the play's the thing

my head is all over the place and i fear for my ability to hone it in at present and scribe anything legible — cognitively legible, that is. (fortunately on a day like this,) due to the electronic nature of a blog, i don't have to worry about the physical legibility.

i find myself still very much lost in thoughts like yesterday's. i guess it's no wonder considering where i'm currently employed. but yes, another sad day for anyone who will take the time to observe it. (note: i'm not necessarily recommending at this point that one should.) well, i suppose that's not entirely true; i know there are some people out there who take comfort in knowing something, whether it be good or bad. so to those of you wired as such, take heart! yesterday afternoon, a 1989 survey in which our very own harriet miers supported a constitutional ban on abortion except to protect the life of the pregnant woman (NOT the health of the woman — very important distinction — and NOT victims of rape or incest).

"a nominee unmasked?"
(a new one-act play from the powers that unfortunately were in 1989)

dramatis personae: harriet miers, survey

act 1, scene i

survey: if congress passes a human life amendment to the constitution that would prohibit abortion except when it was necessary to prohibit the death of the mother, would you actively support its ratification by the texas legislature?

ms. miers: yes

fin

that doesn't make for a very long jump to a conclusion. of course the white house jumped on it citing the vast difference between a court nominee as ms. miers is now and a political officeholder as she was then. and of course she "recognizes that personal views and ideology and religion have no role to play when it comes to making decisions on the bench" (that's mclellan). he just has such a way with words, that one; i find him so frighteningly comforting, don't you? or maybe he's just frightening. but i digress. what really interested me today on the miers front was her bizarre disagreement with senator arlen specter. following their meeting on monday, specter told reporters that miers had "agreed that the constitution protected a right to privacy and embraced precedents that led to roe." which may have been a welcome development in the case, had ms. miers not made a personal telephone call to specter that very evening, to say she "did not recall making those statements."

huh???

specter dealt well, i thought, basically giving miers the benefit of the doubt, not publicly denouncing her version of the story, and thus not making a big stink (we clearly have enough of those). he said he plans to question her on the matter further at a later date. but again,

huh???

i don't normally put too much faith in republicans (pompous generalization yes, but whatever), but specter seems like a rational guy. so what on earth happened? it calls to mind another bushie person who made a similar comment as of late: oh, wait, no — that'd be the leading man himself.

"doing what he does best"
(a new one-act play from the powers that unfortunately were two weeks ago)

dramatis personae: president bush, reporter, unconvinced reporter*

*"unconvinced reporter" should be played by same actor portraying "reporter." this represents shift in emotional and/or behavioral state. see director's notes on staging concurrent appearance of multiple characters.

act 1, scene i

reporter: you’ve taken the time to express that you know her heart, her character. you've emphasized your friendship. so it seems reasonable that over the course of the years you've known her perhaps you have discussed the issue of abortion. have you ever discussed with harriet miers abortion? or have you gleaned from her comments her views on that subject?

bush shifts weight

unconvinced reporter: have you never discussed abortion with her?

bush clears throat

unconvinced reporter: in your friendship with her...?

bush: not to my recollection have i ever sat down with her.

fin

no, ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately i did not make that up. i wish i had, really i do. it would show excellent comic timing and imagination, to mention what might amount to an important insight into the political and media-related happenings of the great nation in which we reside. but, alas... i am merely a messenger. but i shall play my small and humble part with as much gusto as i can muster (doesn't that make you want to say "gusto as i can musto?" what fun!)

so the lights dim on another day in bush's washington...
gee. shakespeare had it right from the start, didn't he? all the world really is a stage. tomatoes, anyone?