The Latest Tweets from Team NRO . . .
K-Lo, Bush did strike Karl Rove’s formula with perfect pitch — nothing critical of the lifestyle for the Log Cabin left, with a little scriptural sugar for the religious right — but it can also be argued in political terms that Bush is doing nothing more courageous than placing himself in the same spot on the social-ideology spectrum as Bill Clinton, who signed the Defense of Marriage Act. It’s been clear from the beginning that their whole objective at 1600 Penn is to keep that front as quiet as humanly possible, and in the silence, hope to convince voters on both sides of the issue to support them.
Cleaning and Healing Boston
The new Catholic bishop of Boston was installed today and sounded the right notes. May his actions mimic them:
How we ultimately deal with the present crisis in our Church will do much to define us as Catholics of the future. If we do not flee from the cross of pain and humiliation, if we stand firm in who we are and what we stand for, if we work together, hierarchy, priests, religious and laity, to live our faith and fulfill our mission then, we will be a stronger and a holier Church.
This should be of some consolation to those victims who have opened old wounds in their own hearts by coming forward. Your pain will not be in vain if our Church and our nation become a safer place for children. I am pleased that so many victims have come to this installation Mass. The healing of our Church is inexorably bound up with your own healing. You are the wounds on the Body of Christ today. I am sure that many are skeptical and think that the Church leaders are like Simon the Cyrenean who carried the Cross only under duress and not from a genuine desire to help. Perhaps the journey began that way, but what we see in the community of faith is a spirit of repentance and a desire for healing. Despite the understandable anger, protests and litigation, we see you as our brothers and sisters who have been wronged. For this crisis has forced us to focus on what is essential, on Christ, on the saving power of the Cross and our call to follow in His mission to make the loving mercy of our Heavenly Father present in this world.
the whole sermon.
Compassionate Conservative Bush On Marriage
President Bush gave a good, compassionate answer to a question about gay marriage at this morning’s press conference:
Q Thank you, sir. Mr. President, many of your supporters believe that homosexuality is immoral. They believe that it’s been given too much acceptance in policy terms and culturally. As someone who’s spoken out in strongly moral terms, what’s your view on homosexuality?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I am mindful that we’re all sinners, and I caution those who may try to take the speck out of their neighbor’s eye when they got a log in their own. I think it’s very important for our society to respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a welcoming country. On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage. And that’s really where the issue is heading here in Washington, and that is the definition of marriage. I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman. And I think we ought to codify that one way or the other. And we’ve got lawyers looking at the best way to do that.
The Antioch Law
When Antioch College introduced its “Sexual Offense Prevention Policy” in 1996 it was widely ridiculed as a joke for provisions such as this:
“Obtaining consent is an on-going process in any sexual interaction. Verbal consent should be obtained with each new level of physical and/or sexual behavior in any given interaction, regardless of who initiates it. Asking “Do you want to have sex with me?” is not enough. The request for consent must be specific to each act.”
It’s like that annoying guy in the wireless phone commercials, but instead of saying “can you hear me now?” Antioch students would have to say every few seconds “can I touch you now?”
But maybe Antioch was simply ahead of the social and legal curve. The AP is now reporting an interesting development in sexual offense law:
A new rape law in Illinois attempts to clarify the issue of consent by emphasizing that people can change their mind while having sex. Under the law, if someone says “no” at any time the other person must stop or it becomes rape.
That sounds pretty similar to the Antioch code
… If someone has initially consented but then stops consenting during a sexual interaction, she/he should communicate withdrawal of consent verbally (example: saying “no” or “stop”) and/or through physical resistance (example: pushing away). The other individual(s) must stop immediately.
These are things to keep in mind as we watch the Kobe Bryant case unfold, a case that will in all likelihood get far uglier before it is resolved.
Bush Vs. The Network Stars
It seems clear to me that the President braces the most for questions from ABC, CBS, and NBC. Kate Snow, Campbell Brown, and John Roberts asked three of the most attitude-laden questions. They wanted another tape loop to extend the Sixteen Words story, and he wasn’t biting, unless you count his very forceful endorsement of Condoleezza Rice. But he went long and deep into the press corps and the session should accomplish its purpose of letting some of the steam out of the avoiding-us feeling among the press.
While we all realize the political dangers for Bush of live swimming with the media sharks, I can tell you that WH reporters also want these sessions to increase the prestige of their own beat within their own news organizations and the media in general. The beat can make reporters feel like copy boys getting handouts, which increases the aggression you see in the live sessions.
Bruce Puts On a Good Show
Kevin, Bruce will always be Bruce and I loved the time I saw him perform. But I think it is precisely because people will pick up on what he says and use it to Bush-bash that he should just shaddup and sing.
From 41 Shots to Into the Fire to supporting uniformed heroes for sacrificing their lives in NYC on 9/11 to questioning the war, he’s all over the place. Perhaps most of us are — but when a performer is in an influential position, he might let the music speak and keep the in-between patter to introducing the band.
…I think we can safely put those Condi Rice-is-resigning rumors to rest. (President just adamantly defended her.)
From The “Not a Good Sign” File
On the home page of Microsoft’s popular Web-mail program Hotmail, there is a link to an article which asks, “Is monogamy a joke
Fortunately the article ends up
supporting monogamy, though without more support than the claim that “most of us
cling to romantic notions of finding The One and being linked forever and
exclusively with a soul mate.” This is typical, I think, of much popular
opinion about marriage and family life: “Yes, I believe this, but I can’t really
Arnold Really Out?
Schwarzenegger out of California recall race
LOS ANGELES (CNN) — Actor Arnold Schwarzenegger will not run for California’s governor as part of the October vote on whether to recall incumbent Gov. Gray Davis, state Republican sources said Wednesday.
Schwarzenegger is expected to back Richard Riordan, a former Los Angeles mayor who unsuccessfully sought the GOP gubernatorial nomination in 2002. Riordan said yesterday that he would not run if the star of the Terminator movies, who turned 56 on Wednesday, entered the race.
Davis faces an Oct. 7 recall vote that could unseat him. Voters will pick a successor as part of the same ballot.
The recall drive has been led by Rep. Darrell Issa, who hopes to replace Davis as the state’s next governor. Bill Simon — who narrowly lost to Davis in the 2002 election — and state Sen. Tom McClintock also are likely GOP candidates.
Political gadfly Arianna Huffington has said she is considering running as an independent.
– CNN Political Editor John Mercurio in Washington contributed to this report.
More Catholic Than The Pope
Israeli’s ambassador to the U.N. has some issues doing Fox–he says the anchors are more pro-Israel than he is, according to this blogsite. (Via webmaster Aaron Bailey)
A reader concurs:
I’ve been waiting for someone from NRO to address this news item. The media has (like Congress) reflexively rejected the futures market. I find this so depressing. I have my own view on the “whether” question concerning this proposed marketplace and I respect the fact that many have a differing view, but I’d like to intelligently debate it before it gets dismissed!!!
None of the issues raised (which are soooo interesting) were ever discussed. What a shame. Hopefully you or someone on NRO can dedicate some good thought to this.
Is the pricing of a life insurance contract any less morbid/moral than the pricing of an assassination? Why/why not? Why is one so accepted and the other denounced?
If terrorists profiting from their attacks is the most disgusting possible outcome from an events futures market, how can you not accuse all financial markets of the same potential atrocity? If Al Qaeda wanted to profit from its attacks it could have shorted anything in any stock market in the world on September 10th.
I don’t know if my answers to these questions are the ‘right’ answers for us or the civilized world, but I sure would like to hear some intelligent discourse on the matter.
Tapper’s Liberal Bias
Jake Tapper’s debut on ABC was not great evidence to back up his claim he could be an objective reporter.
Not to Be Overlooked
No U.S. Servicemen have been killed in the last 24 hours (knock on wood). This is very good news for several reasons. First, and most obvious, it’s always good news when our troops don’t get hurt. Second, the “resistance” knows that there is a huge PR value in killing at least one American every day. The “daily toll” story line is their greatest asset. Third, no US troops have been killed since Saddam’s tape came out confirming that Uday and Qusay are dead. According to various broadcasts, this confirmed for millions of skeptical Iraqis that the pig boys were really dead. Saddam (or his sound alike) were clearly hoping their deaths would inspire more “martyrs” but maybe it had the opposite effect.
A GWB Rose Garden press conference
And, by the way, what in the world is wrong with “selective legitimacy” in the first place? We practive selective legitimacy in every sphere of life, don’t we. We decide as a society and express through our laws the view that some people should be permitted to run for President (over 35 year-old, non-felon, native US citizens), we selectively decide who can vote (though we’re probably not strict enough here), we selectively decide who can serve in the armed forces, who can drive a car, and so on and so on. The issue isn’t selectivity. The issue is the criteria by which we make those selections. This strikes me as similar to those who denounce “censorship” but don’t mind the rules preventing hardcore porn from appearing on family time broadcast television.
Foday Sankoh, the former leader of Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front, is dead.
Save The Deviants!
Nick – I largely agree with you. Look at the backlash in the polls on the gay stuff, the society is recoiling from what it sees as a rush to mainstreaming. This is just one more indication of why we shouldn’t rely on the courts for issues like this.
But what I would add is that I’d have a lot more respect for Levine’s position if I believed her and her kind when they say they want to privatize all social institutions. But, the fact is that if the private sector (aka the civil society) — churches, schools, neighborhoods — started to stigmatize club crawlers and drag queens, the sexual liberationists would claim that the state must step in and stop the private sector “oppressors.” They would demand that the St. Patrick’s Day Parade be forced to allow transgender biker sluts or whatever. They would insist that local merchants couldn’t refuse to hire drag queens. In other words, I just don’t believe many on the liberationist left when they say they want the government to “get out” of the “selective legitimacy” business. What they want is for the government to save the deviants from the application of selective legitimacy wherever it rears its judgmental head. I know that Charles Murray’s form of libertarianism allows for the Burkean “little platoons” to apply selective legitimacy when necessary.