Instawankery

When last we checked in on Ernest T. Bass, ESQ he was proclaiming himself to be tired of the Iraq War before it even began. Which begs the question of whether he was tired because he had stayed up all evening one night in early March 2003 writing 30 months worth of "hehs" and "indeeds".

Now, Professor Chicken-in-a-Biskit, who found the Plame Affair too confusing has had to perform an extraordinary jujitsu of justifying actions that he, as a law professor has to know are blatently illegal. That Bush openly violated the law and undermined the 4th Amendment by by-passing even a rubber-stamp court.

Wankerus Prime on Friday:

I can't see any very compelling reason to bypass the courts here, especially given that warrants in these cases are almost always granted. Which makes me wonder what's up.

You see, concerned, but not too condemning. He knows he has to post something, but not yet able to vomit up an opinion.

And then a day later cometh the "bold" prediction that Bush repeatedly breaking the law is actually bad for Democrats:

My take: This story was bad for Bush on Friday, but it'll be bad for a lot of other people by next week. My earlier post on this topic is here.

There are going to be three kinds of conservatives on this issue.

Those, like a Bob Barr, that are disgusted at what Bush has done on principal.

Those, like Tom Davis of Virginia who express concern because they are worried about their political futures.

And those like Reynolds, who are so wedded to Bush's War and have so enabled it, they would simply rip the nation's underpinnings apart to find a way to support whatever Lord Bush does. No matter how petulant and unprincipled. Yes, Glenn it will be bad for others alright, but not who you think.

And no matter what, it will be bad for the Chimperor Disgustus.