1.12.2006

Common Sense Round-up of Other News

James Frey and Oprah: Okay, this is another scandal I have a tough time with. Frey exaggerated and made stuff up and called it non-fiction. Oprah was moved. Random House offers to refund money based on a misrepresentation of the genre. The fur flies. Sales pop.

I am not sure why I should give a crap. If the story is moving (it was for Oprah) and offers a powerful message (no argument that it does), what is the scandal? I guess Frey tried to peddle it as a fiction novel first, but did not get a bite. SO, he did what any recovering addict/convict would do and bent the truth a bit. In the realm of things he has done, I assume it was not a great leap.

Fiction represented as fact? Frey has got a future with the NY Times.

NSA: The only people who have their knickers in a bunch on this question are a) those with something to hide and b) partisan political opponents. This is one of those "scandals" that display the hypocrisy of the NY Times to its utmost. Does the NY Times really believe that the Echelon program is a grave threat to civil liberties? As you might suspect, it depends on who is President?

Sam Alito: We need to have a bit of a reality check here. Notwithstanding the high profile judicial appointments and a few sensational judicial rulings (such as 6 months jail term for child molestation because the judge now believes "punishment does not work") the VAST majority of judges, whether from the liberal or conservative side of the political spectrum, are like Sam Alito: hard working, conscientious and apolitical on the bench. Since they are like the rest of America (just doing their jobs), they do not make the news. It is the trend toward SEEKING activist judges that has caused such a sensation and has conservatives (who do not like judicial activism) in an uproar and Democrats (who are projecting their own agenda) desperate to block any conservative. But even so, the judiciary is, by and large, incredibly professional and understand that it is the legislature that sets the laws, not judges.

The confirmation spectacle gives a very different (and incorrect) version of reality.

UPDATE: Lots of typos to correct. And that was before the Friday afternoon Scotch...

No comments: