The Bowdoin Orient

Because I am certain that virtually no Bowdoin student will be reading my column this weekend, down from the five that have typically muscled through columns past, I deliver to my non-student readership (my parents) a scorcher of a column on domestic spending policy. Read on. The political firestorm of the week in Washington centers around a Senate appropriations bill, comprised of both a hurricane aid package and a fifth emergency defense funding request, that weighs in at a whopping $106 billion. President Bush, under pressure from fiscal conservatives in Congress, vowed Tuesday not to sign the bill in its current pork barrel-laden incarnation if the final price tag topped $92 billion, leaving senators to pare a hefty sum from the bill.

The growing row over immigration reforms debated these past few weeks in the Senate and media represents an abundance of misunderstanding on the part of most Americans about the intent of the changes being proposed. Millions of Americans, mostly of Latino ethnicity, have taken to the streets in the past days to protest what they perceive is a gross breach of their civil and human rights.

There are two new reasons that the world is going to Hell in a hand basket: 1) Kevin Federline's new single, "Popozao," and 2) mainstream media have successfully spent an entire week covering Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident. Every pundit and comedian in the country has been taking shots at Cheney (kinda like that one) for an entire week, alleging a cover-up, intentional deception, and arguing that this proves the Bush administration's propensity for sowing lies. The coverage of this accident, however, speaks to a problem greater than the vice president's aim.

The State of the Union address is an annual opportunity for the president to outline his accomplishments during the previous year, as well as his goals for the next. However, this year I have become increasingly aware, despite partisan spin, of what has gone right, of what has improved in our country and abroad.

There is a writer in New Orleans whom I respect a lot. Chris Rose is a columnist for the Times-Picayune, and he has what has always been a pretty sweet job: He writes about New Orleans. He's not the food guy, or the movie guy, or the Living section guy; he's the guy who gets to put it all together and talk about the feeling, the emotion, the experience that is living in New Orleans. His job has sucked for the past several months, but he has been one of the few New Orleanians, it seems, who can still put it all together and remind us where we're from.

With the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, one issue quickly rose above all others with those preparing to question his record. Alito's opinion on abortion is clear, whether one consults his 90-year-old mother (who has already gained notoriety in the press for confidently proclaiming her son's pro-life beliefs), or some of the 350 opinions he has written.

As most have figured out in the past few weeks?among them George Bush and his strategy team?there are better Supreme Court nominees than Harriet Miers. However, her nomination was not the greatest of my worries; Harriet Miers's nomination to the highest court in the country represents to me the pinnacle, or more appropriately, the abyss of what has become a potentially injurious trend in the American political system. The vulnerable position held today by the Bush administration directly influenced the choice of a Supreme Court nominee who in the past and under different standards would never have been chosen. With Miers withdrawn, Bush is now under even greater pressure to nominate a confirmable candidate, and I am sorry to say that this candidate will likely be another Harriet Miers.

In attending the lecture given by Michael Heath on Monday night, an event sponsored by the College Republicans, I saw a Republican party that over the past decade has been transformed by an increasingly polarized American political system.