Once more into the breeches: Or t-shirts, in this case. Here's a link to my humorous (if you stretch the term far enough) blog.

Why I'm thankful for idiots: My buddy over at Chapel42 weighs in on Ward Churchill. Pretty funny, and accurate.

Idiots are necessary to teach our children (and maybe ourselves) the importance of logic and critical thinking skills. We should be able to look at what he said and systematically break down his positions and refute each and every tenant of his belief system. If I can do that, then what he says will not threaten me. If I can't, all that's left is to attack Churchill and his right to express those ideas and then, I am no better than he.

Crazy in print: Yes God, please do help disgraced former Chief Justice Roy Moore by letting him know that you never enlisted him for "service."

Go away Roy, your silly banter has become tiresome. Now is the time on Sprockets when we dance!

Update: BTW, what the heck is Hannity doing giving Roy Boy premium air time on his radio and television programs to promote his book?

Why Lawrence Summers is in deep trouble: As explained in the New York Times's "Week in Review":

By being naturally and deliberately provocative, [Summers]has challenged campus liberals, which is not what campus liberals are accustomed to.

(Registration required.)

Cherie Blair: Just a reminder to those in the Birmingham area who may be interested....Cherie Blair, wife of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, will be speaking tomorrow evening (March 1 at 6:00 p.m.) at Samford University's Wright Center. Admission is free. If you have the time it might be something worth checking out.

The Ten Commandments Come To D.C.: Hopefully, his Highness Roy Moore will not be anywhere around. Wednesday marks the day when the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for two cases re: government and the Ten Commandments. Linda Greenhouse looks at the cases in today's New York Times.

One federal court upheld them as a symbol of the country's devotion to its legal heritage. Another federal court ordered them removed as an illicit message of religious endorsement. Fifteen months ago, Alabama's chief justice lost his job over them, and the two-ton granite monument that once sat in the rotunda of the state courthouse is now the star of a national tour. The profile of the Ten Commandments, it seems, has rarely been higher, or their ability to attract lawsuits greater.

Sacre bleu!: From the "Hope history doesn't repeat itself" department, Germany is about to have a representative with a really famous name.

The German parliament is due to gain a deputy with one of the most prominent historical names in Germany when Carl-Eduard Graf von Bismarck takes a seat for the opposition Christian Democratic Union (CDU).

Carl-Eduard, 43, is a great-great grandson of Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898), who as the "Iron Chancellor" was the driving force in the creation of the modern German state.

That sound you heard was France nervously coughing and tugging at their shirt collars.

Major Dick Rubinstein, R.I.P. Here's today's cool Telegraph obituary alert:

Major Dick Rubinstein, who has died aged 83, won the MC and the Croix de Guerre serving on SOE Jedburgh missions in France and Burma.

On the night of August 6 1944, Rubinstein's team was parachuted into Brittany, north-east of Vannes. The "Jeds" were not spies, but primarily a liaison force, and Rubinstein was wearing the uniform of a British paratrooper and a captain's badges. He was armed with a.45 Colt revolver, M1 carbine and commando knife and was carrying five million francs for local supplies and wages for the French Resistance.

Hibbs' Review of "Million Dollar Baby" on NRO

My Baylor colleague, Thomas Hibbs, reviews the Academy Award winning "Million Dollar Baby" in this morning's National Review Online. See here.

The Virtues of the Republic, the Follies of Man
SA's own Bill Watkins continues to draw praise for his book Reclaiming the American Revolution. IntellectualConservative.com favorably reviews the book here, concluding that the book:

is simply the most informative, well written and researched book on the [Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions] I’ve ever read. It is a clarion call for a return to the first principles and a must read for every citizen concerned about the real meaning of liberty and the future of this country!

More on Kelo v. New London

Over at the Reason website, Jacob Sullum has a good piece on the Kelo arguments. The more I think about this case, the more I am troubled by the contention that the power of eminent domain permits a government to take property from A and give it to B if B will pay higher taxes, which is essentially the position of the City. Sullum makes a good case that urban blight should instead be addressed under the government's police power, which includes the authority to force property owners to eliminate nuisances.

Sillyville: If you have young children and don't own this movie, then you probably should buy it right now. It will drive you and your spouse nuts, but your kid(s) will absolutely love it.

Here's the trailer.

Candidate for Permalink Ad. I'm here at the Federalist Society's National Student Symposium at Harvard with over 900 other Federalists, including Crasher Shane, one of the big dogs from Bureacrash.com. Folks, these guys are fighting the good fight, and you should check out the site (not to mention all the cool gear like the "Enjoy Capitalism" tee shirts). Check it out here.

Get ya zing on: Professor Kerr knows a good insult when he sees one. He recently stumbled across this gem, penned by Kip of A Stitch in Haste (who was kind enough to link to SA in the same post sans insult):

To an unfortunately large extent [The Volokh Conspiracy is] just a collection of bored semi-scholars and intellectual narcissists preening themselves in front of the blogospheric mirror. Reality, meanwhile, keeps chugging along.

This caused Kerr to quip, "Hey, that's a pretty good quote -- does anyone else think it would be perfect for one of our t-shirts?"

I think that's the right attitude to take. Some insults are funny, even if they're not necessarily justified.

Oh, and Kerr's post reminded me of the best insult another blogger--Skelly Wright (who, by the way, is a really nice person when not provoked to anger by the fedster)--ever hurled at me:

"[Feddie is a] Opus-Dei-linking, General-R.-E.-Lee-sacralizing, silly-bowtie-wearing, Pope-Pius-IX-name-checking, neo-Confederate Federalist Society martinet . . ."

That is a classic zinger; but I don't think it will work for an SA t-shirt. Oh no, the first SA t-shirt simply must have this quote somewhere on it (courtesy of commenter Navy Davy):

"Y'all gotta one damn fine blog! An erudite buncha Catholic lawyas, with a touch of Southern pecan panache! Be understandin' the nuances of Separation of Powers and Federalism, too! Hot damn! Y'all can count me in --long live Thomas and Scalia."

"America's Lord High Chancellor": Jimmy Akin has penned a nice tribute to Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist over at his blog, celebrating his long and (sometimes) distinguished tenure on the Supreme Court. As the Chief nears retirement, I think it is appropriate to speak well of a man, who, for the most part, has been a fairly solid justice.

I am not sure that I would characterize Rehnquist as an "originalist," as Jimmy does; but there is no question that the Chief is certainly more of an originalist than every other member of the Court (save Justices Scalia and Thomas). And Rehnquist did vote the right way in one of the most abominable cases ever handed down by the Court.

But my oh my, have there been some stinkers.

Free Speech in 'Bama: Apparently, the students at the University of Alabama are more enamored of the free exchange of ideas than their professors. What a bunch of losers. (The faculty who voted for the speech restrictions, that is).

Happy Blogiversary to Jimmy Akin, a new friend and one of my very favorite bloggers.

For Judge Bootle "following the rule of law was an act of integrity": Pete Barlas of The Investor's Business Daily has a nice (albeit belated) tribute to Judge William Augustus Bootle, who recently passed away, here. And here are some my favorite Bootle quotes from the piece:

"A lawyer must have courage to advocate a minority view . . . he must have the heart of a warrior"

"The lawyer must be as clean as a hound's tooth and represent the high watermark in character."

"[Attorneys must protect their credibility] "as if it were a crown jewel."

"One serious indiscretion, one slipping of the foot, one betrayal of a confidence reposed by a client, one reneging on a stipulation with counsel, and it [the attorney's reputation/credibility] is completely lost."

Mark Steyn laments the "death of 'the West'" in this column about the President's trip to Europe.

But, in the broader sense vis-à-vis Europe, the administration is changing the tone precisely because it understands there can be no substance. And, if there's no substance that can be changed, what's to quarrel about? International relations are like ex-girlfriends: if you're still deluding yourself you can get her back, every encounter will perforce be fraught and turbulent; once you realise that's never gonna happen, you can meet for a quick decaf latte every six – make that 10 – months and do the whole hey-isn't-it-terrific-the-way-we're-able-to-be-such-great-friends routine because you couldn't care less. You can even make a few pleasant noises about her new romance (the so-called European Constitution) secure in the knowledge he's a total loser.

Two on Iowahawk: I wanted to link to its wonderful send-up of "mommy madness" that I'd read a couple of days ago. So I go to the site to retrieve the link and also find a brand-new, dead-on parody of Hunter Thompson.

Simply stated, I stand in awe of Iowahawk.

Muscle Shoals Sound closes down: The legendary recording studio is being converted to focus on film and video production, but will, according to its new owner, still "be equipped for audio recording." (Via A Bama Blog.)

Lawrence Summers crossed with Ward Churchill on ScrappleFace.

Heh and double-heh.

Whither Winn-Dixie? The Southern supermarket chain's Chapter 11 filing inspired this story in the Christian Science Monitor on food retailing generally.

"Timetable for Bill Pryor's renomination up in the air": The Mobile Register has this report.

Soupie's BBQ and Daycare turns one: Congrats!

Liar, Liar: Anita, your 15 minutes of infamy were up a long time ago.

Florida DCF seeks 60 day stay in Schiavo case: This is excellent news. Here's hoping the judge grants the agency's request.

SA stats update: We just passed the 400,000 hits mark, and SA is currently ranked 120th out of the 20,449 blogs being tracked by TTLB's Blogosphere Ecosystem.

Not too shabby. :)

Pope has tracheotomy, now on respirator: Please keep PJPII in your prayers.

The Grand 'Sez Who?
A former professor of mine has an excellent article soon to be published in the Journal of Law and Religion. The abstract states:

The late Professor Arthur Leff believed that standard methods for grounding normative assertions fail to provide a solid foundation for moral judgment because none provides a satisfactory answer to what Leff called the grand 'sez who?' - a universal taunt by which a skeptic may challenge the standing/competency of the speaker to make authoritative moral assessments. Leff argued that as a matter of logic no system of morals premised in mankind alone ever could withstand the taunt. His provocative conclusion was that the only unchallengeable response to the grand 'sez who?' is God sez.

This Article demonstrates the continued relevance and validity of Leff's critique by evaluating three contemporary discussions of morality: (1) Judge Richard Posner's attack on academic moralism; (2) Professor Edward Wilson's assertion that morality has a biological basis; and (3) Professor Steven Pinker's attempt to distinguish between morality and our innate human nature. Although Leff did not discuss the practical possibility of a God-based moral system, this Article examines the practical question, focusing on three critical presuppositions implicit in seeking God's help to discern the right: (1) God actually exists; (2) one looks to the God who actually exists; and (3) this true God communicates what is "right" in understandable ways. While not providing any final answers, this Article honestly grapples with the three key issues, refuting some common objections to a God-premised morality, while acknowledging the existence of some genuine difficulties.

Leave it to Peggy: I've been meaning to post something on Hunter S. Thompson's passing, and the collective fever of a million wannabe-gonzos trying to exhaust their Roget's in praising him despite the man's excesses and faults, but Peggy Noonan beat me to it. And, believe it or not, she just might have done a better job of it than I could have.

Hunter Thompson, RIP. Tom Wolfe, a genius, goes over the top in his praise of Thompson. Wolfe and Thompson were of the same journalistic generation, and we are all chauvinists for our era. But Hunter Thompson was not Mark Twain, who was a genius, nor was he the great comic voice of America in the 20th century.

He was a reporter/diarist who helped create a new journalistic form, to which 30 years ago he gave the even then embarrassingly corny name "gonzo journalism." It was highly personal, eccentric, with the writer at the center of the story, and it had its moments, the best of which was "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas," which had a different sound, a different attitude, and a whiff of anarchy that seemed liberating.

In time Thompson's swashbuckling came to seem joyless, aggressive and half dead. What he thought fed his gift (drugs, alcohol) killed it. He must have been very scared to get tanked like that to write. The empty page, the blank screen, is scary. But so is a mortgage. So is the stillness of a courtroom before you make the closing argument. And so is a broken leg that needs fixing fast. We all have jobs. You take a bad turn when you start to think your next work must be marked by genius because you are a genius. Thompson's death is an occasion not for inspiration or celebration but compassion. Not pity, but a sense of universal idiocy, and sympathy.

I'm not just trying to be "that guy" when I say that Thompson, for whatever level of talent he had (and I'll never forgive him for the part he played in kicking "new journalism" off the ground), he's not a role model. He did what he did largely through heavy drug use, and influenced countless others to do the same. Mourn the loss of talent if you must, but don't hold him up as a hero.

It's not easy being stupid: But still I press on. An SA reader corrected my errors in this post made a couple of days ago. He wrote:

It's Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass. Two different guys, two different sets of fabricated stories. Just wanted to let you know because you may want to revise your post. See the following pages for more info:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0323944/plotsummary

http://www.jayson-blair.com/

Not sure on what level the irony stops with this: I fact-checked a blogger who was griping about MSM authors who weren't fact-checked enough by their eds. Ouch, my head is starting to hurt...

If anybody's head should hurt, it's mine for being so dense. I regret the error, and 1000 apologies for bringing down the collective IQ of SA.

JUST WHAT YOU NEED TO GET STARTED IN THE MORNING.
Highly motivational firepower video. Permissum hostilis Americanae iactio hodie; cras horrescebant et lacrimabant!! Hat tip to Maj Thielmann.

UNCOMMON VALOR WAS A COMMON VIRTUE.
On this day in 1945 five Marines and one Sailor participated in what would become one of the most enduring images of WWII and the Marine Corps. You can read about the flag raisers here. Semper Fidelis.

Prediction re New London
To get right to the point: I predict that the pessimistic gnashers of teeth will not see their worst fears realized in the Kelo v New London case. I predict that the Supreme Court WILL NOT rule against Kelo and the other homeowners. This is not to say that they will rule for them, but only that they will, at the very least, keep the case open on remand for lower courts to reconsider in light of wisdom offered by SCOTUS. I know, I'm not the only one who says this is a possibility; but I'm saying this is the WORST that SCOTUS will do to the homeowners. And I say this even though, judging from news reports, homeowner lawyer Scott Bullock -- who IS on the side of angels -- did not do quite as good a job as one would hope, or as an intelligent observer in retrospect could do, in providing justices with a clear guide to how they could come down in his favor.
So, why do I think the homeowners will do okay? Because I'm assuming three justices -- Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist -- will posit some fairly bright-line test of what "public use" means, and that the test does not extend as far as "public benefits from greater tax revenues." I'm then assuming that Breyer and O'Connor will find some way to aggregate more power to the courts by seeing how thinly they can slice the "rational basis" apple. Clearly, those justices sympathize, and rightly so, with the homeowners, and I think they will look for some grounds to avoid killing the homeowners' hopes. I also believe that Kennedy may join them, although he probably won't because he'll want to assert some kind of federalist principle that in this case isn't really there (being superseded, logically, by the Constitution's due process protections for property and -- I uniquely argue -- by its protections of the rights of contract). Finally, oddly enough, I wouldn't rule out Stevens coming down somewhere on the side of the homeowners, even if he has to concoct some theory out of thin air. He'll see the NAACP and the AARP and other liberal advocates coming down on the homeowners' side, and he'll continue to see himself as the champion of the "little guy," and so he may well make some sort of anti-big corporation argument and throw in references to Mussolini for good measure.
But the long and short of it is, I foresee one of those ugly, hodge-podge, multi-concurrence (or concur-in-part/dissent-in-part) decisions in which a majority finds nothing to agree on other than the conclusion that the homeowners are not, yet, to be forsaken, at least until New London offers more compelling arguments or until New London can pass some new judicially created test that is fuzzy enough to please O'Connor and other "swing" justices.
As for me, I'm where I assume Thomas, Scalia and Rehnquist will come down, i.e. in favor of the homeowners due to an easily explainable limitation on eminent domain -- for reasons that will require another post, if I have time, to fully articulate. -- Quin

Rehnquist's legacy: Professors Rick Garnett (ND) and Kermit Roosevelt (Penn) offer their thoughts on the topic here and here respectively (LvOK@VC).

The case for Chief Justice John Roberts: Professor Orin Kerr makes a good one here.

Famed Route 66 motel for sale: It appears that the Blue Swallow Motel in Tucumcari, N.M., is on the market at an asking price of $ 165,000. When I was a kid, I thought that running a motel would be about the best job in the world . . .

Don't Forget Sudan: Kudos to the NYT's Nicholas Kristof who reminds us - with pictures and words - that the genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan is still ongoing. The U.S. has a lot on its foreign policy plate, but there's precious little excuse for inaction here.

THE BEST BOOK ON ABORTION!
After reading some of the “Rebel Yell” responses to Feddie’s Planned Parenthood post I feel compelled to recommend Natural Rights and the Right to Choose by Hadley Arkes as required reading on the subject. Simply put, this is the best book I have ever read concerning the legal, philosophical, and political ramifications of the institutionalized endorsement of abortion’s “right to choose.” However, this book grapples with more than just the abortion issue; it also provides a fascinating discussion on the first principle of natural rights. For the aforementioned reasons Natural Rights and the Right to Choose has been for me one of the most influential books I have ever read. Everyone should read this book Regardless of his or her position on abortion.

European shame: Oh, wow! Janet Daley has written an absolutely wonderful op/ed in today's Telegraph (reg. req'd) comparing European and American ideas of freedom and democracy.

The enlightenment idealism of Europe was exported to the rebellious colonies and, in geographical isolation, it flourished. While Europeans themselves undermined their own great democratic project with their ancient hatreds and their aristocratic nostalgia, the naïve Americans kept the dream intact, building it into a written constitution (which was an 18th-century idea itself).

Europe has pretty much given up on the whole undertaking now: we tried it and it ended in the Terror. We went through our phase of proselytising democratic revolution with Bonaparte and look where that ended. Spreading freedom? All that amounts to is killing off one generation of autocrats and replacing them with another. Trust the people? They are just as likely to follow a fascist demagogue as to perpetuate the sacred principle of justice.

Better to make your cynical peace with the worst aspects of human nature than to pretend that free men will always choose good over evil. Much better to make a mutually profitable trade-off behind the scenes than to expose political decisions to the popular will. What evidence is there that the people actually know what is best for them? Most charitably, the European philosophy of government - shortly to be permanently installed under the EU constitution - is paternalistic. At worst, it is arrogant and authoritarian.

But whatever it is, it no longer has a belief in real democracy of the kind that Americans recognise - government of the people, by the people and for the people - at its heart.

Finally, she ends with this:

I have written before on this page that European hatred of the United States has a great deal to do with jealousy of American self-belief. But there is an element of shame there, too. Because Europe knows that it has sold the pass. It has traded liberty for security: the safety of consensus, the reassuring unfreedom of bureaucratic control and an over-regulated economy.

American talk about spreading freedom is not just gauche; it is a reproach.

Ms. Daley is absolutely correct, the EU has sold freedom and liberty down the river - and for what? As this past weekend's referendum Spain on the EU Constitution shows - the EU's paternalistic ways are causing rampant indolence and apathy on the part of EU citizens. Less than 43% of Spanish voters bothered to turn out and vote on the EU Constitution. Were it just this once, or simply a Spanish problem there would be no case for alarm. However, this summer's elections for European Parliament were equally anemic - all over Europe. Studies and polls have shown that few Europeans have any idea what the proposed constitution states - if they are even aware that a constitution exists at all. Pathetic.

A spate of city-county mergers?: An article in today's WSJ looks at cities such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Buffalo that are seeking to merge with surrounding counties to "slash expenses and attract revenue generating economic development." This has been done in Georgia with the merger of Athens and Clarke County into Athens-Clarke County (ACC). ACC was the "second unified government in Georgia and the twenty-eighth nationwide."

Buffalo's proposed merger with Erie County, New York "could potentially save between $15 million and $30 million annually by eliminating redundant services, such as zoning and maintenance." It is an interesting idea, though one that might not work in most instances. I do not foresee an Atlanta-Fulton County merger, nor even a Birmingham-Jefferson County merger. It has worked for Athens, Jacksonville, FL., and Kansas City, but most merger proposals have been turned down by the voters. I'd be interested to learn why so few merger proposals are accepted. Any ideas?

My assumption is that county residents are not city residents for a reason - maybe they consider the city's property or sales taxes too high, or other various socioeconomic reasons (ahem... Birmingham). For those familiar with the Birmingham area, can you imagine the uproar in Mountain Brook and Homewood if Birmingham merged with Jefferson County?

Now here's a "catholic" who desperately needs some answers: Joe Feuerherd.

Update: O.k., Dale Price really takes Joey to the woodshed (Thanks to Jeff Miller a.k.a The Curt Jester for the pointer). Here's my favorite excerpt:

Many--I would venture to say most--of us who found ourselves in the President's corner did so because we found the prospect of a religious fraud like JFK II being elected as a direct affront to everything we are trying to live and pass on to our children and others. The thought of watching the architects of beige Catholicism wave the awful Kerry like a totem for their brand of anything-goes over the next four years was a vision of hell. In one stroke, much of the fragile renewal of American Catholic life would have been destroyed, as cowards in miters posed in photo ops... Bush has some serious flaws, but, in the final analysis, he doesn't make us puke.

Yep. And that is why I, unlike many of my conservative friends, do not want to see Kerry renominated in 2008.

K-Lo on Pryor:

There is no reason Pryor should have to go through another hearing. He was qualified last time he went through hearings. He is qualified now—and with a year on the bench, has an even firmer record to make that clear. And not because he has come down with “progressive” decisions. He, uh, upholds the law. (What a concept.) Like a judge does. And can still believe Roe is an abomination . . . .

Senate Democrats already wrongly filibustered Pryor. If the expectation is that they are going to again, why give them another hearing show-trial opportunity (where they can get back to the really big relevant questions—like Pryor family vacation choices)?

Barnett Update: As mentioned earlier, Prof. Barnett will be speaking at Cumberland this coming Thursday, at noon. If interested in attending, send me an email.

More drivel from the Planned Parenthood crowd, courtesy of K-Lo. I think this excerpt sums up the author's position nicely:

Reproductive freedom - abortion rights; freedom of sexual consent; motherhood - is essential to women's equality. Far from being tragic, abortion ensures us agency over our lives.

Every euphemism and every apology about abortion is really another apology for being female, as if over and over, that pesky fertility gets in our way

.

Of course, in this case, "women's equality" means "the right to be sexually promiscuous without having to accept the consequences of one's actions."

You see, it's not "that pesky fertility" that's the problem, madam; it's your lack of character and morality. But hey, whatever gets you through the day.

(Note to my liberal blogging friends: Please print this post out and place it in your respective "Feddie--filibuster" files)

(Note to my friends in the Bush Administration: Please print out this post and place it in the administration's "Why Feddie might be a good recess appointment if we really need to piss off the dems" file)

Update: Wow.

Blegging for Sutherland: I realize this is a long shot, but here goes. I am in the market for a used copy of Sutherland on Statutory Construction (any complete edition). If any of SA's readers know where I can get one for a reasonable price, I would greatly appreciate it you forwarding me that information.

Thanks!

Good Things come to those who blog: Joe Carter, whose blog the evangelical outpost, has long been one of my favorites, has picked up a very nice job on the strength of his blogging. Go give him a congrats...

Guinea Pig, Or A Way To Save Face? Byron York pens an excellent essay, at NRO, looking at the new GOP strategy re: judicial nominations (one I think might just work). Basically, Specter's offering an olive branch to the Democrats by way of holding hearings for some of the judges who President Bush recently re-nominated. One of those nominees is none other than Judge Pryor.

National Review Online has learned that the first of those hearings will be held next month on the nomination of William Pryor, President Bush's filibustered choice for a seat on the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The hearing will also consider the nomination of William Haynes, the president's pick for a place on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Both men had hearings before the committee when they were nominated in the president's first term. Both were approved by the committee. Pryor's nomination was filibustered by Democrats, while Haynes's nomination was never brought to the Senate floor.

Pryor, the former attorney general of Alabama who, after the Democratic filibuster, was given a recess appointment to the Eleventh Circuit by President Bush, is a favorite of social conservatives. By all accounts, he made a strong showing at his hearing in June 2003 (see "The Nominee Who Won't Back Down"), where he stood behind his statement that he considers Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination in the history of constitutional law."

...

The decision to hold hearings for Pryor and Haynes appears to be a concession to Democrats. Republicans, who now hold a 10-to-8-vote advantage over Democrats on the committee (it was 10-to-9 before last year's election), had hoped to approve the nominations quickly without having to reenact hearings that had already taken place.

...

The Republicans say that Specter and his GOP colleagues are shaping a strategy in which they, the Republicans, will offer hearings and other procedural concessions to Democrats in an effort to determine whether Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid plans to continue his predecessor Tom Daschle's strategy of stopping Republican nominees at all costs.

"It's an opportunity if they want to back off one or two of [the filibusters]," says the second Republican source, "so they have a way of saving face."

"This is kind of an olive branch to them, saying, hey, I'll give this guy hearings," says the first Republican. "If they turn it into a circus, [Specter] can say, screw it, I'm not going to put the other guys through that."

...

Pryor and Haynes will be the guinea pigs in the new Republican experiment. They were chosen carefully; both are candidates who, given the situation that exists in the Senate, will be difficult for Democrats not to filibuster. Pryor's statements on abortion alone virtually guarantee continued Democratic opposition, while Haynes seems destined to be portrayed as Mr. Abu Ghraib. If that is the case, and especially if Democratic attacks on them are strident, then Republicans feel they will be able to build the base from which to launch an attempt to break through the Democratic filibusters.

Sounds like there will be more to March Madness than basketball.

More Rehnquist News/Speculation: The New York Times reports, today, about continuing speculation as to what exactly are the plans of the Chief Justice. Basically, the conventional wisdom seems to be he's trying to make it through the end of the term, in June, at which time he'll announce his retirement, in order to prevent the disruption which would occur should he leave now, during the middle of the term.

[F]or senior White House officials, as well as a handful of others who follow the court closely, a working assumption about what is going to happen has already taken shape. The strong expectation, senior administration officials and others said, is that Chief Justice Rehnquist is making his best effort to serve out the remainder of the term that ends in June before resigning. And the only question, they say, is whether the 80-year-old chief justice, who is suffering from thyroid cancer and the effects of his treatment, will be able to do so.

Note also the speculation of his replacement, particularly the attention given to Judge Michael McConnell, which I know has been discussed, here, before.

The potential outside nominees are all judicial conservatives of strong, if varying, degrees. One outside adviser suggested that Judge McConnell had risen in the White House's handicapping because, among other things, he had been supported in his nomination to the appeals court by dozens of liberal law professors.

Before joining the bench, Judge McConnell was a law professor who was well known for his erudite criticism of legalized abortion. When he encountered opposition during his nomination to the appeals court, some 200 law professors, ranging across the ideological spectrum, signed a petition supporting his confirmation.

Till Next Week . . .

Today, I am off to a Long Term Care and the Law Conference in San Diego. Check out the digs I'll be staying in: The Hotel del Coronado. Cross your fingers that I'll have good weather and be able to develop some business on this trip. In case you didn't know, a large part of my practice deals with administrative appeals to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, general health care compliance (HIPAA, Stark Law, Anti-Kickback Statute), and defense of long term care facilities in litigation.

Kelo v. City of New London (04-0108) Arguments Today

This is the latest eminent domain case to reach the High Court. According to the Petitioner's brief, the City and a private development corporation seek to take Petitioners’ 15 homes to turn them over to other private parties in the hope that the City may benefit from whatever trickle-down effects those new businesses produce. Petitioners argue that the majority opinion below incorrectly equated "public use" with the ordinary "public" benefits – taxes and jobs – that typically flow from private business enterprises. The Petitioners urge the Court to adopt a bright-line rule that the possible increase in taxes and jobs does not qualify as a public use. Petitioner's Brief can be found here. (For some reason, the Respondent's Brief is not up on the ABA site). Also, CNN has a nice summary of the case here.

From the good folks at Catholic Answers re: Terri Schiavo:

A woman is about to be murdered, and you probably already know her name--Terri Schiavo.

Please help us rescue Terri from a horrible death by starvation! The moment her feeding tube is removed, Terri will begin a long, slow, painful death by starvation and dehydration.

We need your help NOW to rescue Terri from her cruel executioners. They've already tried to kill her once before, and she fought to stay alive. But this may be the last chance Terri gets. Will you help save her life?

MEDIA LIES

If you've heard about Terri only through the news media, you've probably been led to believe things like this:

* Terri brain dead.
* She is in a coma.
* She's a vegetable.
* Extraordinary means are being used to keep her alive.
* She wants to die but her parents stubbornly won't let it happen.

None of these things are true!

Terri is NOT brain dead. She is NOT in a coma. She is NOT in a "persistent vegetative state." And she is not on ANY life-support system.

THE FACTS THE MEDIA HIDES FROM YOU

When her parents visit her, Terri laughs, she cries, she moves, and she makes child-like attempts at speech with her mother and father. Sometimes she will say "Mom" or "Dad" or "yeah" when they ask her a question. And when they kiss her hello or goodbye, she looks at them and "puckers up" her lips.

She's able to sit in a chair, she loves to listen to her favorite music, and she recognizes her brother and sister when they come to visit.

Board-certified neurologist Dr. Jacob Green of Jacksonville, Florida, who examined Terri, said unequivocally: "She is not in a vegetative state." When asked if it would be ethical to remove her feeding tube, he said, "I'd call it murder."

Terri receives food and liquid through a feeding tube because she can't swallow. In other words, Terri depends on food and water to stay alive-just like everybody else!

But her husband, Michael, wants to disconnect her only means of food so that she will slowly starve to death.

Medical experts all agree that death by starvation and dehydration is perhaps the most painful, the most tortuous, and the most agonizing way to die.

Yes, Terri's injury left her disabled. But there are tens of thousands of disabled people who depend on gastro feeding tubes every day, and they live otherwise normal lives.

Terri can breathe for herself. She is not on a ventilator. Her vital organs are working fine, which means she is not hooked up to a machine. Furthermore, she is NOT dying or being "kept alive" by artificial means. She does not have a terminal disease, and she will be able to feel pain if she is starved to death.

And that could start to happen in the next few days.

THE IMMEDIATE CRISIS

Time is running out for Terri. Her feeding tube could be removed THIS WEEK!!!

There is one last court procedure that is being tried to save Terri's life, but if it fails her feeding tube could be removed Wednesday.

If that happens then only thing that may save her might be action by Florida Governor Jeb Bush.

Governor Bush has already fought to save Terri's life. The last time her feeding tube was removed he stepped in and snatched her back from the brink of death. The Florida legislature even passed a special law--"Terri's Law"--to give him the authority to keep her alive.

But then the law was struck down by a judge, putting Terri's life on the line once again.

If the courts continue their anti-life crusade against Terri and others like her, the only thing that may save her would be action by Governor Bush.

WHERE YOU COME IN

The attorneys who are fighting for Terri's life have a few more possible ways to prevent Terri's murder. But these are last-ditch efforts that may or may not work. The courts are decidedly on Michael's side--not Terri's.

So that means we have to come to Terri's aid-especially through the amazing power of prayer and sacrifice--but also by sharing this story with everybody you know, and encouraging Governor Jeb Bush to do everything he can to rescue Terri once again.

Here's what you can do . . .

1.) First, PRAY for Terri--harder than ever before! Not enough people are praying for Terri right now. And she needs our prayers now more than ever.

2.) Second, FAST along with Terri if and when her feeding tube gets removed--and then offer up your sacrifices for her.

3.) Third, please ENCOURAGE Governor Bush to do everything he can to rescue Terri. Since time is of the essence, we recommend that you send him an e-mail by clicking this link:

mailto:jeb.bush@myflorida.com

Or, if you prefer, you can call his office at the Florida State Capitol at (850) 488-4441.

4.) And finally, please FORWARD this e-mail to everyone on your e-mail list. The more people who know the true story about Terri Schiavo and how she is in imminent danger of being murdered, the greater our chances of achieving a victory in this life-or-death struggle between good and evil.

It's hard to believe, but there are many hard-hearted people out there who believe that, due to Terri's condition, she is "better off dead." Words cannot describe the pain and anger such sentiments cause Terri's family.

This is their daughter, their little girl. And even in her disabled condition, she still has the right to life and the right to be loved and cared for by her family.

Terri doesn't have to die. If you'll carry out the steps above, we can win this battle and save Terri's life.

Please do your part--immediately--because tomorrow may be too late.

Sincerely,

Catholic Answers
http://www.catholic.com

Liberals make me laugh:
In a story on the Larry Summers' brouhaha at Harvard, fellow Clintonista Gene Sperling says:

Now, a more sensible middle ground is emerging that acknowledges -- as Larry has -- that his comments were off the mark and potentially harmful, but that also recognizes that he is a very open-minded leader with a lifetime of walking the walk for greater economic and social opportunity.

Translation: He said something bad, but he's a liberal. So excuse him.

Liberals can be very forgiving of un-PC comments when it is a fellow liberal.

Chairman Dean visits Mississippi and check out this take on it in Monday's editorial cartoon in the Jackson, MS Clarion-Ledger.