But firing them in person "would have been unpleasant!"

So you guys probably know that the inspector general's report on the firings of the nine U.S. attorneys has been released. What you probably didn't know was there was no malice or political seediness in the process -- just evasion of unpleasantness:

From Legal Times:

Pg. 50: Michael Battle, then Director of the Executive Office for U.S Attorneys, fired the nine U.S. attorneys over the telephone. But at one point, Justice Department officials floated the idea of having then Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty sack them in person. McNulty, who is criticized in the report for being “remarkably unengaged” in firing process, told investigators that, in the report's words, “it would have been unpleasant to tell the U.S. attorneys they were being removed.” Sampson similarly told investigators that McNulty was cool to idea “because it would have made him uncomfortable.” Besides, McNulty told investigators, Battle’s phone calls were consistent with the plan to keep the firings in a “lower key.”

Battle had a list of talking points and a script he could retreat to if someone started asking questions. Also from Legal Times:

If the U.S. attorneys questioned their dismissal and asked who authorized it, Battle was to retreat to this script: “The Administration made the determination to seek the resignations (not a specific person at the White house or the Department of Justice.)” If they asked “why me,” the response was: “The Administration is grateful for your service, but wants to give someone else a chance to serve in your district.” And if they asked for more time: “The decision is to have a new Acting or Interim U.S. attorney in place by January 31, 2007 (granting ‘extensions’ would hinder the process of getting a new U.S. attorney in place and giving that person the opportunity to serve for a full two years.”

And finally, an excerpt from an e-mail from Sampson to Deputy White House Counsel David Leitch:

as an operational matter, we would like to replace 15-20 percent of the current U.S. Attorneys – the underperforming ones. (This is a rough guess; we might want to consider doing performance evaluations after Judge [Gonzales] comes on board.) The vast majority of U.S. Attorneys, 80-85 percent, I would guess, are doing a great job, are loyal Bushies, etc., etc.

Because it's been too long...

Sleepy Mattie.

She wakes up when you call her, briefly opens her eyes, looks at you, and then goes back to sleep.

There's the tongue again.

I can't tell if she's yawning or meowing here. I think yawning...

She's starting to get too big to go places where she used to be able to fit. There's a dresser she likes to hang out underneath, and she just barely fits there now, so she has to slither in and out on her belly (which proves especially difficult when she is trying to chase something). Sometimes her back leg gets in the way while she's trying to slither and she thinks it's attacking her.

Awesome.

So I'm finally posting after 14 days of dormancy, and this is all you get:


In other news my brother's cat, President Cat, has taken to flinging his poo across the room. I told Daniel to take it as a sign that Prez is getting smarter (aren't monkeys supposed to be smarter than cats?), but he's considerably less amused than I am.

"Why lose it to some guy in the backseat of a Toyota when you can pay for your education?"

A 22-year-old San Diego girl is "auctioning" her virginity to pay for her graduate degree. She has a bachelor's in women's studies from Sacramento State and wants to get a master's in marriage and family therapy.

"We live in a capitalist society," she said to the Daily News. "Why shouldn't I be allowed to capitalize on my virginity?"

OK. So I'll start with the obvious statement that trading sex for money is not an auction -- it's prostitution. EBay, incidentally, rejected her, so she will be holding the "auction" through a Nevada brothel, the Moonlight Bunny Ranch.

"I think it's a tremendous idea," the owner of the Moonlight Bunny Ranch said, according to Reuters. "Why lose it to some guy in the backseat of a Toyota when you can pay for your education?"

My new car

This is my new car:

I pick him/her (I haven't decided yet) up tomorrow morning. It's a 2003 Honda Accord LX with 70,000 miles. You can't really tell from the photo but the exterior is that dark gray color.

It's relatively sexy, I think. I'm content...

"I've been called worse on the basketball court"

I hadn't seen this before, so I'll pass it on, sans commentary.

Obama, responding to the public vetting of Palin (via Writ Large, which traveled with the Obama campaign this week):

“Listen, I mean, if they want to work the refs, they are free to do so,” he said. “I think the public can make their judgments about this. The notion that any questions about her work in Alaska is somehow not relevant to her potential to be vice president of the United States doesn’t make too much sense.

“I think she’s got a compelling story, but I assume she wants to be treated the way guys want to be treated. That means our records are under scrutiny. I’ve been through this for 19 months. She’s been through it, what, four days so far?”

He said he wasn’t responding to Palin’s attacks because “I’m running against John McCain. I don’t get the sense that Gov. Palin has ideas different than John McCain.”

But, Obama said, the criticism “isn’t that big of a deal.”

“I’ve been called worse on the basketball court,” he said.

Meanwhile, here's Biden's response to Palin's RNC speech (via the Washington Post):

At a town hall meeting in Virginia Beach, Biden called Palin a formidable politician and said he was impressed by her speech, which he said was stocked with "good, funny lines. . . . I'm glad they weren't about me. I was sitting there thinking, 'Whoa, zinger.'"

Sexy sleeping kitten

I am without words.

Sexism?

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not hearing any of the mainstream media, liberal pundits or anyone in the Obama campaign assail Palin for not staying home with her children. I'm hearing the McCain campaign, the Republican base, and the conservative pundits talk about it, accusing the "liberal media" and the Dems of being sexist. But I haven't actually heard that criticism in the mainstream media or the Democratic base.

Here's the accusation...

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The accusations came at an angry press conference today starring former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, who lead the charge, and California State Secretary of Consumer Services and former U.S. Treasurer Rosario Marin, who were among others here at the Xcel Energy Center.

Marin, speaking to Spanish-language media: "It has insulted me, it has offended me, how they've treated Gov. Palin ... It's unacceptable."

"They feel they have the authority to question her -- and when they do they insult every woman who is trying to balance work and family. There are millions of women doing just that."

More Marin: "They are questioning whether you can be a mother and a professional, because she's running for higher office? How shameful that the media is mounting this campaign and insulting every woman in doing so." She called it a form of media "machismo."

So did any of this actually happen? Or are the Fiorina-types creating controversy that isn't there? Or quoting the tabs as the mainstream media?

Here's Roger Simon's response to the accusations in Politico.

The Daily Show did a phenomenal job last night of pitting the Republicans against themselves:

And this amused me because I am immature and lame:

Maybe if we omit that line about going with McCain to the strip club...

The McCain vice presidential nominee RNC address was prepared in advance, and then apparently had to be scrapped because it was "very masculine," according to the McCain campaign manager. From the Washington Post:

Not anticipating that McCain would choose a woman as his running mate, the speech that was prepared in advance was "very masculine," according to campaign manager Rick Davis, and "we had to start from scratch."

OK. So putting aside my confusion over what constitutes masculinity in a convention speech (grunts? jockstraps? chest-pounding? beer? references to male genitalia? references to female genitalia?), my real question is why the McCain camp would tell this to the media.

If you're going to say the Palin selection is based on her qualifications and character, rather than her gender, stick with it.

Not to mention, McCain's people are calling Palin critics sexist. This is either about gender or it isn't. And if you're rewriting speeches on account of gender, well........