The Politics of Reporting on Filibusters . . .

Just read an interesting AP story (here) re. Sen. Frist's comments today ("...I believe we have a fair and independent judiciary") which contrasted with those of Rep. Tom Delay. But the interesting part is how slanted the "news" article is. Religious Conservatives are the only ones, apparently, who are dissatisfied with the judiciary in America, and RCs want simply "conservative" justices (the message being that we think like liberals and think it appropriate that judges should push policy from the bench). The Dems are portrayed as paragons of moderation (ergo, of virtue!) in that they have only used the filibuster to block 10 of Bush's "most controversial" nominees. Of course, all of Bush's nominees were controversial, and even some of the most controversial judges were allowed by the forebearing Dems. And of course, no mention of the fact that this has NEVER been done in history to block Federal District or Circuit judges. The article also flatly states that "Frist has threatened to change Senate rules to ban filibusters" without specifying that it is only in regard to advise and consent of nominees. Folks, I hope you are clear whenever (if ever) you discuss this with others . . . a "Conservative jurist" refers to theory of the judiciary not political theory--it is a judge who understands the principle of separation of powers and doesn't legislate from the bench.

Lowry: ""When the chips are down, give me a freedom-loving man of faith every time"

Interesting op/ed (here) concerning trendy "theocracy" demagoguery

If You Aren't a Secularist, Phooey on You . . .

Leftists in France (which is like saying "bigots in Nazi Germany") are outraged (here) that France officially lowered flags to half-mast in honor of the Pope's passing . . . I guess if you believe in God you are a non-person, and certainly unworthy of remembrance. If not for Reagan and Pope John Paul II such Leftists (Commies) might rule France and more than half of the world; well, I guess that explains their outrage. Yikes.

Poll-skewing on Schiavo

See this excellent blog post (here) on the disingenuous polling practices of the dominant media (hat tip, The Corner).

"Man of Peace" Mantra alert

One thing that I noticed today in coverage about the Pope's death is the media's consistent reporting of the common view among the public (both Catholic and non-Catholic) that the Pope was wrong on various issues (you know the ones...) but at least he was a "man of peace." See here, here, here. That's a somewhat begrudging (and beguiling) view of the Pope by the Left in America, but I think it is inaccurate. It kind of reminds me of all the odd affection from odd elitists for the Gipper when he passed away. But the Pope was not anti-"Iraqi Freedom," per se or anti-Bush. This blog archive (from the inimitable The Corner) demonstrates that the Pope was less like the Left than they may wish to remember. You know what I think is cool, though? Several of the mourners-on-the-street (mostly female) interviewed gave the cliched "I didn't agree with him about everything, but..." I believe there is an undeniable attraction/admiration for a person who lives by conviction.

The Religious Left and Sectarian Agendas...

In recent posts I've sounded off on the idiocy of claiming that only Conservatives are influenced by beliefs in considering public policy. Well, this bit of excellent reporting on Michael Schiavo's attorney demonstrates how ludicrous this hackneyed secularist accusation is. It describes Mr. Felos' spiritualish journey that manifests itself in his legal work on euthanasia cases. In particular, Felos describes the impact of a book, "(w)ritten by a meditation teacher and activist in the hospice movement, the book “describes the enormous potential for spiritual awakening, both for the patient and the caregiver, which is sometimes realized during the death process.” Can someone get the Rev. Danforth on the line?

Sandy Burglar and the Real Deception About the War on Terror

Perhaps feeling--post-Clinton, the political pain of being known as liars, the Left has worked overtime characterizing every action of the President as dishonest (ref. "Bush Lied."). Fast forward to today when Senior Kerry Campaign adviser and Clinton Administration Nat'l Security Adviser Sandy Berger pled guilty to stealing and shredding with scissors original documents pertaining to the Clinton administration's handling of terrorist threats to America. An article in today's Washington Post reveals new details about the case . . . details which should silence any baseless dishonesty talk. Of course, the shameless Bush-haters--ever in campaign mode, will never concede how defamatory their attacks were on the President, Condy Rice, et al about how they handled post-9/11. Ah, the beauty of moral relativism . . . Burglar's plea agreement is even more insulting in light of these new details.

More on the Pope...

In a news story about the pope's likely successor, this revealing comment about conventional Media opinion, "The next pope will confront a range of challenges, including scientific advances that conflict with Catholic teaching." Now, I'm not Catholic and I won't defend everything that they believe, but I can't think of a "Catholic teaching" that is subject to scientific investigation. Maybe it is the discovery that men and women are exactly alike or that unborn children aren't really human or aren't "living."

Prayers for the Pope . . .

I am saddened by the Pope's failing health and I will miss his presence--particularly for the courage he typically demonstrated in standing up to totalitarianism. (Laurie and I did missions work in Poland for a summer while it was still a soviet satellite state, and it was invigorating to observe the impact of Solidarity and the Pope.) But, in reading a news report on the subject, I was struck by the flat assertion (by a spokesman from the home office--French Council of the Muslim Faith) that "Muslims in France were praying for the pontiff. . ." ; as Jonah Goldberg might say, "you in the back, stop laughing..."