Sunday, October 23, 2005

Short Takes

A few of the things I noted during my perusal of the papers this morning:

- The NYTimes' San Francisco bureau chief, Dean Murphy, has a magazine piece today asking "Who Should Redistrict?" Since redistricting reform has become of my major themes over the last few months, it would be more than derelict of me not to mention Murphy's article. While it is hardly positive about redistricting reform (Murphy seems to think the whole thing is hopeless), it does discuss some important aspects of the process. Also, the LATimes endorses Schwarzenegger's redistricting proposal in an important editorial, saying that its passage will "restore some reason and moderation to the political process."

- Also from the Times, don't miss this story, about an interesting gift that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld received while visiting Mongolia, as well as their endorsement of Republican Mike Bloomberg for a second term as mayor.

- George Will gets all (and I do mean all) hot and bothered in his column this week; it lives up to and even surpasses all the rumors I had heard about how harsh it was going to be toward the Miers nomination and its defenders. I think this kind of rhetoric (saying any Republicans who support her are unworthy of consideration for 2008, etc.) might be a touch overblown; I don't like the nomination either but I'm kind of worried Will's head may explode.

- Mark Leibovich profiles Cheney chief of staff Scooter Libby, who may find his name on front pages everywhere in just a few days.

- The LATimes looks at Democratic silence on the "quag-Miers," noting that many Democrat senators, like me, are wary of being seen as helping to scuttle the nomination since they remain worried about what comes next if she is forced out. If the conservatives can bring her down on their own, the argument goes, then non-conservatives keep their powder dry in case he sends up an even more ideological nominee next time.

- The must-read of the day award, however, goes to the Washington Post for its editorial "Mr. Stevens' Tirade." Yes, that would be the "senatorial version of a hissy fit" that Stevens engaged in during debate on the Coburn amendment on Thursday. The Post writes "What's most impressive about Mr. Stevens's tantrum is his ability to summon up this degree of righteous indignation - self-righteous might be more apt - over the alleged mistreatment of a state that benefits enormously, and disproportionately, from federal spending." The whole thing is excellent.


At 2:13 PM, Blogger yellojkt said...

Someone taught the Democrats that when your enemies are self-destructing, stay out of their way.


Post a Comment

<< Home