "Spice Girls of Tennis". Kournikova's professional tennis career has been curtailed for the past several years, and possibly ended, by serious back and spinal problems. She currently resides in Miami Beach, Florida, and plays in occasional exhibitions and in doubles for the St. Louis Aces of World Team Tennis.

Career statistics
Singles
Career record: 209–129
Career titles : 0 WTA, 2 ITF
Highest ranking : No. 8 (20 November 2000)

Grand Slam results
Australian Open : QF (2001)
French Open: 4R (1998, 1999)
Wimbledon : SF (1997)
US Open : 4R (1996, 2002)

Major tournaments
WTA Championships : SF (2000)
Olympic Games : 1R (1996)

Doubles
Career record : 200–71
Career titles : 16 WTA
Highest ranking : No. 1 (22 November 1999)

Grand Slam Doubles results
Australian Open : W (1999, 2002)
French Open : F (1999)
Wimbledon : SF (2000, 2002)
US Open : QF (1996, 2002)

Major doubles tournaments
WTA Championships : W (1999, 2000)


awards
* 1996: WTA Newcomer of the Year
* 1999: WTA Doubles Team of the Year (with Martina Hingis)
* 2002: ESPN Hottest Female Athlete


statics
Country : Russia/ United States
Residence : Miami Beach, Florida, United States
Date of birth : 7 June 1981 (1981-06-07)
Place of birth : Moscow, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union
Height: 1.72 m (5 ft 7+1⁄2 in)
Weight : 56 kg (120 lb)
Turned pro : October 1995
Plays : Right; Two-handed backhand
Career prize money : US$3,584,662