The secret – which Matt Drudge told, of course – is out: Britain’s rash and handsome Harry has fought behind Afghanistan’s front lines for the past two months. Now Britain is yanking her royal son from the Helmland and bringing him home.

The prince, a military academy grad and third in line to the British throne, couldn’t serve with his troops in Iraq so he cut a secret deal to go to Afghanistan instead. Red-headed bad boy and “playboy prince,” he’s always had a wicked flair his slightly balding, boring older brother William lacks. (William’s contribution to the Afghanistan fight: A letter saying Princess Di would have been proud.)

And this time, the world’s reaction is not to frown on the recklessness of a guy once dumb enough to dress up like a Nazi for a costume party. Kathryn Jean Lopez gushes on The Corner, “Prince Harry seems like such an impressive young man,” not just because of his bravery but also because he seems miraculously cured of his booze thirst. John Noonan writes on The Weekly Standard blog, “This kind of leadership impresses me no end.” Human Events writes, “Prince Harry the hero puts Europe to shame.” The Morning Journal says,“A prince obviously doesn’t have to do such things.” Allan Mallinson’s pride is palpable: “Well, now Cornet Wales can look every soldier in the eye. Indeed, he can look the whole country in the eye. And his gritty determination to do his bit ought to have recruits clamouring at every barracks gate.”

In an embarrassingly-timed column today, Abe Greenwald claims that democracy is superior to monarchy because good looks correlate with high intelligence: “Our radiant, twinkling, and smoldering candidates are clear indications of the health of our democracy.” Greenwald proves his point by unforgivably ignoring William and Harry’s good looks, choosing instead to compare our potential leaders with the unfortunate-faced Prince Charles. “Erase the great experiment of America,” he says, “and we’d be poised to kneel at the throne of this dull and cowardly man who makes Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich look like Matt Damon and Ben Affleck.”

But Britons are allowed to be a little smug today: Erase the great American experiment and you could have some national pride in a prince who makes American worthies look, well, cowardly and dull. Commanders-in-chief usually conduct wars so far removed from the fight it’s like playing a computer game — push a button, make some sterile, artificial gore. Years ago, though, the men in charge of starting wars actually fought them. It didn’t lead to fewer wars, but it may have made for bigger, braver men.

If you’re not a subscriber of WORLD — or if you are one and are just impatient and can’t wait for the next issue to arrive in your mailbox — head on over to WORLDMag.com to check out the March 8/15 issue, hot off the server. Here are some highlights:

Cover story: As we approach the fifth anniversary of the beginning of the conflict, Mindy Belz examines the Unfinished Business that is the war in Iraq.

Remembering William F. Buckley Jr.: Marvin Olasky describes how the founder of the National Review gave conservatism wit and a rudder.

Movie review: Megan Basham reviews Vantage Point, which she notes is able to follow the terror war and succeed as entertainment.

Veepstakes: Mark Bergin analyzes the race for the No. 2 spot on the Democratic and Republican presidential tickets and the significance these choices represent.

Michael English: Lynn Vincent reports that after years of false starts, this Christian vocalist is back with a message of redemption.

Plus: a recap of last week’s Oscars, a look at a new book on the Great Depression, an analysis of the transfer of power in Cuba, and much more.

For all you non-subscribers out there, we’d love to have you join our family of readers. Click here for more info.

“Fast Break” by Edward Hirsch

In Memory of Dennis Turner, 1946-1984

A hook shot kisses the rim and
hangs there, helplessly, but doesn’t drop,

and for once our gangly starting center
boxes out his man and times his jump

perfectly, gathering the orange leather
from the air like a cherished possession

and spinning around to throw a strike
to the outlet who is already shoveling

an underhand pass toward the other guard
scissoring past a flat-footed defender

who looks stunned and nailed to the floor
in the wrong direction, trying to catch sight

of a high, gliding dribble and a man
letting the play develop in front of him

in slow motion, almost exactly
like a coach’s drawing on the blackboard,

both forwards racing down the court
the way that forwards should, fanning out

and filling the lanes in tandem, moving
together as brothers passing the ball

between them without a dribble, without
a single bounce hitting the hardwood

until the guard finally lunges out
and commits to the wrong man

while the power-forward explodes past them
in a fury, taking the ball into the air

by himself now and laying it gently
against the glass for a lay-up,

but losing his balance in the process,
inexplicably falling, hitting the floor

with a wild, headlong motion
for the game he loved like a country

and swiveling back to see an orange blur
floating perfectly through the net.

(from Wild Gratitude, 1985)

The Washington Post reported yesterday on a new federal study which reveals that more than 1 in 100 Americans are incarcerated, the highest percentage in U.S. history, and greater than that of countries like China. Faced with the rising costs of keeping more and more people in prison, states are considering experiments with alternative sentences for non-violent offenders.

My grandfather was a Gideon, and used to take Bibles to the local prison, where he visited with the inmates. I never went with him. I wondered why he did it, why he had such concern for them. The only people I knew about who’d gone to prison belonged there. They were grown-up versions of the bullies I had to face in grade school. I didn’t think about why they were there, any more than I thought about why bullies picked on little kids like me. I only knew that I wished more than once that our school had a prison, too.

I wonder if anyone in an official capacity, amidst all the criminological studies examining incarceration rates, and recidivism, and cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies, will ask why so many young men — for these are largely the population we are talking about — are committing crimes. Think about it: we live in one of the most prosperous nations on earth, such that even our poor have, except in the most extreme cases, a standard of living well above that of a substantial portion of the world’s population. We have enormous liberty, as well. What’s more, women are more sexually available now than at any other time in history. The present-day U.S. should be a young heathen’s nirvana.

But still there is this great ache, or some despair, or some deep need, that drives young men to steal, and attack, and rape, and murder. It drives them to poison their own bodies. What is it?

I hope you didn’t read this far for an answer, because I haven’t a definitive one. I do recall Charles Colson telling a story about providing prisoners in his ministry with cards and stamps before Mother’s Day, so that those who wanted to could send their mothers a small token of their affection. The response, he said, was overwhelming — so much so that when Father’s Day approached, he decided to make the same offer. That second time, however, there were few takers. These broken men — many of them ruthless criminals — jumped at the chance to send a token of love to their mothers. But they had nothing, most of them, to say to their fathers.

Do you think there’s a connection between that sad reality, and the rising prison population? And if so, what can be done? More specifically, because we can likely count on governments to avoid this hot potato the way presidential candidates avoid direct statements, what can churches do?

John McCain had a slip of the tongue yesterday, almost calling himself a liberal:

“I’m a proud, conservative, liberal Republi- Hello! Easy there,” McCain said, laughing along with his audience at Texas Instruments Inc.

He corrected himself immediately. “Let me say this: I am a proud, conservative Republican, and both of my possible or likely opponents today are liberal Democrats.”

But was it really a slip, or merely a reflection of the state of his political heart?

What is art?  It’s not just a question philosophy professors asked confused students.  It’s not just a punchline in a graduate seminar.  It’s a question that wealthy people ask themselves so they can have a better idea of how much to pay. 

Art paralysis: It is a widespread and often crippling malady, striking everyone from the new college grad in his or her first apartment to the super-rich banker, lasting anywhere from a few months to a lifetime. How many are affected is not known, perhaps because the victims are often too embarrassed to come forth. Who wants to admit that “I’ve had these posters since college, I know that as one of the American Top 10 Orthodontists I should get some real art, but I don’t know what that means”? Or that “It’s not that I’m trying to make a minimalist statement with these empty white walls, I just don’t know what to buy”? Or “I walk into those snooty galleries in Chelsea and feel like I just don’t belong”?

This problem is common for the rest of us, too.  I know some of us here couldn’t care less about art, or about the world of it, but I kind of feel this latent obligation to have a little art.  I’m a believer.  I work in the arts.  I’ve read all those books about art and creativity and Christianity and how the church needs to embrace the arts and what the Bible says and suggests about art and how art is incarnational and all that.  So, I feel like I ought to be one of the few believers on my block to own a little art.  But I’m poor.  Until I sell the Great American Novel, then, I will have to settle for trading for art.  I’ve helped artists write their “artist statements,” and they always give me something small.  I’ve gleaned forgotten pieces of art from my poor artist friends.  It’s a start. 

But if you still don’t know what art is, and you have the money to care, you can do what these people did and get an art consultant. 

“I am astounded that in this day and age many churches still don’t allow women to preach.”

I heard it again on the radio today and it always feels like fingernails down a chalk board. Never mind the church policy issue for now; it’s the “in this day and age” part that grates.

My favorite line in Disney’s “Sleeping Beauty” comes where the prince announces — to his father’s protestation — that he’s going to marry a peasant girl:

Prince: “Now, father, you’re living in the past. This is the fourteenth century. Nowadays…”

King: “Nowadays I’m still the king, and I command you to come to your senses.”

All debates aside regarding the issue of “true love” versus “arranged” marriages, the script writer has amused and embarrassed us by showing the vacuousness of an appeal to modernity as the royal flush of argumentation. We find it very funny that the prince thinks he stands at the absolute apex of human enlightenment. This is because we believe we stand at the apex of human enlightenment, we of the 21^st century, before whom all were barbarians.

Next time some expert on the radio says she rejects this or that position or tradition because it isn’t “modern” or “progressive,” I would like to hear her interviewer redirect the conversation to more substantial avenues — such as whether the position has merit or is “true.”

Barack Obama and John Edwards are making friends, and some say it’s because the latter wants to be the next attorney general of the United States. This article takes a look at his most famous case and what it would mean for that new potential office.

Edwards defended his trial-lawyer past on the campaign trail. The mother of one of his clients, Valerie Lakey, has spoken on his behalf, and in his 2003 book, Four Trials, Edwards uses Lakey’s case as a supposed example of bringing a callous, recalcitrant company to justice for the terrible injuries suffered by a little girl [...] The Lakey case seemed to inoculate him against criticism of his pre-Senate career as a plaintiff attorney.

It shouldn’t have, for the facts of this case tell a different story-that of a blameless company attacked, solely because of its deep pockets, for the negligence of others. The Lakey case is really about the collusion of trial lawyers and judges to make lawless, plaintiff-friendly rulings.

Which is probably why, if he were nominated, he wouldn’t be confirmed.

Although Russia’s presidential election won’t take place until Sunday, “barring something extraordinary and unforeseen,” Dmitri Medvedev will win by a landslide to succeed Vladimir Putin as the Kremlin’s new leader. Handpicked by Putin, the 42-year-old Medvedev has never held an elected office. While some have cast him as merely a Putin puppet, Medvedev has also made some surprisingly un-Putinesque moves:

In a speech Feb. 15, he publicly embraced personal freedom, saying that liberty is necessary for the state to have legitimacy among its citizens. He has laid out domestic policy goals that seem to speak to Russia’s expanding consumer class.

Medvedev has also struck a campy pose – hamming it up with Deep Purple, the British band whose music was popular in Soviet times – that suggested a dormitory-life playfulness decidedly un-Putinesque.

His words and behavior have raised unexpected but pervasive questions: Does Medvedev mean what he seems to say? Can he relax the Kremlin’s grip on Russian political life that has been a central characteristic of Putin’s rule? And if he does, will he clash with Putin, his principal source of power?

Continue reading here to see what some analysts have to say.

The hubbub is slow to die after John McCain condemned conservative radio talk-show host Bill Cunningham for opening a Cincinnati rally by taking aim at Barack Obama. Conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity wasted no time in responding, denouncing McCain’s actions on the airwaves as millions of conservative Republican voters listened.

Analysts are now saying McCain may have made a massive mistake, as he’s already on rocky ground with conservatives–a group he really can’t afford to alienate any more:

“Yes, John McCain needs those people if he has any hope of winning in November,” said Jason Johnson, a political science professor at Hiram College in northeast Ohio.

“It’s going to be hard for them to support him, now that they’ve heard him stab one of their heroes in the back,” he said.

Do you think the incident will hurt McCain’s efforts to appeal to conservatives?