Nat Hentoff -- Bush Backer?: On the subject of freethinkers, the social libertarian columnist Nat Hentoff surely fits, and not just because of his opposition to abortion. Hentoff has got me upset over the last few years for missing the forest for the trees on the Bush Administration in particular, so much that last year I wrote a letter to the Washington Times to address it. He supported Nader, arguing that Gore really was no better than Bush, though does he think Gore would choose Ashcroft (a bête noire to the columnist) and so forth? Who knows, but I do know that Hentoff actually supported Bush v. Gore, while ignoring a slew of voting irregularities that did not just hurt one person.
The columnist has had his moments in the past that upset liberals, but I think there is more than a fair share this time around. After supporting Bush v. Gore, Hentoff unsurprisingly opposed Ashcroft and all that he stood for, though in a somewhat predictable fashion as compared to others who attacked the administration as a whole on such matters. See, e.g., various articles on Findlaw.com. All the same, Hentoff supported the war with Iraq, simplistically worried about Saddam's victims without dealing with the problems with such a move. I have not heard mention in his weekly Village Voice columns of all the innocents killed by our guns and so forth after the war began. Likewise, except for some passing comments, he has largely ignored the great harm the President can inflict with his ideological choices to the bench.
This should concern someone with a career concern about civil liberties. Instead, ignoring the other problems, he focused on one aspect of the opposition to Judge Pickering (questionable handling of civil rights and hate crime cases); opposed Senate Democrat filibustering without explaining why they felt compelled to do so (or doing so without proper perspective of history ... this was partly what drove me to write my letter [5/20]); and again simplistically argued opposition to Judge Owens was really all about abortion (I also schooled him on this). He again is targeting Democrats for their attacks on Pickering, a single focused attack that might be right as applied, but is a sad example of his tunnel vision. Finally, as many other things went on worthy of notice, he spent many columns pointing out the shocking truth (except perhaps to a few on the left) that Castro is bad for civil liberties. It has sadly become rather tedious to read the guy anymore.
Other Issues: A favorite player of mine on the Mets in the late '90s was the pitcher Rick Reed, his strike breaking past notwithstanding (hard to be too upset about strikebreaking baseball players, I must admit). He was a gutsy player who quietly got the job done. Gone in the first wave of the post-2000 player dumps, he went to the Twins, and had a good year. Reed has not done well lately, was sent to the Pirates, and decided to retire after his injuries stuck again. Have a nice retirement, Rick.
Power Without Responsibility is a book I read some time ago, but its message that congressional delegation of its powers and responsibilities is a threat to our liberty, besides just being a bad idea, is well worth reading today. A look at the diverse individuals who praised it suggests the principle is not limited to one political ideology. And, as things remain quite stressful, go and see Life of Brian, the Monty Python classic re-released in theaters for its twenty fifth anniversary. A good companion to The Passion of The Christ or something to watch if you just feel like laughing at loud.