October 26th, 2005
Patterico has excellent post on Miers, this time examining some of the nominee’s views on the rights to choice and the nature of judicial activism. Damning stuff.
For the record, what do you think the conservative reaction would have been had President Bush nominated Alberto Gonzales, instead of Miers? Conservatives would have been upset, they would have felt betrayed, they probably would have even carped bitterly about Bush’s unhealthy obsession with “loyalty” and perhaps would have gone all the way to “cronyism.” But do you think they would have actually mounted a wide-spread campaign of opposition to the nomination? I don’t.
Because while Gonzales would have been an ideological disappointment, he wouldn’t have been fundamentally unqualified for the SCOTUS the way Miers obviously is. I believe that for conservatives their ultimate objection to the Miers nomination is really is about quality. Even if you could provide incontrovertible proof that Miers would spend the next 20 years voting with Scalia and Thomas on every case, they would still object.
This is a good thing. It means that conservatives have been serious as they argued against the naked politicization of the judiciary.
Anyway, it seems this morning that the administration line has moved from Don’t oppose Miers, because her confirmation is inevitable to the slightly more skittish, If any Senators oppose Miers, We the Republican People, will make that Senator pay at the ballot box.
To which the obvious reply is: What you mean “we,” kemosabe?
0 commentsNot a Parody
October 25th, 2005
Check out this news item:
Halifax and NatWest banks have led the move to scrap the time-honoured symbol of saving from being given to children or used in their advertising, the Daily Express/Daily Star group reported today.
Muslims do not eat pork, as Islamic culture deems the pig to be an impure animal.
Salim Mulla, secretary of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, backed the bank move.
“This is a sensitive issue and I think the banks are simply being courteous to their customers,” he said.
So, will the banks also stop advertising loans? Or charging interest?
0 commentsOctober 25th, 2005
Fine. Sometimes blogs can be a force for good. For example, without blogs, you’d never get thoughts such as this from Richard John Neuhaus:
0 commentsAt Immaculate Conception down on First Avenue and 14th Street, where I say Mass regularly, I was this morning required to adjudicate a near-violent dispute between a young black man and an elderly Irish regular at daily Mass. Did or did not George Steinbrenner betray the Yankees by trading Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte, and Jose Contreras, all of whom now loom large in the series between the Astros and White Sox? I was tempted to quote Our Lord, “Who made me a judge between you?” But they would not be satisfied with that. Taking the side of Steinbrenner on anything is a losing proposition in New York. So I opined that 20/20 hindsight is too easy. At the time it may have seemed a smart decision to let them go, but, after what they’ve done this season, it looks stupid. “The Church is always standing up for the bad guys,” responded the young man. I assured him the Church had no official position on George Steinbrenner, but he did not even try to disguise his skepticism. It’s not easy being a parish priest. Nor did either of these gentlemen take any consolation from the prospect of the White Sox winning on Tuesday evening, although the elderly regular said he had been to Chicago once and it was “a nice enough town.”
It Hurts to Watch
October 25th, 2005
The Baseball Crank does a survey of pitchers who have blown big post-season games to see what the odds are that Brad Lidge will be able to survive his recent troubles. Impressive, amazing list that’s fun to read (unless you’re the guy who gave up the game-winning run).
0 commentsIt's On.
October 24th, 2005
Be honest, you’re not getting any work done while waiting for the indictments. So what better way to pass the time than to check out this review of Civilization IV?
0 commentsGet Your Fresh Scalia!
October 24th, 2005
The other day I mentioned the Scalia piece in the new issue of First Things; here’s the whole thing.
P.S.: It’s a dynamite issue–check out this murderers’ row (so to speak). If you’re not subscribing to First Things, you’re missing out.
0 commentsI'm Just Along for the Ride
October 24th, 2005
Thanks to GS commenter who points us to this awesome illusion page (cue Journey’s “Final Countdown). My favorite is this one.
Trippy.
0 commentsIt's Not a Trick, It's an Illusion
October 24th, 2005
Via Patterico comes this outstanding optical illusion. Don’t miss it.
0 comments

