« September 2005 | Main | November 2005 »
“One of the things I’ve noticed in the Judy Miller / Scooter Libby coverage is the development of a new history that's very convenient for a lot of the people peddling it. …There are lots of problems with this, beginning with the fact that it's not true.”
By the way, I see the Wikipedia article on Samuel Alito has already been updated to reflect this morning's nomination. If you're the Encyclopedia Britannica, that's got to be annoying.
Mort Kondrache and Fred Barnes were on FNC’s Special Report last Thursday, opining on how the president should approach his post-Miers nomination for Sandra Day O’Connor’s seat on the Supreme Court:
Kondrache: “…I just think that uniting the base is part of his problem, but I think it goes beyond that. I think uniting the country if he can do it is the right thing to do.”The Democrats are going to angrily denounce any non-liberal the president offers to replace O’Connor, all the while claiming the nominee is "out of the mainstream.": the party that lost the election a year ago wants the president to pick as if they won. No surprise there. I hope the president will nominate a fair, highly qualified jurist with an originalist record, with the understanding that we’ll just have to put up with the shrieks as Democrats’ souls burn and their eyes bleed, and count on the GOP to keep its liberal elements in line. We shall see what actually happens. Maybe soon, too—reports have the president announcing his nominee as early as today...
Barnes: “And name me a Democratic senator who’s going to say, ‘oh, that’s great, we’re for you now!’ That’s nonsense. They’re going to be against him. A president has to have his base intact. This is what Bush had before, this is why he’s been a successful president up to now, and he’s going to get nothing out of appeasing a bunch of demorats and liberals, because they’re going to trash everything he does anyway.”
Silver ranked as most boring vehicle color for fifth consecutive year
Actually, the original Autoblog post says “most popular”, not “most boring”, but I’m taking some editorial liberties. Can’t we please… and I say this as someone who drives a silver car… spice thing up a bit, for crying out loud? “Amazing to think that one out of every three 2005 vehicles on the road today in the world is silver, eh?” Dull, dull, dull! Go wtih orange, or something. How about that see-it-from-orbit day-glo yellow they use on police vests in Europe? Now there’s a color.
Via Neal Boortz, Ace of Spades HQ’s Top Ten Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"
10. "You know, in terms of pure aesthetics, I actually prefer the spork."
9. "Yo, Playah-- that Victorian ascot is the shizznat, Dog!"
8. "I know you're on the pill, but can't I wear a condom just this once? Why must it always be about your dirty needs?"
7. "It's this simple: if I can't put the vision I want on the screen, I'm not making this movie. And the vision I want is David Hasselhof."
6. "My scent? It's Nadler, the only perfume endorsed by 300-pound liberal Congressman Jerry Nadler-- a delicate yet sultry blend of cinnamon, pheremones and pork-chops."
5. "Topless dancers?!! The sign outside specifically promised me Stopless dancers. Now you instruct your staff to get off their break and put on some proper clothing or there are going to be consequences, my good man."
4. "When I move, I slice like a freaking hammer."
3. "There's something magical about riding the bus."
2. "Would I like to take a few minutes to discuss switching over to AT&T's new Friends and Family service? Would I! Would I ever!!!"
...and the Number One Thing People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did you Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"...
1. "Who the hell is Al Franken?"
Neal thinks you should support conservative talk radio by donating to help keep Air America flying.
The wily Charles Krauthammer, by the way, called today’s events last Friday:
Finally, a way out: irreconcilable differences over documents.
For a nominee who, unlike John Roberts, has practically no record on constitutional issues, such documentation is essential for the Senate to judge her thinking and legal acumen. But there is no way that any president would release this kind of information -- "policy documents" and "legal analysis" -- from such a close confidante. It would forever undermine the ability of any president to get unguarded advice.
That creates a classic conflict, not of personality, not of competence, not of ideology, but of simple constitutional prerogatives: The Senate cannot confirm her unless it has this information. And the White House cannot allow release of this information lest it jeopardize executive privilege.
Hence the perfectly honorable way to solve the conundrum: Miers withdraws out of respect for both the Senate and the executive's prerogatives, the Senate expresses appreciation for this gracious acknowledgment of its needs and responsibilities, and the White House accepts her decision with the deepest regret and with gratitude for Miers's putting preservation of executive prerogative above personal ambition.
Faces saved. And we start again.
This is from the president’s statement accepting Ms. Miers resignation:
I understand and share her concern, however, about the current state of the Supreme Court confirmation process. It is clear that Senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House -- disclosures that would undermine a President's ability to receive candid counsel. Harriet Miers' decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the Constitutional separation of powers -- and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her.
Was Krauthammer prescient, or is the White House responding to his column? Either way, it was a good call.
Now that Harriet Miers has withdrawn her name from consideration for the Supreme Court, the question arises, “now what?”
When opposition to Miers appeared among conservatives, the response by the White House trumpeting her evangelical religious background caused many to ask if the White House hint with saying, with a nod and wink, that she could be expected to rule based on those personal beliefs. Given her relatively limited Constitutional work, it seemed unlikely she would have the experience to implement an originalist judicial philosophy, and given what little we could learn of her, there was little to lead one to think she would seek to do so.
I believe that a Supreme Court justice that rules based on his or her own conservative policy preferences is every bit as bad a one that rules based on his or her liberal policy preferences. There is no difference at all between them: both betray the Constitution and the country as they strive to advance their own political agenda. If the Constitution calls for outcomes that are outmoded or wrong, the responsibility for correcting that lies with the American people and the Congress, not with the Court.
Is there reason to think the president’s next pick will be originalist? I remain skeptical.
Reuters - Jermaine Dye's late run-scoring single was enough to give the Chicago White Sox a 1-0 victory over the Houston Astros on Wednesday and a first World Series title in 88 years with a four-game sweep.On the other hand, the White Sox have been waiting for this day twice as long as the Houston Astros have been the Houston Astros, so it’s hard to begrudge them their victory.
Well, here’s some wild speculation I’d like to see bear fruit:
Serenity 2?
As we mentioned before the film was released, most of the cast of Joss Whedon's Serenity is already signed up for a pair of sequels. The only question is if anybody wants to pay for one, and it's been assumed that money will talk much louder than fanboy pleas (after all, that didn't do much to get Firefly back on the air). Well, as of last weekend, the movie hit the $30 million box office mark which, according to those who pretend them know, was the amount the movie had to make to get Joss financial backing for Serenity 2. Since this is all rumor-based anyway, all anyone can do now is sit and wait for bits of news to dribble out.
Have I mentioned Serenity was a great movie? I’m pretty sure I’ve mentioned that…
(Via Cinematical)
Recent Comments