Saturday, December 30, 2006


Because of the recent death of former President Ford, there has been a lot of re-hashing of Ford's pardon of his predecessor. Apparently, the current conventional wisdom is that Ford did the right thing in that he saved the U.S. from great pain and divisiveness of the trial of a U.S. president. Even Senator Kennedy is apologizing for his then criticism of Ford for the pardon, saying that he now believes that Ford did the right thing.

I have to ask if anyone else has thought the following other than me (because I haven't seen or heard it anywhere else and I'm not that original a thinker): Isn't it ironic that the Rs devoted incredible amounts of time, energy and money into an investigation called "Whitewater" that found NOTHING and then tried President Clinton for the crime of lying to a grand jury about sex (that was with a consenting adult, if not appropriate for various other reasons). This was after an investigation so mean-spirited and vast that it included research into what books Monica Lewinksy purchased and the publication of lurid sexual details.

Nixon, on the other hand, was guilty of not only every-day crimes (conspiracy, accessory to burglary) but Constitutional offenses.

Interesting that Ford can be called heroic for saving the nation from all that trauma and yet there is no mention of what the Rs did to the American people more recently.

Not to mention that Reagan wiped his butt with the Constitution ("Iran-Contra") and got a free pass. And W. thinks that the Executive branch is the only one that matters and the Constitution is for just for appearances.

I'm open to a debate as to whether the Nixon pardon was the right thing to do. BUT looking back at the past but not applying it to what happened after is at best not helpful. One could also call it cowardly or deceitful.

Saturday, December 02, 2006


While I have weightier posts rolling around in my head, here is a link to a piece "Why we love going to Canada" in today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer. It's mildly entertaining, if somewhat condescending.

Also, and this is a total steal from L-girl at we move to canada, I liked this so much that I want to link to it myself:

Hon. Stephane Dion [who just won the leadership of the Liberal Party -- I'm so glad it wasn't Ignatieff] in the House of Commons, November 27, 2006, Speaking to the motion: "That this House recognize that the Quebecois form a nation within a united Canada"

Wish I had life news to report, but I'm just treading water. I'm hoping to return with issue commentary soon.

So, yes, this post is filler to let you know this blog is alive.