For remarks he made a couple of days ago:

WASHINGTON — The White House on Friday criticized former Education Secretary William Bennett for remarks linking the crime rate and the abortion of black babies.

"The president believes the comments were not appropriate," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

Bennett, on his radio show, "Morning in America," was answering a caller's question when he took issue with the hypothesis put forth in a recent book that one reason crime is down is that abortion is up.

"But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down," said Bennett, author of "The Book of Virtues."

He went on to call that "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky."

Bennett's method is not the one I would have used to make the point he was attempting, but to try and tar him as a racist - as the Left is doing - is absurd. It would have been more desirable to have used a different example had he had the foresight, which I'm surprised that he did not, to know that the Left is always trying to race bait and that sensitivities are now particularly acute in the aftermath of Katrina, but his remarks taken in full context do not convey a racist intent.

***
Extensive analysis over at the Moderate Voice.

Why the indictment against Tom Delay will likely never make it to trial:

"Following the indictment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, conservatives are left wondering what to make of the charges. The answer is simple. The charges are absurd and should be thrown out of court.

Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle has charged DeLay with conspiracy to make a contribution to a political party in violation of the Texas Election Code. The alleged violation involved a money swap between the now-defunct Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC), which DeLay helped found but never managed, and the Republican National State Elections Committee (RNSEC). TRMPAC sent a check for $190,000 to RNSEC, and RNSEC then sent checks totaling approximately the same amount to Texas House candidates in October of 2002. Earle, a Democrat, calls this money laundering, because the money that TRMPAC sent to RNSEC came from corporations, which are barred from contributing to campaigns in Texas.

Earle is wrong. Before campaign-finance reform, this kind of soft-money for hard-money swap was perfectly legal and happened all the time. In October of 2002, the Texas Democratic party did the same thing when it sent $75,000 to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and received $75,000 back from the DNC.

Also, as former Department of Justice official Barbara Comstock noted yesterday, “Had corporations sent money directly to the RNC or RNSEC, the transaction would be legal. How could anyone conspire to do indirectly what could legally have been done directly?” Earle considers these transactions illegal because he thinks they should be, and he’s convinced a grand jury to play along with him."

Really, why should we?

"Everything that American media could throw at a story, it threw at New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina. No expense was spared. All hands were on deck. And yet not one news organization produced anything like complete coverage of the events unfolding inside the city's convention center or the Superdome. Horrific stories of murders and rapes spread like wildfire, reports of little girls with their throats slashed stunned Americans, and hysteria gripped many in the MSM. Weeks later the Los Angeles Times and others began to examine the collapse of the media's own levees that traditionally hold back rumor and urban myth.

Given this failure to capture the true story in New Orleans even with all of the combined resources of all the MSM working around the clock, why would anyone believe that American media is accurately reporting on the events in Iraq from the Green Zone, in the course of a bloody insurgency fought in a language they don't understand? If the combined forces of old media couldn't get one accurate story out of the convention center, why for a moment believe it can get a story out of Mosul or Najaf?"

John Podhoretz sums it up just about right:

"I hope some day somebody writes all this down, because the whole story is unbelievable. Miller never writes a story about Plamegate, but insists she must keep her sources secret, even though the name of her primary source, Cheney chief of staff Scooter Libby, has long since been a matter of public record -- and has publicly released her from her pledge of anonymity. She decides to go to jail to protect the principle of source anonymity, and is only weeks away from being sprung (because the grand jury she was refusing to talk to will go out of business in Ocrober) before she abandons her stand on principle and decides to talk. And all this in relation to a matter that may well not have been a crime to begin with. Weird wacko crazy bananas."

From Confirm Them:

"Just heard from a very knowledgeable Washington insider type. One of the most staunchly conservative people I’ve ever known, and with some degree of personal experience to back it up, my “insider” just characterized Gonzales as “a very good bet to be a solid conservative justice over the years.” Interesting."

Also:

"The press reports are accurate. It’s very likely that there will be no announcement before Monday. And the consensus this afternoon is that no one (including, quite possibly, the President) has any real idea who the choice will be."

Pay attention, Joe Biden:

During four days of sometimes testy questioning by Democrats, Roberts refused to answer questions that would hint how he'd rule on cases, a position that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called "unquestionably right" at a speech at Wake Forest University on Wednesday.

Approved 78-22:

The Senate confirmed John Glover Roberts Jr. as chief justice of the United States, replacing the late William H. Rehnquist, the mentor for whom he clerked. The vote was 78-22.

Justice John Paul Stevens, the senior associate justice who has been performing the chief justice's duties since Rehnquist died, will swear in Roberts at 3 p.m. today at the White House. Roberts will participate on Monday -- the first Monday in October -- in a Supreme Court investiture ceremony as the justices begin their new term.

***

And sworn in.

Surprise, surprise. Tom delay has been indicted. Actually, it is not altogether unexpected, given the partisan nature of the Travis County Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle, who has a history of hyper enthusiastic legal pursuit of Republicans.

That said, it was appropriate for Tom delay to temporarily step down from his House leadership post. Republicans could not have credibly argued that Tom delay should stay on as the House Majority Leader while he is under indictment. To have followed through with a change that would have allowed Delay to remain in his leadership position would have put House Republicans unnecessarily on the defensive, and given Democrats a significant issue to use in the upcoming 2006 election.

More specifics on the indictment over at Media Blog:

"The indictment centers around a money swap that took place between the Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC), to which DeLay has ties, and the Republican National State Elections Committee (RNSEC). TRMPAC sent $190,000 to RNSEC, and RNSEC then sent the same total amount in seven checks ranging from $20,000 to $40,000 to Texas House candidates in 2002. Travis County DA Ronnie Earle, a Democrat, calls this money laundering, because the money that TRMPAC sent to RNSEC came from coporations, which are barred from contributing to campaigns in Texas.

What you won't hear in the press is that A) This is a perfectly legal move, and B) the Democrats did the exact same thing. An Institute on Money in State Politics study reveals that on Oct. 31, 2002, the Texas Democratic Party did the same thing when it sent $75,000 to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and received $75,000 back from the DNC the very same day."

The actual indictment here.

Glenn Reynolds notes:

"I'm on travel and haven't had time to read the many emails I've gotten proclaiming his obvious guilt or persecuted innocence, but it's obviously an embarrassment for the G.O.P. On the other hand, maybe his replacement will be better at finding pork . . . ."

The Political Teen has video of Tom delay's response to the indictment.

It's too bad that Nancy Pelosi isn't residing down in Travis County. But I rather suspect that she would be immune from the efforts of Mr. Earle. (See here also)

***
Related:

House Republicans In Retreat Over Ethics Rules Changes
Delay Fights Back
Times Editors Soliciting For Shots At Delay
Republican Anxiety Over Tom Delay Is Rising
Pelosi's Letters
Rules Change Lets Delay Stay If Indicted

***
Other bloggers:

Hugh Hewitt:

"A Texas prosecutor with a history of abuse of his office, Ronnie Earle, has indicted Tom DeLay. Earle is a sort of Jim Garrison without the integrity. Soon to follow: Giant MSM coverage, show trial, acquittal and exoneration, DeLay's return to Majority Leader for another 20 years."

Ankle Biting Pundits:

"Look folks, there's not good way to try an spin this. Tom DeLay, as expected, has been indicted for campaign finance violations. There's an old saying that "a ham sandwich can be indicted", and by no means is it evidence of guilt. However, in politics, perception is reality, and even if DeLay is cleared eventually the media and the Democrats are going to have a field day. Of course, if DeLay did break the law he should pay the price. And let's not forget the DA who indicted him is a political hack who pulled a similar stunt on Kay Bailey Hutchinson, which was exposed as a partisan witch hunt.

But politically, this is trouble for the GOP...

...Plus, like it or not any GOP candidate who received money from his PAC (and there are many) is going to painted as a crook."

I believe that is a bit of an overestimation of the trouble for Republicans. Democrats, as they always do, will overstep in their glee to take down Republicans. This will lead to the inevitable stepped up scrutiny of their own congressional members, although MSM is not likely to play up such occurrences. It will be up to the bloggers to fill this role.

The moonbats over at Kos are just beside themselves, acting like they just had a lucky first date, and they are already beginning to try and smear the presumed incoming replacement for Delay, Rep. David Dreier.

Update: Republican Rep. Roy Blunt will take over for Delay, instead of David Dreier.

Patrick Ruffini has another presidential straw poll up. Head on over and cast your vote. Rudy Giuliani is running away with the #1 spot so far, with Condoleeza Rice topping the fantasy candidate results.

From Breitbart:

President Bush, close to nominating a successor to retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, has narrowed his list to a handful of candidates that outside advisers say includes federal judges and two people who have never banged a gavel _ corporate attorney Larry Thompson and White House counsel Harriet Miers.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Tuesday that Bush had pledged to consult with senators about his selection and said, "I think we were essentially wrapping that process up as early as today."

He declined to say if the president had interviewed any candidates and wouldn't speculate about Bush's favorites, but legal analysts monitoring the selection process say others often mentioned are federal appellate judges Alice Batchelder, J. Michael Luttig, Edith Jones, J. Harvie Wilkinson, Priscilla Owen, Samuel Alito, Karen Williams and Michael McConnell. Also said to be on the list are Maura Corrigan, a judge on the Michigan Supreme Court, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Bush is expected to announce his nominee quickly after Thursday's anticipated confirmation and swearing in of John Roberts as chief justice.

More rumors here and here.

The libs that think George W. Bush is vulnerable because of his low poll readings. Wouldn't it be just lovely if the president just sent them up Michael Luttig? He'd instantly regain some strong support from the conservative base, which has been a bit less than totally comfortable with the president as of late.

If I were to bet now I'd say that the president is highly likely to send up a good, solid conservative, who will almost assuredly provoke massive screeches from the Left, and a filibuster by Senate Democrats as well.

Ed Compass is the New Orleans fall guy:

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Police Superintendent Eddie Compass resigned Tuesday after four turbulent weeks in which the police force came under fire for its conduct in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath.

Earlier in the day, the department said that about 250 police officers — roughly 15% of the force — could face face discipline for leaving their posts without permission during Katrina and its aftermath.

Each case will be investigated to determine whether the officer was truly a deserter or had legitimate reasons to be absent, Deputy Chief Warren Riley said.

The resignation came the same day in which a local newspaper published a report saying 249 police officers could face a special tribunal because they left their posts without permission during and after Hurricane Katrina.

It's appropriate for Compass to be forced out, as his department is now a demoralized one that will need new leadership and new ideas, and while he appears to be an amiable fellow, he does not seem to be the kind of figure that is capable of leading a post-Katrina New Orleans Police Department.

But Compass should not be the only major figure in the city to take the fall. Mayor Ray Nagin should have also announced his resignation along with Compass, and as I posted a couple of weeks ago, every day that Nagin has the audacity to stay on as mayor redefines the word "chutzpah."

A behind the scenes movie focusing on the 2004 presidential campaign of John Kerry is already causing a stir, prior to its first public showing on Thursday:

It features, among other not-ready-for-prime-time moments, Clinton scowling and rolling her eyes over an apparent Kerry gaffe during a presidential debate; Kerry pretending to interview himself and babbling in Italian while waiting for a real interview to begin; Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) cursing at reporters during a campaign stop, and Kerry message guru Robert Shrum confidently declaring a few days before the 2004 election: "Zogby [a prominent pollster] just announced who's gonna win. Us!"

A press release claims the movie - which won't be shown publicly until Thursday - "turns a harsh but deeply revealing mirror on the campaign ... a disorganized, contentious, self-absorbed team that thought they could win by 'not making mistakes,' and keeping their candidate in the public eye without clarifying a position on anything."

Would Casey Sheehan be proud of this, and would he agree with it?

The answer to both those questions, based on what we know about him, would undoubtably be NO.

Shame on the hardcore left moonbats for so ruthlessly exploiting this woman and her grief.

Austin Bay doesn't believe there should be:

"Not if we want to keep a federal system.

Unless we’re talking about fighting a war, a “let the military do it” idea is bad for a democracy. What the military can do is provide extraordinarily fine “special asset” coordination. Coordinating air assets (especially helicopters) in an “overwhelmed environment” is a job the military must be good at doing. Likewise coordinating ships and large-scale truck convoys. Coordination doesn’t necessarily mean command– and that’s an important distinction."

And Joe Gandelman says "Oye"