Victory or success

LAT reporter Doyle McManus, formerly LAT Washington bureau chief, makes a big deal this morning of the president's failure to include the term "victory" in last night's speech. It's a distinction without a difference and it makes you wonder what goes on between the ears of people like McManus and LAT editors. Is a choice of words important in reporting on the Iraq debate? It seems awfully small and simple-minded to bring it up.

Chemerinsky

UCI Chancellor Michael V. Drake was right to un-hire left-wing law professor Erwin Chemerinsky after he was wrong to hire him in the first place. Chemerinsky would have been a lightning rod at UCI as a law school dean as he has become a lightning rod since the un-hiring.

Chemerinsky displayed a lack of maturity in posting a scathing attack on Alberto Gonzales in an opinion piece while he was being consider by UCI or after he had been hired. Gonzales was already dead meat. Chemerinsky didn't need to pile on. He didn't add to the debate. So why did he post the piece? Could be he's addicted to politics. Maybe he likes his name in print. Whatever the reason, it was inappropriate and immature for a prospective dean. A more serious piece on the constitution, his specialty, or law schools or a court case might have been alright.

The left-wing faculty and students at UCI, of which there are many, are demanding that Chemerinsky be re-hired. They may get their way but it would be a mistake. Better for UCI and the new law school to hire someone of stature who is non-controversial and pray that the rabble rousers get tired and go away. If they don't, it may be necessary to forget the law school for awhile.

The Economist

For a change, the Sept. 8 issue of The Economist contains some thoughtful "leaders" (editorials) -- on nuclear power, Belgium (time to call it a day,) education in Britain, subprime mortgages and America v Iran. Only in the final piece does it bad mouth President Bush, something it has done regularly recently, to excess.

LAT on Chemerinsky

The LAT editorializes today on the hiring/firing of Erwin Chemerinsky by UCI. Predictably, the LAT is fighting mad about the firing. Wonder what their position would have been if Chemerinsky had been a conservative.

The LAT also published today an opinion piece by Doug Kmiec which glowingly praises Chemerinsky and argues that UCI made a serious mistake in rescinding Chemerinsky's appointment. Kmiec's piece is the kind of piece you'd like to see liberals write occasionally.

UCI's mistake was in offering the job to Chemerinsky. There is no way they could not have known his political views before they offered him the job.

LAT on Clinton, Guiliani

On the front page today, the LAT reports positively on Clinton and negatively on Giuliani, side by side. The positioning wasn't accidental.

Dems gain ground?

LAT reporters Noam Levey (Dem propagandist) and Julian Barnes report that congressional Democrats are gaining or have gained ground in "winning significant Republican support for legislation to challenge the way President Bush is managing the war in Iraq." Levey has long been a cheerleader for congressional Democrats. It's no surprise that he's optimistic. It's also no surprise that the LAT would put that optimism in print. It doesn't make it true, however.

LAT on Thompson

LAT reporter Michael Finnegan today portrays Fred Thompson as a dishonest former lobbyist- actor who is trying to sell himself as another Davey Crockett. Apparently this means that the LAT takes him seriously as a threat to Hillary.