Alito for SCOTUS

Judge Samuel Alito has been named as the next nominee to the Supreme Court. Already there is a hue and a cry over his Casey decision. Bench Memos posts the statute here. It basically reads a woman must inform her husband of her plans for an abortion before she does it. Sounds like common sense right? "But wait!" you say, "what if her husband is abusive?" Well let's look at the exemptions to the notification laws:

(b) EXCEPTIONS. — The statement certifying that the notice required by subsection (a) has been given need not be furnished where the woman provides the physician a signed statement certifying at least one of the following:

(1) Her spouse is not the father of the child.

(2) Her spouse, after diligent effort, could not be located.

(3) The pregnancy is a result of spousal sexual assault as described in section 3128 (relating to spousal sexual assault), which has been reported to a law enforcement agency having the requisite jurisdiction.

(4) The woman has reason to believe that the furnishing of notice to her spouse is likely to result in the infliction of bodily injury upon her by her spouse or by another individual.

Such statements need not be notarized, but shall bear a notice that any false statements made therein are punishable by law.

(c) MEDICAL EMERGENCY. — The requirements of subsection (a) shall not apply in the case of a medical emergency

.

Notice is not permission and there isn't even a fine line between the two, no matter how NOW and Planned Parenthood howl. Unlike with parental notification laws, there is no suggestion that this inhibits in anyway choice. A woman could declare her intent and thumb her nose at the co-creating partner and still fulfill the law. Availibility is not the issue. What pro-abortion lobbyists don't want anyone to do is have a "cooling off period" or anything that might confront the woman with the moral implications of her actions; like talking over a course of action with the other person intimately involved in the decision.

Jeff Goldstein has a roundup from the left side of the fence.

Who We Are Instead

In thier song, Trouble Is, the group Jars of Clay say:

My wings don't sail me to the sky,
On my own these wings won't fly,
Jesus told me so.
Still I'm not so sure that I know.

Man, the trouble is
We don't know who we are instead.

This thought seems to encapsulate conservatives, the GOP, and the nation at the moment. Peggy Noonan in a recent column said:

I think that a lot of people are carrying around in their heads, unarticulated and even in some cases unnoticed, a sense that the wheels are coming off the trolley and the trolley off the tracks. That in some deep and fundamental way things have broken down and can't be fixed, or won't be fixed any time soon. That our pollsters are preoccupied with "right track" and "wrong track" but missing the number of people who think the answer to "How are things going in America?" is "Off the tracks and hurtling forward, toward an unknown destination."

While a bit over the top in the impending doom department, she's not too far off the mark. Why is it that this feeling pervades us? We have always lived in precarious times, a look at history always has shown trouble a brewin'. The answer lies in a couple of places. Firstly, the illusion of safety has been ripped away. 9-11 and some unprecedented natural disasters have brought down the last shreds of the illusion. Who can defend against madmen and the might of nature? You can not reason with a zealot or an earthquake. Secondly, our societal mechanism for coping with the things you can not defend against has been unmade. Muticulturalism fights nationalism, selfishness against duty, relativism against truth. These fights cut across party lines, across generational lines, across religious lines. There is not all good and all bad in any one group - when Code Pink stands hand in hand with the burka enforcement squad we know it an odd alignment.

In thier book, The Fourth Turning, authors William Strauss and Neil Howe define this erosion of societal mechanism as the Unraveling. They postulate four cycles on the wheel of societal time: a High, an Awakening, an Unraveling, and a Crisis. The High is a time of confident expansion in a new order; the Awakening a time of spiritual explorations and rebellion against the established order. Next, the Unraveling era of building trouble as individualism takes precedence over institutions; finally, the Crisis which ushers in a new society thru a momentous gate in history.

Compare what Peggy Noonan says in her column with what Strauss and Howe say. Peggy says:

The fear of parents that their children will wind up disturbed, and their souls actually imperiled, by the popular culture in which we are raising them. Senators who seem owned by someone, actually owned, by an interest group or a financial entity. Great churches that have lost all sense of mission, and all authority. Do you have confidence in the CIA? The FBI? I didn't think so.

But this recounting doesn't quite get me to what I mean. I mean I believe there's a general and amorphous sense that things are broken and tough history is coming.

Now Strauss and Howe:

During each of these periods, Americans celebrated an ethos of frenetic and laissez-faire individualism... yet also fretted over societal fragmentation, epidemic violence, and economic and technological change that seemed to be accelerating beyond society's ability to absorb it...

During each of these periods, an agressive moralism darkened the debate about the country's future. Culture wars raged, the language of political discourse coarsened, nativist (and sectional) feelings hardened, immigration and substance abuse came under attack, and attitudes toward children grew more protective.

During each of these periods, Americans felt well rooted in thier personal values but newly hostile toward the corruption of civic life. Unifying institutions, which once seemed secure for decades, now felt ephemeral. Those who had once trusted the nation with thier lives were growing old and dying. To the new crop f young adults, the nation hardly mattered. The whole res publica seemed on the verge of disintegrating.

During each of these previous Third Turnings, Americans felt as if they were drifting towards cataclysm. And, as it turned out, they were.

Do you see the parallels? I do. What does this mean? Are we facing an imminent Crisis? Strauss and Howe thought so when they published the book in the late 1990's. They predicted a Crisis period beginning in about 2005. I think they predicted a couple of years too late I think the Crisis began on 9-11-2001. Why then and not the bombing of the USS Cole or the tumultus elections of 2000? Why not the first World Trade Center attack or the SARS panic? Why not the dot com crash? Because 9-11 shook us, defines us, polorizes us and set a chain of events in motion that nothing else has.

Strauss and Howe set out a morphology of how the Crisis era unfolds:

* A catalyst - a groundshaking event (or sequence of events) that produces a shift of national mood.

* a regeneracy - reunification of civic life

* a climax - birthing a new societal order and burying the old

* a resolution - the culmination of the climax that resolves big questions and firmly established the new societal order.

Resolution will bring unprecedented freedoms or unprecedented tyranny. Examine a few of the Crisises of the past: the Civil War, WW2. At each we stood at the bring of freedom or tyranny, already many have likened 9-11 to Pearl Harbor. There is a reason the rhetoric of politics keeps turning to the parallels of WW2 and the specter of facism. We stand at the same brink. No, not the brink, we are full force into the flood of history and on some level we are all aware of it. The Crisis will encompass a generation as the Unraveling did before it, and the Awakening did before the Unraveling.

Peggy Noonan expresses a worry that too many of our national leaders are not going to lead us in the reformation of civic life:

Our elites, our educated and successful professionals, are the ones who are supposed to dig us out and lead us. I refer specifically to the elites of journalism and politics, the elites of the Hill and at Foggy Bottom and the agencies, the elites of our state capitals, the rich and accomplished and successful of Washington, and elsewhere. I have a nagging sense, and think I have accurately observed, that many of these people have made a separate peace. That they're living their lives and taking their pleasures and pursuing their agendas; that they're going forward each day with the knowledge, which they hold more securely and with greater reason than nonelites, that the wheels are off the trolley and the trolley's off the tracks, and with a conviction, a certainty, that there is nothing they can do about it.

I suspect that history, including great historical novelists of the future, will look back and see that many of our elites simply decided to enjoy their lives while they waited for the next chapter of trouble. And that they consciously, or unconsciously, took grim comfort in this thought: I got mine. Which is what the separate peace comes down to, "I got mine, you get yours."

Perhaps that is so, but the story does not end there. There will be leaders with the courage and tenacity to work through it, and in some respects it may be easier to find these leaders to rally to them and to support them. I speak of the internet and blogs, tools just as Franklin and Paine used newspapers and pamphlets. Out there somewhere a blogger will write the Common Sense of our Crisis. Glenn Reynolds tipped me to Justin Katz at Anchor Rising and I think Justin got it just right:

Ms. Noonan is surely in a better position than I to judge whether this attitude drives the Western elite, but I can't help but wonder whether, similarly, she's more susceptible to elites' false conceits. Perhaps it isn't "the whole ball of wax" that's falling apart, but just the artificial system — long sensed to be untenable — by which the elites, the conceit-full Baby Boomer elites, have managed to secure the "grim comfort" that "I got mine."

Or perhaps we are headed toward "the next chapter of trouble," and it may be trouble from more than merely a limited perspective. But blogs are proving that, if the functional elites are too resigned to that trouble to lead our society through it, the underclasses now have the technology — and the faculty — to pick up the slack. Maybe the sky is falling only to reveal the truer sky beyond, and in its light, we will be better able to respond to the troubles with which life — and history — accosts us all equally.

Basil has working trackbacks again!

Pumpkin Cake

A delicious treat for halloween parties, harvest parties or just something to do with all that pumpkin laying around, I give you - Pumpkin Cake!

4 eggs
3/4 cup oil
2 cup sugar
15 oz pumpkin
2 cups flour
2 tsp cinnamon
2 tsp baking powder
1 tsp baking soda
3/4 tsp salt
3/4 tsp each nutmeg, ginger, and cloves
1/2 cup chopped toasted walnuts (opt.)

Mix pumpkin, sugar, oil, and spices. Add beaten eggs. Combine flour, soda, and baking powder and add slowly to pumpkin mixture until texture is smooth and uniform. Stir in nuts. Stir into 2 greased and lightly floured cake pans. Bake at 350 for 30 minutes or until toothpick can be removed cleanly.

What's cake without icing?

Cream Cheese Icing

1/4 lb butter
1 lb cream cheese
1 tsp vanilla
1 cup sugar

Mix until creamy and smooth. Resist urge to lick paddle of blender.

Drunk Pumpkin

Makin' frat boys proud everywhere, Don's got a drunk pumpkin up on his site. Plus a whole lota cool linkage. Thanks for the link Don.

Halloween Movies

Lori Byrd has a post up about her favorite Halloween movies and Ace follows up with a post considering the "rules" of vampire movies. He's wrong about the "entering rule", some evil you have to invite into your life. Well, in my family ghost movies are the byword. Chief among them strides Lady in White starring Lukas Haas and Alex Rocco.

Lady in White tells of a 10 year old in the 1950's who sees a ghost and has a brush with a serial killer on Halloween.

Haunted starring Aiden Quinn and Kate Beckinsale is a particular favorite of my mother. More recent entrants, What Lies Beneath and Gothika have problems with basic ghost story rules. The're still enjoyable, but don't touch The Gift for good quality creepy.

Good family friendly fare includes: The Ghost and Mrs Muir, Topper, Haunted Mansion, and Blithe Spirit, particularly the one starring Rex Harrison. Rex Harrison loves to portray a man set on his comfortable rut, it is highly entertaining to see it upset.

What are ghost story rules?

* Ghosts haunt for a reason, mostly to resolve the circumstances around thier death - injustice or to bring emotional closure.

* Ghosts are limited to where they can haunt. (Major problem with Haunted)

* Ghostly manifestations like fire or water must have application to how they perished. So a ghost who was drowned could manifest water all around but is unlikely to manifest fire.

* Ghosts stop haunting when thier issues are resolved or after they have completed thier mission.

* Ghosts sometimes haunt to protect a loved one from a threat.

* Ghosts can not possess only express. (Major problem with Gothika)

Good ghost story books: Daniel Hecht's City of Masks and Land of Echoes. Also Lily's Ghosts by Lara Ruby. The latter is a young adult book, excellent though.

Update: How could I forget The Others and The Frighteners?

Cao has open trackbacks today. Thanks Cao.
So does Mudville.

Idiocity

I am going to insult someone. What kind of idiot puts a "Bad Cop, No Donut" sign on thier flashy red sports car? Do they want a speeding ticket? I mean, it is in the realm of possibility that the person drives within the speed limit all the time, never commits any kind of traffic violation, ect; do you really think so though?

Mr. Heston, Mr. Rozsa

In the past when studio execs wanted a big box office smash they remade Ben-Hur. Then in 1959, William Wyler filmed the definitive version starring Charlton "you'll pry this scene from my cold, dead hands" Heston. Nominated for 11 Academy Awards (back when that meant something - ed. cynic), this movie has it all. Easily one of the best movies ever made.

I have had it on in the background while doing chores, and have got to say Miklos Rozsa's masterful score* ennobles** even the most mundane tasks. Just at the desert scene where Judah almost dies of thirst, the Muralist has stopped to watch, wait for it. Yup.

"Mom, I'm thirsty!"

"We keep you alive to serve these children, serve well and live." - Words for all us at home parents.

Ben-Hur trivia:

The design of the stadium was another major bone of contention. MGM asked an archaeologist what the stadium in Jerusalem had looked like. "Roman," came the reply. A second archaeologist was asked. "It was in a Phoenician style," he said. A third archaeologist was consulted, who said: "Stadium? I was not aware that Jerusalem had one!" MGM engineers eventually sat down and carefully studied Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ (1925), and based their design on that.


*Yes, Dad it is the best peice of music ever produced.
**Yes, Dear Husband I almost said inbiggens***
***Yes, everyone else inbiggens is a legit word, I learned it on the Simpsons after all. heh.

UPDATE:
I am corrected - "embiggens". Go banana!

A Walk in the Woods

As anyone who has ever read Bill Bryson's A Walk in the Woods knows, bears are dangerous because they like Snickers bars. Wait scratch that, Snickers bars are dangerous because bears like them. Here in the good ol' USA though, we reserve the right to bear arms in case bears (or the king of England) comes sniffing after our candy. That applies to gun savvy 8 year old Mayland girls too. First bear of the season. Second Amendment.

ht: Don Surber

(Yes, I can find a gratitious book reference in just about anything Mom.)

On to the Ridiculous

Cindy Sheehan plans to tie herself to the White House fence for a publicity stunt, er um, anti-Iraq protest. I just have got one question: what happens when you tie yourself to something to protest and then you've got to use the bathroom? How does that work? (ht: M.Malkin)

Rosa Parks RIP

Dark Wizard of Fiduciary Concerns

Alan Greenspan has been replaced at long last and we have a new Dark Wizard, er, Fed Chairman- Ben Bernanke. Signs are looking good on this. (ht: Ramesh)


UPDATE:
WSJ has an op-ed from earlier in the year by Mr. Bernanke up.

On Mere Christianity

Baldilocks has been reading Mere Christianity and makes an arguement I'd quibble with. She quotes Lewis talking about morality effecting the soul here is the quote she pulls:

People often think of Christian morality as a kind of bargain in which God says, “If you keep a lot of rules I’ll reward you, and if you don’t I’ll do the other thing.” I do not think that is the best way of looking at it. I would much rather say that every time you make a choice you are turning the central part of you, the part that chooses, into something a little different from what it was before. And taking your life as a whole, with all your innumerable choices, all your life long you are slowly turning this central thing either into a heavenly creature or into a hellish creature: either into a creature that is in harmony with God, and with its fellow-creatures, and with itself. To be one kind of creature is heaven: that is, it is joy and peace and knowledge and power. To be the other means madness, horror, idiocy, rage impotence and eternal loneliness. Each of us at each moment is progressing to the one state or to the other.

That explains what always used to puzzle me about Christian writers; they seem to be so very strict at one moment and so very free and easy at another. They talk about mere sins of thought as if they were immensely important: and then they talk about the most frightful murders and treacheries as if you had only got to repent and all would be forgiven. But I have come to see that they are right. What they are always thinking of is the mark which the action leaves on that tiny central self which no one sees in this life but which each of us will have to endure—or enjoy—for ever.

Then she says:

To me, this seems to be a particularly Catholic way of thinking--Catholics, feel free to argue--and though I have no intention of converting, it makes a lot of sense to me. If you’re going to be stuck with ‘you’ forever, it behooves you to try to become the type of person that you want to be stuck with for that long. After your threescore and ten are done (plus change, if you’re lucky/unlucky), all opportunities for modification will be past. To put it in geek-speak, in the eternal life realm, you'll have all the features and bugs that you’re ever going to have. Apart from radical change, a person is always headed in one direction or the other; therefore the time to make changes is now.

I am not a Catholic, but I am going to challenge that reading of the passage. I don't think Lewis is saying we are going to bear the marks of sin forever. We are going to be perfected in Christ. Rather Lewis is speaking directly of people Now, the eternal beings we meet in the grocery store. For a Christian the passage to becoming more like Jesus is increasingly difficult as you further your walk with Him. The more He sheds his light on your life more more you become aware of where the dross is. Some things are easy to get rid of.

Imagine the sin in your life as a big log. Jesus helps you roll the huge log off your chest, suddenly you're free, you can move, He's bandaging your big scrapes and cuts. You notice you are covered in splinters, some are big - easy to see, most of them are tiny hard - to grasp. All of the splinters are areas that can cause infection. All need to be dealt with. So large unmistakeable sins, like murder to use Lewis' example, can not be ignored, it is easy to let the Physician pull the large shards. Sins of thought, are tiny things requiring us to search carefully, get it all including the sharp spike; to stand under Jesus' strong searching light and not flinch away from His tweezers.

Ukulele

My mom gave the kids a Ukulele a while back ago when the Verbalist expressed an interest in playing the guitar. When he asked to hear some ukulele music I played him some IZ, that is Israel Kamakawiwo'ole. Now thanks to Bill at INDC, I can show him this wonderful Beatles rendition.

Punkin' Patch

Little more than a week until Halloween so it is time for the obligatory pumpkin hunt. In places more urban we hunted pumpkins in grocery store lots; last year we went down the road to one of the local farms and poked through the wagons. This year we went whole hog, and the clan caravaned to a pumpkin patch complete with hay rides and a corn maze. Positively Rockwellian in the best of ways.

The weather was threatening, in fact had it's beginning of the season pour earlier in the week. Friday was warm and sunny and today was the last of the sun forcasted for a while. Prime chance for getting out to pick out gourds for fun and destruction. The Verbalist was full of big plans for a big pumpkin, while the Muralist decided to wait for the spirit to move her. She would keep a weather eye out the perfectus one.

We pulled up and piled out of my Sis' mini van. Next to us, my folks rolled up in thier pick-up. Glancing around the parking lot I was uneasy, if the puddles were bad here, how bad would they be in the field? The tractor pulling the hay ride sat idling by the produce stand ready to load the last few people it's wagon could hold. As the adults stood palavering about the availability of seats the Muralist pipes up.

"I have to use the potty!" she intones, using the premptory note a tot uses when toilet usage is a Big Deal. I handed the Infant off to Sis and hay ride was forgone for Port-a-let. So we trooped out to the patch instead, a good choice considering the wiggles stored up in the car ride out. We pause enroute examining carrots and winter cabbage in situ, discussing the virtues of washing off vegetables before consumption. Across the ditch into the patch we wandered.

1-2-3-4-5

"Found mine!" cried the Verbalist.

"Are you sure?" I ask looking down at the small pumpkin he has claimed. "What about the big one you were going to get?"

"I'm sure. This one is the best." Confidence exudes from him. "The best for a boy like me."

"Ok," say I, already scanning for the Muralist and spying her considering a pumpkin the same size as she. "pick it up." The Verbalist was having none of that. "Pacah!" he calls to my father. "Can you carry this for me?"

To and fro we went looking for the Pumpkin perfect for each of us. The Muralist ran all round looking for the sincerest pumpkin I guess finging one with character - tall and oval, perfectly orange with a dimpled face. Pacah and the Verbalist trekked back to the sales area to retrieve a wheel barrow to tote the 11 pumpkins chosen by our entire party. Alas they returned with a barrow with a flat tire. It fell to my brother in the Navy to muscle it back, for which we were all grateful.

From the patch we retired to the "buffalo" (as the Muralist calls the Chinese buffet) where hungry as lions, we ate our fill. Bouyed by our successful hunt, my mother promised small toys to her grandkids. God help us, in a kung pao chicken haze I let the Verbalist have a pump action shot gun that propells suction darts. What hath I wrought?

Hamlet

I get a little dividend from my love of movies and the Swan of Avon, in the form of recognition. (barely... in the most desperate, pathetic fashion) Just click here and scroll down. Revel in my clear and insightful analysis of Mel Gibson in tights. Then go read Jasper Ffordes funny, funny books.

This Elitism Will Not Stand

No, I am not talking about Miers, but the outrageous slur against science fiction in The Corner in regards to this list of books from TIME. John Podhoretz said:

John J., I'm enough of an elitist to find it a little horrifying that the Time list featured Neal Stephenson and William Gibson -- I've read both books, and they're impressive examples of their genre, but (here comes the stuff that will provoke a million e-mails) science fiction is junk like Judy Blume is junk like comic books are junk.

I will grant you that a great deal of genre fiction is dreck, science and speculative fiction suffer from what novelist Sharyn McCrumb calls the "Bimbos of the Death Sun" curse. That is, no matter how well written and researched, sci-fi inevitably gets slapped with a large chested woman in a tight jumpsuit on the cover art. This leads those who like to act haughty about Lit-rat-chure to dismiss it as "junk". Substitute brass brassieres for fantasy genre fiction, and don't get me started on the largest selling pie in popular fiction, romance novels.

That which the high and mighty lit critics love can also be dreck, but is often presented with the adjective "challenging" or worse, "ground breaking". Sorry, I like a coherent narrative in my fiction and usually a third less (at least) poised angst about the dreariness of life. I am a bibliophile, I love books and can barely part with tattered copies bought for a quarter at the Friends of the Library book sales. Oh how tired I get of people telling me what is worthwhile to read and what is not, what I should read furtively for fear of being labeled a lightweight.

John Miller sensibly defends genre fiction. John Derbyshire tries to but commits his own fallacy (bold mine):

If a great novel is written in the sci-fi idiom, it is at once de-categorized as "sci fi" and re-categorized as "mainstream."

What is "Brave New World," if not sci-fi? You don't see it in sci-fi catalogs, though. Even Vonnegut's sci-fi isn't sci-fi (mostly) -- it's too well thought of (though not by me).

Sci fi is by definition a low category of literature. A really good novel is by definition mainstream... even if it's sci-fi.

And in a way, this is right and just. After all, sci-fi readers aren't looking for high literary merit, and don't want it, or at any rate don't much care whether it's present or not. (Though it is NOT the case that they wouldn't know it if they saw it. Lots of them -- of us -- would. It's just that we don't always want it.) What a sci-fi reader, in sci-fi-reading mode, wants, is, to quote Isaac Asimov, "those crazy ideas." At the heart of every sci-fi story is a really cool idea. "Wow! Just imagine! What if..." If it comes attached to literary excellence, as it occasionally does, that's really neither here not there.

Greatest sci-fi writer of the 20C: Robert A. Heinlein, by a mile.

Recatogorization happens when the haughty lit prognosticators run across a genre book that they can not ignore. It doesn't not magically change the book from whatever genre it is in. Frankenstien, Dracula, and Mask of the Red Death are undeniably horror stories. Your test is to pitch it as a film: picture your book as a movie and chances are it will fall into a genre. If it does not then it is "mainstream" fiction and will rarely be snubbed as "low brow". I agree with Derb about Heinlein, although an admirable case can be made for Bradbury.

The silliness of TIME's list and the Corner discussion stems from that fact that only future generations can determine what becomes classic literature and what get tossed by the wayside. Stephen King will stack besides Shelly, Stoker, and Poe in the annals of classic horror unless I miss my guess, and he is the poster child for pulpy goodness. I am horrified that TIME has snubbed the comedic genius of PG Wodehouse, but I rest easy knowing that his body of work will not wither away for want of a nod by the twiddleheads who have appointed themselves arbitors of literature.

Nick Park, Genius in Details

Wallace and Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit is not a kid movie, it is a family movie. Kid movies engross the younger set but leave adults yawning, family movies engage all levels. If the the fun in Shrek is noticing the details, you'll love Nick Park's latest creation.

The movie shows us the classic horror concept of science gone amok. In an effort to save the town vegetables from a horde of hungry rabbits, Wallace attempts to reverse the bunnies produce loving ways thru mind control. Disaster, as they say, ensues. Adults, even those who are not horror film enthusiasts, can pleasure in carefully crafted horror film cliches: racing to a safe haven as the sun sets, the old priest (or anglican minister in this case) with musty tomes of lore and a cabinet full of occult knowledge locked away, locking the doors on the vehicle as the monster appears, even the hood of a vehicle smashed as the detrius of the monster's prey is rained down on the street.

Along with the broader scene cliches, come the little comedic gems: the radio presets in the van spell M-U-T-T, the Bishop cheese, the picture of a younger Wallace with hair from a bygone era, and (my personal favorite) the bumper sticker on the van - Eat cheese now, ask me how! There are many more large and small cliches and details all lovingly included. It is a testament to Park that he has crafted the perfect horror story while telling it in so gentle and accessible a manner as to delight my extremely shy and easily frightened niece of three years. This is one to add to the family archives.

Mexican Omlette

This is kind of a cop out post; I mean, who can't make an omlette? But I am crunched for time so this is the best it gets.

5 eggs
1/3 cup mixed, grated, cheddar and jack cheese
1/4 tsp minced garlic
1/4 tsp onion powder
1/2 tsp cumin
salt
pepper
2 tbsp minced black olives
salsa
sour cream
1/4 cup taco meat (optional)

whisk eggs lightly, add 3 tbsp warm water, garlic and spices and combine thoroughly. Water will make the eggs fluffier. Pour out onto medium hot griddle or non stick skillet. When bottom of egg mixture is cooked, add cheese, olives, and meat to half of egg. Fold over the other half and cook for another 3 minutes. Slide onto warm plate and spoon on salsa and sour cream. Yum!

From Imaginings of a Tot

Every day I get new evidence of the Verbalist's rich fantasy life but the other day he shared a gem. Apparently, he and his panda have begun to write a comic book about the Adventures of Captain Froggie Applepants. Now Cap'n F. Applepants is a fearsome pirate with a the face of an ugly frog and apples rolling around in his pants. (A purely sartotial statement as subsequent questioning proves). Action drives a plot, so Cap'n F.A. was made to walk the plank by his former crony, Captian Hook. Now came the difficult part, what would happen to Cap'n F.A.?
Research is called for.

"Grammy," begins my child to my mother, "do alligators and crocodiles live out in the water by the ferry?" My mother explained that no, alligators and crocodiles like warm water. As and Cs eat birds and birds prefer warm water.

"Are you sure?" he asks earnestly. Yes, she assures him. Grammy, an authority on all animal life, is then posed another question. "Are ther sharks in those waters?"

"Oh yes, at least 10 different kinds."

"Noooo," he chuckles nervously, "you're teasing." Grammy began to list the variety of sharks that live in the water around our Pacific abode, and the Verbalist realized that she was not teasing. Explainations on food chains and cold water marine habitats ensued. At last research done, the Verbalist continued the adventures of Captain Froggie Applepants. After Captain Hook made him walk the plank, a shark came and swallowed C. F.A. whole and that was the end of him.

Something tells me these adventures will get played out in the next few weeks with the Muralist cast as Captain Froggie Applepants.

Harriet Miers 3

Beryl says:

Some people (*COUGH*K-Lo*COUGH*) were stunned by the pick. As has been said by many before me, conservatives have aimed to reform the system. They wanted (with "charming naivete") to see a justice who could follow the constitution even if it meant that they would not always agree with that justice's decisions. The wanted someone who would espouse a philosophy of law that would have influence far beyond a vote on a particular case.

For example: I think that honest conservatives want a 'reversal' of Roe, whereby the court devolves the power to the states (where it resided before Roe.) They do not seek a decision that is the 'inversion' of Roe, i.e., a SCOTUS-imposed sanction against abortion.

In the wake of their shock and dissapointment, intemperate words have been spoken. The rift needs to be healed, but don't expect people to kiss and make up. The opportunity to appoint to SCOTUS does not come to every president. Bush had many, many people standing by him, giveing lots of time and treasure, taking lots of hits, so that he could get the opportunity to appoint TWO.

And for the second pick the best that we get is, "Trust me."

I am not saying I disagree with NROers that Meirs should not sit in SCOTUS. I am saying that in the war of damaging rhetorical smears NROers threw the first gout of mud. It's kinda rich that Jonah is now employing the "whoever started it" let's kiss and make up when no one in the Corner called Brookheiser on his Caligulan smear.

I am turned cold to thier arguments, no matter how persuasive they might be, by the nasty attack. Does this mean I am going to refuse to support the GOP in 06 and 08? Or conversely quit reading NRO? Of course not. Does this mean I am going reflexively support Miers? No, I am holding to my original decision, to wait until the hearing and use my best judgement then contact my Senators and ask them to support or not support her which is what the President has asked. When he said "Trust me" it was not "trust me and abdicate your judgement completely" as Mark Levin said. Mr. Bush has said: wait until the hearings, you'll be surprised. I sincerely hope so, all though I doubt I will be. I would hope that the many branches of the GOP, from conservatives to libertarians to hard line party men would stop attacking each other, the nominee, and the President and debate like grown ups.

If the debate were about her judicial philosophy and not about her "qualifications", cronyism, gender, religious conviction, or any other peripheral consideration, then I think most would agree that she is not who we would want sitting on the highest bench on the land. I think party men like Hewitt and Ruffini are big enough to say "we were wrong" if at the hearings her judicial philosophy is shown to be wandering and incoherent. By the same token some folks at NRO have all ready indicated they have closed thier minds to the possibility they may be wrong. *cough* Frum, Levin *cough* I am happy to see not all NROers are like that (Goldberg, Lopez and Podhoretz spring to mind)

Like Lileks says Miers is gonna hurt Bush when he seeks his third term. Ha!