Cassandra, who I thought wasn’t supposed to be blogging but (happily) clearly is, has a great post slamming Emily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick. Read and enjoy.
The Most Foul, Loathsome, Disgusting, and Evil Creature Ever to Exist Anywhere in the Universe, At Any Time
I refer, of course, to Keith Olbermann.
P.S. OK, I admit that I may be exaggerating — just a smidgen — in order to mock Mini-Murrow’s penchant for labeling perfectly nice people like Mary Katherine Ham the “Worst Person in the World.”
But surely I do not exaggerate when I label Olbermann the “Worst Lover in the World.” After all, a woman who slept with him termed him a “dud in bed.”
Old news? Sure. Just like this “Worst Person in the World” routine has gotten plenty old — but he’s still doing it.
Seeing as how Mini-Murrow keeps mocking people I like, I think it is worth reminding people about this.
So maybe the title is an accurate reference to him after all — at least, to the women who have had the bad fortune to sleep with the guy.
[Abbreviated guest post by DRJ]
“On Tuesday, President Bush will issue an Executive Order directing Federal agencies to ignore any future earmark that is not voted on and included in a law approved by Congress. This will effectively end the common practice of concealing earmarks in so-called report language instead of placing them in the actual text of the bill. This means earmarks will be subject to votes, which will better expose them to the light of day and help constrain excessive and unjustified spending.
The Executive Order will provide that with regard to all future appropriations laws and other legislation enacted into law, executive agencies will not commit, obligate, or expend funds on the basis of earmarks from any non-statutory source, including requests included in congressional committee reports or other congressional documents, or communications from or on behalf of Members of Congress, or any other non-statutory source, except when required by law, or when an agency itself decides that a project or other transaction has merit under statutory criteria or other merit-based decision-making.”
The Instapundit’s take: “Good for him. If he’d done this in 2005, of course, the GOP might have kept its majority. But this is still the right thing to do.”
My take: President Bush just saved his legacy with me.
UPDATE @ 1:15 PM PST: So much for his legacy. Mark Tapscott says it’s an empty gesture because it only applies to future legislation:
“In view of the collapse of the GOP leadership on all three fronts, it is absolutely fitting that Pelosi most accurately explains what it means: “I think Republicans have pulled their punch on earmarks. It looked like a very lukewarm approach. They want to beat a loud drum, but when it comes down to it, they want their earmarks.”
Precisely. With few exceptions, the Republicans in the nation’s capitol are toothless wonders. They talk a good case for conservative reform but they don’t walk it. They want to keep the perks of power and position, even if doing so means betraying the principles they profess to believe and for the defense of which their constituents voted for them.”
Now I’m especially interested in the positions of the GOP Presidential candidates on this. That will help me decide who to vote for.
This is how a terrorist’s obituary reads in the L.A. Times:
George Habash, the founder of Arab nationalism and architect of the infamous airline hijackings of the 1960s and ’70s that brought the search for a Palestinian homeland terrifyingly close to home for millions around the world, died Saturday in Amman, Jordan.
. . . .
With a wave of airline hijackings and the headline-grabbing seizure of a French airliner at Entebbe, Uganda, in 1976, Habash’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) inspired an image of ruthlessness in a Western psyche unattuned to the violent politics of the Middle East.
Stupid Westerners! We’re so unattuned to the violent politics of the Middle East that we consider airplane hijackers to be ruthless!
For millions of young Arabs, Habash represented the voice that said no to Western intervention in the Middle East and to the Arab regimes, such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt, that had allowed U.S. interests to dominate the region. He saw the Palestinian cause as part of a global struggle, and defended international terrorism as a way of drawing attention to it.
As my tipster (initials J.D.) wrote me: “I was educated in a California public school, so we never got to the part where we learned that American hegemony in the Middle East in the 60s and 70s was a foregone conclusion.”
The obit goes on to give us this stirring justification for terror:
“I believe that 6 million Palestinians, if they say we want only self-determination, they will get it,” he told The Times in a 1991 interview. “Imagine. Six million saying daily, daily, daily, ‘We want self-determination, we want self-determination.’ And expressing this by all means. I see it very clearly, that we will succeed. Why not?”
The “expressing this by all means” part is the part I don’t like to imagine. But that’s probably just my “Western psyche” talking.
You know, I hope we do catch Osama bin Laden, just to see what kind of obituary the L.A. Times will write for him.
UPDATE: Power Line has more on Habash.