Is delivering its report to Treasury Secretary John Snow today at 11:30.
The Spectacle Blog
Jed: There's one more thing to note about egregious E.J., and it's actually a cause for cheer. He fears that no matter how many screws Fitzgerald puts to Libby, the ultimate trump lies with Bush: "If Libby, through nods and winks, knows that a the end of Bush's term, the president will issue an unconditional pardon..." Naturally, E.J. now wants Bush to promise he'll never ever pardon Libby. It's not clear if that promise is to be made before or after Bush apologizes for appointing yet another White Man to the Supreme Court, or indeed for being, at last check, a White Man himself.
10) Meat-less Fridays all year round in the Supreme Court cafeteria;
9) Oral arguments in Latin;
6) Supreme Court windows replaced with stained glass;
5) On close votes, the Justices will consult a statue of St. Thomas More. If the statue weeps, they affirm; if no tears, then they reverse.
4) Incense at the start of each session;
3) Supreme Court opinions will be deemed infallible and unreviewable by any earthly authority [Ed. - Sorry -
that does not appear to be a change at all]
2) Catechism of the Catholic Church will now be "persuasive authority";
Than that of WaPo columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr. His Tuesday fulmination rages at the gifts he thought were his for Fitzmas. Not this one, the one he -- and apparently Joe Wilson -- thought would come out in October 2004 just in time to get Vichy John Kerry elected. Dionne accuses Scooter Libby of throwing sand in the eyes of prosecutors to delay any damage to President Bush past the November 04 election. And that's not all.
Because Dionne thinks we still don't know enough about what blame should be assigned in the Plame leak, he says, "That is why Senate Democrats...should insist that before Alito's nomination is voted on, Bush and Cheney have some work to do." The "work" he assigns is, natch, to confess their crimes against poor ol' Val Plame.
The Judicial Council rules: Lesbian minister Beth Stroud is defrocked, and the Virginia pastor who denied church membership to a practicing homosexual was reinstated. These are positive steps for a church which has otherwise appeared uncertain.
Even by Maureen Dowd's standards, her Sunday NY Times piece is remarkably bitter and joyless. At its heart, it reveals a befuddled rage at the mysteries of human nature that feminism was unable to expunge. Her despair that women, after all the sturm und drang of the feminist era, still want to attract men, and are even willing (some of them) to trade domesticity for career, is rendered with a subtle tone of incomprehension that says more about her than the phenomena she is purportedly analyzing. And that's what makes the piece so uncomfortable to read; it's about Dowd, not the state of women today. What else to conclude when the author's analysis includes pieces of pure fantasy like this:
When I was reading what you wrote, Paul, I was tempted to believe that the purpose of elevating Rosa Parks was to celebrate her particular brand of civil rights activism. But that would have required some thinking on the part of the elected officials who were probably a little more concerned about how bad their image would be otherwise. Dave, talk about turning people into objects, it didn't take long after Martin Luther King, Jr.'s assassination for the riots to start.
But here we have two national figures who have been exploited in this way for decades -- Rosa Parks showed up in at least one or two State of the Union cameos. It can be argued that national figures are the stuff of tokenage, and carping about it as bad form is just tut-tutting. Well, then, what about the plight of those affected by the Hurricanes? To no end did we hear about poor people specifically as though they were the only ones suffering. Yet where are those honest enough to aid them in their hour of need, after the media buzz is over?
The historical perspective on the great honor of stopping in the Rotunda on the way to becoming dust is very helpful. Sen. Schumer seemed to confirm the crass political motives interpretation today.
His statement on the Alito nomination is remarkable for its narcissism. His first sentence would be about the demands of the law, the honor of the court, right? Right? Nope. "This morning I went and visited Rosa Parks in the Capitol Rotunda to pay my respects." Schumer then goes on to invoke Parks' memory to score political points against Alito. Dead people can't object to being made objects.