ANNIKA SORENSTAM
PLAYS GOLF: SO WHAT
The good thing about Annika's appearance on the PGA Tour (we use her first name because the folks at TomPaine.com seem to think it means we're chauvinists -- morons), is that no one is screaming about this being a battle of the sexes. Perhaps that's because it's not an unfair fight between a woman at the top of her game and a has-been old guy, or perhaps it's because we realize that it's just about Annika trying to see how good she really is.

Anyway, I'm completely in favor of her attempt to compete with the men (and she seems to be competing quite well -- she's even after 23 as of this writing.) Why am I for it? 1. It's classic free-market activity. If she can compete then she'll be welcome to return and it won't change the level of play on the PGA tour. If people stop going to tournaments and stop tuning in because women are playing, then the market will make a change. Conversely, if men started joining the LPGA, it would change the level and character of play and surely effect the ratings as it became integrated with Buy.com tour people (or whatever they call that tour now). 2. Neither Government nor some bitter old hag (e.g. Martha Burk) is forcing this on the PGA. 3. No one who deserves to be playing is being denied a spot. Oh, I know it's a sponsor's exemption that would have gone to a man, but it would have been a man equally undeserving who had failed to otherwise qualify. 4. Because Vijay Singh and Nick Price disagree and they had the guts to say so.

A PRETTY GOOD WEEK
The Bush Administration wins in the Security Council, 14-0, and gets the third largest tax cut in history with a Senate vote of 51-50. It just goes to show you that it's easier to get France to put aside its irrational hatred of the President than the Democrats.

QUIZ SHOW: THE SEQUEL?
Matt Drudge is teasing some supposed controversy regarding the final voting for American Idol. He quotes no one in particular: "I think we are looking at a modern day version of the $64,000 question!" and suggests an audit is on the way. Come on, this isn't Florida. But I've had at least one report that a vote placed for Clay Aiken (phone number 02) was acknowledged by a recording that said thanks for voting "for contestent number 1," which was the eventually crowned Idol Ruben Studdard. This may be a fluke, but if you experienced the same, just let us know.

THE NUMBERS SCREAM THE STORY
124 to 2. C'mon. Quit it with the crying for this exCeption (Estrada) that proves the rule that he's (Bush) getting what he wants almost every time.

HIGHER STAKES
Goldberg's lawyerly nit-picking notwithstanding, the interesting judicial stuff is coming this summer when we see who replaces Rehnquist and O'Connor. Is Clarence "what-Scalia-said" Thomas up for another partisan confirmation hearing? (A "high-tech lynching", I believe he called it). Predictions, Winston? (Winston is the only other blogger here for a spell.............oh ye conservative bloggers, where have ye gone?)

ARGUMENT OVER, ESTRADA IS A STEALTH CANDIDATE

I know I keep doing this, and I suspect that John will have something to say about it, but Time Magazine proves bias once again. And it's the subtle kind, as usual, and probably unconscious (unthinking?) bias by the authors. But for months the Republicans and the Democrats in the Senate have argued over the Miguel Estrada nomination to the Court of Appeals. Central to the argument is the Democrat's complaint that Estrada is a stealth candidate and that he has not come across with enough information about his views. Democrats even demand internal memoranda that Estrada wrote while on staff at the Solicitor's office -- despite a letter from all living Solicitors General (mostly Democrats) saying such information shouldn't be released. For their part, the Republicans argue that Estrada has provided as much information as necessary and what has been provided, from written answers to hearings, is on par with what is obtained from other nominess. Now, Time Magazine has determined that the Democrats are right and establishes the following as fact:

. . .Miguel Estrada, who has given Senators too little information about how or what he thinks.

Even a different formulation, such as, "Miguel Estrada, who, Democrats claim, has given Senators too little information about how or what he thinks" doesn't quite work because it would give no account of the Republican argument, but it would establish the opinion rather than the fact as the others would like it to be, and would lessen the sting of bias. Where do these people learn journalism these days?

Thanks to Jonah Goldberg's Corner entry for pointing the language out.

CONSCIOUSLY MARCHING TO EVERYONE'S DRUMMER

Andrew Sullivan provides the following quote from Sidney Blumenthal -- an extended and rambling presidential cliché metaphor.

Not only did [Clinton] have to navigate the vessel of state in a vast sea through unpredictable storms, but he had to build a safe harbor. His political ability to tack with the wind was usually interpreted as being rudderless. Even long-term policy gains - whether on the economy, crime or trade - were obscured because of short-term political losses. And Clinton himself, caught in the midst of howling winds, could not know whether and how much he was succeeding.

Let's consider one of those sentences. His political ability to tack with the wind was usually interpreted as being rudderless. So, it was Clinton's decision to blow with the wind? While purposefully blowing in the wind may be better than lacking all direction, it certainly is not the attribute of a great President, a great leader or a great man. Surely, Sid could have worked Dick Morris into the metaphor as the anemometer or the cock on the weather vane pointing President Clinton further down wind.

WINNING THE PEACE

A GovExec.com story examines how to win the peace, and it seems that it involves the old boy scout lesson of being prepared and involving the full range of governmental power, and not just the Defense Department. Consider whether the battle in the administration among Defense and State officials, reportedly won by Defense, is slowing the final phases of the Iraqi operation --- securing Iraqi freedom. Replacing Jay Garner (retired General), with Paul Bremer (retired Ambassador) would suggest so.

BEER HALLS AND MORELOCKS

It appears that the Subterranean Democrats see a lot of parallels between Adolf Hitler's rise to evil and the 43rd President of the United States. You be the judge:

His SS group of agents and military brass orchestrate a very Reichstag fire-esque 9-11 attack - providing him with a perfect enemy scapegoat - "Arabs and the terrorists" (whereas Hitler had "Jews and communists.") He then begins to break every international treaty, bad mouths/defies the U.N. (League of Nations) conjures up false threats against Germa...er, the United States - from weak, vunerable countries, using phony documention, begins preaching the virtues of war - war as the answer for all ills, war, war, war, war - a madman has found his mantra!! He rules by intimidation - crushing all opposition - disallowing all dissention - you're either with his Nazi, er, Republican Party or your against 'em (and likely to get anthraxed or Wellstoned!!)

Really, wasn't that just too much fun? But the movie is pretty decent. Robert Carlyle of the Full Monty is doing an excellent job as the nutjob from Braunau.

LOTTERY FOR EDUCATION

Not the dream that its proponents, now pushing one for North Carolina, would have you believe. California shows just how meaningless it really is.