"Life-tenured federal judges should be wary of removing a vexing and novel topic of medical debate from the ebbs and flows of democracy by construing a largely unamendable federal constitution to occupy the field."

Wrote Chief Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, quoted in "Transgender Care Ban Allowed to Take Effect in Tennessee, Appeals Panel Says/The ruling on Saturday is the first time a federal court has allowed a law banning transition care to fully go into effect, amid a flurry of legal challenges across the country" (NYT).

What exactly is the argument that the Constitution forbids this law? How did the court below find a likelihood of success on the merits (as was required for the preliminary injunction to issue)? It's not a question of whether the statute was a good idea, but whether the statute is impermissible under the Constitution. It's a new question.

"Mr. Jones and Mr. Pearson were expelled on Thursday for interrupting debate last week by using a bullhorn to lead a gun control protest in the chamber..."

"... in the wake of a deadly school shooting in Nashville. Republican leaders argued that the two lawmakers and Representative Gloria Johnson, who joined the protest but survived an expulsion vote, had brought 'disorder and dishonor to the House of Representatives.' Critics said that the expulsions were an overreaction that defied the will of the voters who had elected Mr. Jones and Mr. Pearson in Nashville and Memphis, the state’s two largest cities, which also have large Black and Democratic-leaning populations. Democratic lawmakers and activists also warned that the expulsions could have dangerous repercussions, including encouraging lawmakers in Tennessee and other states controlled by a single party to use the measure as a tool for silencing dissenting voices."

I'm reading "Outrage at G.O.P. Could Propel Expelled Democrats Right Back to House/A day after two young Black lawmakers were expelled from the Tennessee legislature, momentum was building to reappoint them directly back to their seats" (NYT).

What a bad mistake by Republicans! Did they not foresee this backlash? It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech. 

We've been talking a lot lately about the problem of speakers shouting down speakers. Some of us — and I am not one of them — have become overly righteous about preserving the forum of the official speaker on any given occasion.

We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech. It's not easy to deal with the colliding issues, and some remedies are needed, but don't pick the most aggressive solution!

I'm going to read "Fear pervades Tennessee's trans community amid focus on Nashville shooter's gender identity."

At NBC News. 

The headline signals that we are to prioritize empathy for members of the trans community because they are experiencing fear rather than to want to find out what happened and what role transgenderism may have played in the murder spree. This is the idea that just to talk about the subject or to want to understand and analyze something having to do with transgender people is already inflicting a harm: fear. The message is: Don't even think about it, move on, because your attention is hurting vulnerable people.

This, though three 9-year-old children were murdered, along with 3 adults, and our natural empathy would go to them. Instead, we're expected to look away because trans people feel fear of what you might think if you think about it. Indeed, fear pervades the trans community — at least in Tennessee.

From the article:

Within 10 minutes of police saying that the suspect was transgender, the hashtag #TransTerrorism trended on Twitter.

"Drag is a job. Drag is a legitimate artistic expression that brings people together, that entertains, that allows certain individuals to explore who they are..."

"... and allows all of us to have a very nice time. So it makes literally no sense for legislators, for people in government, to try to ban drag."

Said culture and gender studies professor Lawrence La Fountain-Stokes, author of "Translocas: The Politics of Puerto Rican Drag and Trans Performance," quoted in  "As Tennessee, others target drag shows, many wonder: Why?" (AP News).

I found that after struggling to read "Tennessee curbs trans treatment and drag for children" (BBC):

"The Limestone mine operates day and night, growing louder at night and on weekends when bitcoin’s electricity-hungry computers can take advantage of down time and lower prices on the electricity grid and ramp up their algorithmic-solving power...."

"Appalachia, with its cheap electricity from coal, natural gas and hydro, was already attractive to bitcoin miners when China, which dominated world production, cracked down on such operations last summer, worried about the volatility of digital currencies.... [R]esidents in areas that initially welcomed crypto mining are now experiencing buyer’s remorse.... Craig Ponder, pastor at the New Salem Baptist Church... compared the noise to the jet engines he heard while serving in the military. He said that the noise can make it difficult for congregants to chat with each other in the parking lot after services.... 'In a rural environment, you have a very low ambient noise level anyway, so you walk outside and a creek is gurgling, birds are chirping, but there is not a lot of man-made noise. Once you take some of these bitcoin mining facilities, the noise carries, there is nothing to hide it or mask it,' [said a sound mitigation expert].... 'This is an industry that is on fire now, and a lot of people may not have known the noise the machines make; there are a lot of inexperienced people coming into the industry, and they are causing issues,' said [John Warren, the chief executive of GEM Mining, which owns 32,000 bitcoin miners]."

From "An Appalachian town was told a bitcoin mine would bring an economic boom. It got noise pollution and an eyesore. Supporters of the crypto plant promised an expanded tax base and job creation. What residents say they got was the constant din from massive computers and equally massive cooling fans" (WaPo).

This article is mainly about how noisy the "mine" is. There's a bit about how bad it looks — "like a German POW camp," according to a commissioner who regrets voting for it. I don't know why an article that's so negative about a business doesn't mention climate change. I mean, I can easily find other articles on this subject, but isn't global warming routinely shoehorned into news articles? It's strange to see it bypassed here. Did I miss a reference? 

Anyway, the noise problem is very sad, and the climate change issue is well represented in the comments section over there. Example: "And the environmental costs are astounding. I can't believe we're getting into this kind of thing when we're trying to cut back our environmental footprint. Crypto is a climate change villain, without offering anything back."

What is the objection to a law against something that we're told no one is doing anyway?

I'm reading "Tennessee Bans Hormone Treatments for Transgender Children/The measure signed by Gov. Bill Lee makes it illegal to give prepubescent minors the gender-confirming treatments — a practice some experts have said is not in use" (NYT). 

If medical practice already draws the line in the same place — no hormone treatment before puberty — then why object to the law? Or you can put the question the other way: Why pass the law?

1. There is symbolism — messaging — in passing the law and in refraining from passing the law. Politicians might want to express opposition to/support for transgender people.

2. There is trust/mistrust in the medical profession. Do you believe they'll determine the best treatments and restrain themselves from going too far, or do you think they need a legal line? The AMA position is that the law a "dangerous intrusion into the practice of medicine."

3. Regardless of what the medical profession decides is ethical, there are always unethical practitioners, and you need a law if you want the government to impose consequences. If no one ever violates the law, it may be because the law deterred them (and not merely that every single practitioner hewed to the ethics). 

4. How strong is the evidence that no practitioners give hormone blockers to prepubescent children? Advocates make assertions, but how do they know? The article quotes 2 advocates, but each only said that he's not aware of any practitioner who gives this treatment.

"Every UT alum from 1965 to 2000 seems to remember (or, 'remember') hitting Sam & Andy’s for... those soft, steamy, chewy sandwiches, but nobody seems to know precisely..."

"... when the Fresh-O-Matic intersected with the hoagie. I asked Neely, hoping that as the doyen of Knoxville pop-history he would have some information long forgotten by other Vols of his generation. 'I had this romantic idea,' he said, 'like something from a Ken Burns story. … I knew that before ever opening a restaurant, the Captains were hatmakers; therefore, they would have had steamers around the shop. I imagined that one day they just said, Hey! Let’s try these steamers on some sandwiches!' Before I even realized that a folklore nugget of this caliber should be regarded with some suspicion, Neely let me down gently: 'Unfortunately, that turned out not to be true.' However, he handed off a vague memory of having read something about the origin in a 1990s newspaper column, and that was enough to get me as close to the truth as I’ll ever get.... 'Up in Yankeeland they like those cold sandwiches — and some of them up there heat the sandwiches up in the pizza oven or rotisserie ovens,' Captain says from behind his counter. 'Hillbillies down here, they like that soft bread.'"

From "'They Like That Soft Bread'/In the mountains of East Tennessee, folks have a particular fondness for a sandwich that’s spent a few seconds in a Fresh-O-Matic steamer. Knoxvillians know that soft-bread love in their bones, but nobody seems to know exactly where it comes from. Chelsey Mae Johnson aimed to find out" (The Bitter Southerner).

I found this lovely article via Audm (an app that plays audio versions of high-quality magazine articles). But I had to go to the Bitter Southerner webpage to get my first mental image of a Fresh-O-Matic. Lots of nice photographs at that link.

I also learned that the word "hoagie" began in 1936 (in Philadelphia):

“After witnessing a friend devour a large sandwich and thinking he was a hog to eat it all at once,” sandwich shop proprietor Al De Palma introduced a pile of cold cuts on a long Italian roll and called it a “hoggie.” Soon, “competitors in the Philadelphia area copied his sandwich and sold it under various names, including hoogie, hogie, and horgy. By 1950 … the sandwich became commonly known as the hoagie.”

"'It’s just like a little squirt gun,' she told the group of children, before passing around the small plastic device for them to hold and squeeze."

"At the end of the session, each child received a blue zippered bag containing two doses of Narcan to take home.... In the past three years, the county’s drug prevention coalition has given Narcan training to an estimated 600 young children and teenagers in after-school programs, babysitting classes and vaping cessation courses.... At least 100 young people have returned for additional doses... typically after going through their personal supply.... 'Drugs are bad things that could kill you,' [said a 7-year-old boy]. 'Now I know how to use it. I feel good because I like helping people in danger.'"

From "'Open, Insert, Squirt.'/In This Town, Children Are Taught to Administer Narcan/In rural Carter County, Tenn., health officials have embraced a strategy for stemming addiction: Teaching children as young as 6 how to reverse an overdose" (NYT).

Tennessee Senatorial candidate Phil Bredeson promotes that endorsement he got from Taylor Swift.

Here's the ad:



I think that works more as an anti-Taylor Swift ad. Is that her music in any way? It was horrible! CNN reports:

In a video, simply titled "Taylor Swift," Bredesen's campaign cribs Swift's song, "Look What You Made Me Do" with a slate aimed at his opponent, Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn, that reads, "Look What Marsha Made Her Do." The video then proceeds to clip together news coverage of Swift's unexpected endorsement, with reporters repeatedly noting the move is "out of the norm" for Swift.

Wow. So that was Taylor Swift music?! Here's the original, which seems kind of okay, maybe because we get to look at the lovely young woman (and not that Harry-Morgan-looking guy):



And if the sheer badness of that appropriation of her music and her once-politics-free image were not enough, the new NYT/Siena poll has support for Blackburn suddenly up by 14 points!

1,500 animals are living without the help of human beings inside Ripley's Aquarium of the Smokies.

People were evacuated because of the fires in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. A webcam show that the power is still on and the aquarium is intact, but smoke and fire threaten the animals. Here's a video of the aquarium in happier times:



And: "Despite evacuation orders, some people -- including guests at one Gatlinburg hotel -- could not safely leave the area as the fire advanced."

"We can't go outside. The firefighters said the wind is blowing at 80 miles per hour and the debris in the air is too hard to get us down right now," [said one guest].

Tennessee judge asserts that the Supreme Court's same-sex marriage case has rendered him unable to decide divorce cases.

It's Hamilton County Chancellor Jeffrey Atherton, denying a divorce to an opposite-sex couple:

“With the U.S. Supreme Court having defined what must be recognized as a marriage, it would appear that Tennessee’s judiciary must now await the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court as to what is not a marriage, or better stated, when a marriage is no longer a marriage,” Atherton wrote in his decision.

“The majority’s opinion in Obergefell, regardless of its patronizing and condescending verbiage, is now the law of the land, accurately described by Justice Scalia as ‘a naked claim to legislative — indeed, super-legislative — power.'”

“The conclusion reached by this Court is that Tennesseans have been deemed by the U.S. Supreme Court to be incompetent to define and address such keystone/central institutions such as marriage, and, thereby, at minimum, contested divorces… [A]ccording to Justice Scalia, the majority opinion in Obergefell represents ‘social transformation without representation.'”

Atherton continued: “Although this Court has some vague familiarity with the government theories of democracy, republicanism, socialism, communism, fascism, theocracy, and even despotism, implementation of this apparently new ‘super-federal-judicial’ form of benign and benevolent government, termed ‘krytocracy’ by some and ‘judi-idiocracy’ by others, with its iron fist and limp wrist, represents quite a challenge for a state level trial court.”

If following Supreme Court precedent is too much of a "challenge" for you, resign.

How would you like to be the couple who spent their time and money litigating over divorce only to find their judge grandstanding and bullshitting like this?

As for "iron fist and limp wrist" — interesting that the judge didn't edit out the phrase that is certain to be read as homophobic. Obviously, there's room to deny that "limp wrist" referred to gay people in that sentence. It's a description of the government, and the government doesn't have a sexual orientation. But it's like complaining about what the government is doing about race and then calling the government "watermelon-eating."

As for "krytocracy," it's not in my dictionary, and Googling it, I see it had some currency back in 2005, in the context of the Terri Schiavo case.

"Tennessee Is the Capital of American Jihad/And it didn’t start last week."

A Politico headline.

90 years ago today, the Scopes trial begins in Tennessee.

The Nation reprints a contemporaneous article by H.L. Mencken:

Behind every school ever heard of there is a definite concept of its purpose—of the sort of equipment it is to give to its pupils. It cannot conceivably teach everything; it must confine itself by sheer necessity to teaching what will be of the greatest utility, cultural or practical; to the youth actually in hand. Well, what could be of greater utility to the son of a Tennessee mountaineer than an education making him a good Tennesseean, content with his father, at peace with his neighbors, dutiful to the local religion, and docile under the local mores? That is all the Tennessee anti-evolution law seeks to accomplish. It differs from other regulations of the same sort only to the extent that Tennessee differs from the rest of the world. The State, to a degree that should be gratifying, has escaped the national standardization. Its people show a character that is immensely different from the character of, say, New Yorkers or Californians. They retain, among other things, the anthropomorphic religion of an elder day. They do not profess it; they actually believe in it. The Old Testament, to them, is not a mere sacerdotal whizz-bang, to be read for its pornography; it is an authoritative history.... So crediting the sacred narrative, they desire that it be taught to their children, and any doctrine that makes game of it is immensely offensive to them. When such a doctrine, despite their protests, is actually taught, they proceed to put it down by force.

They do not profess it; they actually believe in it. Great stuff! Read the whole thing:

150 years ago today: A union victory in the Battle of Nashville.

"The Battle of Nashville was a two-day battle in the Franklin-Nashville Campaign that represented the end of large-scale fighting in the Western Theater of the American Civil War."

Federal casualties in the battle were 387 killed, 2,562 wounded, and 112 missing. As only a few of the Confederate units submitted reports on the battle, Confederate casualties are difficult to ascertain. [Maj. Gen. George H.] Thomas reported capturing 4,561 prisoners in the battle itself, with an unknown number captured during the retreat. One historian made an educated guess that 2,500 Confederates were killed and wounded at Nashville....

The Battle of Nashville marked the effective end of the Army of Tennessee. Historian David Eicher remarked, "If [Lt. Gen. John Bell] Hood mortally wounded his army at Franklin, he would kill it two weeks later at Nashville." Although Hood blamed the entire debacle on his subordinates and the soldiers themselves, his career was over.....

"Dems Nominate Anti-Gay Conspiracy Theorist for Senate."

"Mark Clayton... finished on top of a crowded primary field in the race to take on GOP Sen. Bob Corker this fall."

He earned 26 percent of the vote despite raising no money and listing the wrong opponent on his campaign website....

On his issues page, Clayton sounds more like a member of the John Birch Society than a rank-and-file Democrat. He says he's against national ID cards, the North American Union, and the "NAFTA superhighway," a nonexistent proposal that's become a rallying cry in the far-right fever swamps. Elsewhere, he warns of an encroaching "godless new world order" and suggests that Americans who speak out against government policies could some day be placed in "a bone-crushing prison camp similar to the one Alexander Solzhenitsyn was sent or to one of FEMA's prison camps."

What's going on in Tennessee? One explanation is Clayton's name appeared first on the ballot.

Note: The Democratic Party has "disavowed" him, whatever that means.

"Satan is content in letting us profess Christianity."

"As long as we don't practice it."



Canah Chapel, Freewill Baptist Church, is in Erwin, Tennessee.

But we weren't there either to profess or practice Christianity. We went here...



... to pee, drink coffee, and access the internet. Satan let us do all that, but we don't know whether or not he was content. I understand why Satan — if he existed — would be happy to see folks professing but not practicing Christianity. I think he wouldn't care one way or the other about urination, but that he'd be pleased to see us drinking coffee, even as I think God gave us coffee in the hope that, energized, we'd turn to the good.

As for the internet, I'd say it depends on which websites you go to, and the subtle preferences of God and Satan are unknowable to us, but perhaps they are both keeping track of the entire history of all of our website visits and that we'll be called to account in the end.

But it was not the golden arches anymore than the cross that got us to take that exit. It was the sign for the Andrew Johnson National Historic Site. But then another sign said it was 31 miles away, and Satan made us go to McDonald's instead. This morning — the morning after — I sorrowfully regret not making the pilgrimage to the dishonored President's place of honor.

"Want to go back?" Meade says. No, no, we've gone too far ahead. We got all the way to Berea, Kentucky last night, where we walked around until night fell...

"The Couch"? Is that a place where you can go swingin' on the flippity flop?

Glenn Reynolds writes:

IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ACCURATE, but it was smart! Allison Glock's New York Times piece on Knoxville contained this introduction: "KNOXVILLE is often called 'the couch' by the people who live there. It’s a place too unassuming to shout about but too comfortable to leave." That's a nice intro, but nobody in Knoxville can remember ever hearing it called "the couch." But thanks to that bit, Glock's story is the most-blogged item in the Times at the moment. My advice to travel writers -- always open your point with a minor error that's sure to get under local bloggers' skins, and watch your traffic and rankings soar!

Oh, if only we could have been blogging back in 1992, when the New York Times published the ludicrous "Grunge: A Success Story," by Rick Marin:

LEXICON OF GRUNGE: BREAKING THE CODE

All subcultures speak in code; grunge is no exception. Megan Jasper, a 25-year-old sales representative at Caroline Records in Seattle, provided this lexicon of grunge speak, coming soon to a high school or mall near you:

WACK SLACKS: Old ripped jeans

FUZZ: Heavy wool sweaters

PLATS: Platform shoes

KICKERS: Heavy boots

SWINGIN' ON THE FLIPPITY-FLOP: Hanging out

BOUND-AND-HAGGED: Staying home on Friday or Saturday night

SCORE: Great

HARSH REALM: Bummer

COB NOBBLER: Loser

DISH: Desirable guy

BLOATED, BIG BAG OF BLOATATION: Drunk

LAMESTAIN: Uncool person

TOM-TOM CLUB: Uncool outsiders

ROCK ON: A happy goodbye

Of course, Megan Jasper was just horsing around — she made the whole thing up — and the New York Times fell for it. You'd think, after all the embarrassment, they'd be really careful about reporting slang.

CORRECTION: (Just when I'm pointing out mistakes!) I've corrected the spelling of Marin's name.

"Something weird and cultish in the sycophantish cathexis onto Hillary of the many nerds, geeks and vengeful viragos who run her campaign..."

It's Camille Paglia (who admits she's "leaning" toward Obama). She's got her sights set on Hillary Clinton, and it's going to get ugly, with the hurling of dangerous words like viragos and cathexis and — my personal favorite — "sycophantish":

Aside from the stylish Huma [Abedin], there's definitely something weird and cultish in the sycophantish cathexis onto Hillary of the many nerds, geeks and vengeful viragos who run her campaign -- sometimes to her detriment, as with the recent ham-handed playing of the clichéd gender card. I suspect the latter dumb move, which has backfired badly, came from Ann Lewis (Barney Frank's sister), a fanatical Hillary true believer who has been spouting beatific feminist bromides about her for the past 15 years.... Hillary seems to have acolytes rather than friends...

Paglia goes on to lavish compliments on Dianne Feinstein — she's "shrewd" and "steady" — why can't she be the first woman President? Feinstein speaks with "silky ease" and has "true gravitas." Paglia also strokes Nancy Pelosi, who has a "relaxed, resonant realism" and speaks in a "low purr." Pelosi purrs but Hillary's got that "tight-wound, self-righteous attack voice" and that "flat, practical, real-life voice."

But there are no big conclusions here about Hillary. Just an expression of that vague irritation we all feel. (Don't we?) But I wonder if this is the reaction we would have to any woman who got realistically close to the presidency. And I'll bet that's the sort of thing Ann Lewis says behind the scenes, but that doesn't make it wrong.

Paglia lights into Ellen DeGeneres for her "cringe-making on-air meltdown over a dog":

Following Rosie O'Donnell's professional collapse amid lunatic rants and operatic kvetching, this has been a terrible year for Hollywood lesbians' public image. It's as if when the butch mask drops, there's nothing inside but a boiling candy kettle of infantile rage and self-pity.

Butch up, girls, says Camille. But don't forget to keep that voice at a low purr.

She's got this on global warming:

This facile attribution of climate change to human agency is an act of hubris. Good stewardship of the environment is an ethical imperative for every nation. But breast-beating hysteria merely betrays impious tunnel vision. Thousands of factors, minute and grand, are at work in cyclic climate change, whose long-term outcomes we cannot possibly predict. Nature should inspire us with awe, not pity.

That's a nice twist. Our arrogance lies not in thinking we can indulge ourselves in our carbon-spewing ways — as we're commonly told — but in thinking we move Nature. It's impious to think of ourselves that way.

On Norman Mailer:

I didn't care about his novels -- I don't care about any novels published after World War II (Tennessee Williams is my main man) -- but I was impressed by Mailer's visionary and sometimes hallucinatory first-person journalism. And I was directly inspired by his eclectic "Advertisements for Myself" (1959), which I took as a blueprint after my first books were attacked by the feminist establishment in the 1990s.

I will immediately go read "Advertisements for Myself"!

Mailer's "The Prisoner of Sex" (the original 1971 Harper's essay, not the book) was an important statement about men's sexual fears and desires. His jousting with Germaine Greer at the notorious Town Hall debate in New York that same year was a pivotal moment in the sex wars. I loved Greer and still do. And I also thought Jill Johnston (who disrupted the debate with lesbo stunts) was a cutting-edge thinker: I was devouring her Village Voice columns, which had evolved from dance reportage into provocative cultural commentary.

Ah, yes, I remember. How we hated Norman Mailer in those days. From this distance, I rather admire him for making himself as a vortex for feminist hate. He got into the center of things the only way he could.

[O]ne of the lousiest things Mailer ever wrote was his flimsy cover-story screed on her for Esquire in 1994. It was obvious Mailer knew absolutely nothing about Madonna and was just blowing smoke.

Because he neglected to read Paglia's musings on the subject, no doubt.

Guess what -- Esquire's original proposal was for me to interview Madonna. Mailer was the sub!

Ha ha. What a transcendent brag! I especially like the use of the word "sub," with its insinuation of phallic gigantism. Paglia has the bigger... writing talent.

Next, Paglia has a reference to my favorite movie:

Penthouse magazine had similarly tried to bring Madonna and me together, as had HBO, which proposed filming a "My Dinner with André" scenario of the two of us chatting in a restaurant.

Camille is the André, of course. Madonna would have to be the Wally.

But Madonna, no conversationalist, always refused.

Damn! Madonna just needed instruction on how to play the listener, like Wallace Shawn. "My Dinner with André" begins Wally's voiced-over anxiety about he is about sitting through a whole dinner with André Gregory. He resolves to get through the experience by, essentially, interviewing him. But Madonna's problem was not — I suspect — that she wasn't good enough at talking, but that she didn't fancy herself enduring a long outpouring of Paglia's thoughts about everything. To be a good Wally in a "My Dinner With André"-format movie, you have to wait while the other person has most of the lines, then finally, when the audience can't take it anymore, say "You want to know what I think of all this." And then charm us to the core with a few lines that we will remember for decades.

Hey, remember the time Camille Paglia refused to have dinner with me? I wrote a post about it called — of all things! — "My Dinner With Camille."

"What do you think about that?"

I'm sorry I didn't get the chance to weigh in on this yesterday, but everybody's talking about Senator Larry Craig. The story:

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in June at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men’s public restroom... On Aug. 8, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct...

After he was arrested, Craig, who is married, was taken to the Airport Police Operations Center to be interviewed about the lewd conduct incident, according to the police report. At one point during the interview, Craig handed the plainclothes sergeant who arrested him a business card that identified him as a U.S. Senator and said, “What do you think about that?” the report states....

What do I think about that? I think the fact that he did that suggests it works sometimes to get him off the hook. It certainly shows that he thinks it can and he's willing to use his power that way. He should resign for that alone.

[Sgt. Dave Karsnia, a plainclothes officer,] entered the bathroom at noon that day and about 13 minutes after taking a seat in a stall, he stated he could see “an older white male with grey hair standing outside my stall.”...

“I could see Craig look through the crack in the door from his position. Craig would look down at his hands, ‘fidget’ with his fingers, and then look through the crack into my stall again. Craig would repeat this cycle for about two minutes,” the report states.

Craig then entered the stall next to Karsnia’s and placed his roller bag against the front of the stall door.

“My experience has shown that individuals engaging in lewd conduct use their bags to block the view from the front of their stall,” Karsnia stated in his report. “From my seated position, I could observe the shoes and ankles of Craig seated to the left of me.”

Craig was wearing dress pants with black dress shoes.

“At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot. I moved my foot up and down slowly. While this was occurring, the male in the stall to my right was still present. I could hear several unknown persons in the restroom that appeared to use the restroom for its intended use. The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area,” the report states.

Craig then proceeded to swipe his hand under the stall divider several times, and Karsnia noted in his report that “I could ... see Craig had a gold ring on his ring finger as his hand was on my side of the stall divider.”

Karsnia then held his police identification down by the floor so that Craig could see it.

“With my left hand near the floor, I pointed towards the exit. Craig responded, ‘No!’ I again pointed towards the exit. Craig exited the stall with his roller bags without flushing the toilet. ... Craig said he would not go. I told Craig that he was under arrest, he had to go, and that I didn’t want to make a scene. Craig then left the restroom.”

What a sad, pathetic scene! It's awful that public bathrooms -- especially in places like airports -- are used for sexual activity. The police have to figure out how to drive this activity elsewhere. Karsnia has a tough job, but he seems to handle it with efficiency and as much dignity as you can when it involves sitting on a toilet and letting someone watch you through the crack in the door.

Craig has a difficult moral problem if, as it seems, he has a gay sexual orientation, but he has chosen to marry a woman. Cheating on his wife and obtruding on the bathroom-going public is no way to deal with his predicament. It's especially ugly if he's taking this miserable course in order to maintain his grip on political power with an electorate that wouldn't tolerate him if he lived his life openly and honestly.

Worst of all, to my mind, is the proffering of the business card and the "What do you think about that?"

UPDATE: I see Glenn Greenwald is attacking me about the Senator Craig story:

The reaction to the Larry Craig story provides one of the most vivid illustrations yet of how the right-wing movement works. Last October, just weeks before the midterm election, gay activist Mike Rogers reported that the married, GOP "family values" Senator repeatedly had sex with anonymous men in public bathrooms. His report was based on "extensive research," including interviews with several men whom Craig solicited for bathroom sex.

As Rogers argued at the time, the story was relevant -- just as the Vitter prostitute story was -- in light of Craig's frequent political exploitation of issues of sexual morality and his opposition to virtually every gay rights bill. Rogers' story, as a factual matter, seemed relatively credible, both because of his history of accurate outings and because there is no discernible reason why, if he were intent on fabricating, he would single out someone as obscure as Larry Craig, who was not even up for re-election....

Among right-wing pundits -- weeks before the election -- there was nothing but support for Craig and outrage over the reporting of this story. The most hysterical outrage of all was from Glenn Reynolds, who went so far as repeatedly to predict -- literally -- that the country would be so repulsed by Rogers' reporting that it might actually swing the election in favor of the Republicans. More absurdly still, Reynolds cited a grand total of two reasons why he voted for GOP's Bob Corker over Harold Ford in the Tennessee Senate race, one of which was actually Rogers' report on Craig ("the sexual McCarthyism from the pro-outing crowd . . . . has convinced me that [Democrats] just don't deserve a victory with those tactics").

As usual, Bush-supporting bloggers like Ann Althouse and Patterico dutifully echoed Reynolds' line: "I truly believe this sort of tactic is going to create a backlash."

So this is a link back to something I wrote in October 2006. I have to go back and check because I don't remember writing about Craig before. Here's the old post:

"Lefty Blogger Outs Senator As Gay."

Patterico notes. Captain Ed comments.

Kos is taking a poll. "Do you agree with outing Gay Republicans?" 70% say "yes. But don't you think this percentage would change if the strategy backfires? I think aggressive characters like our "lefty blogger" think that uncovering gay Republicans will disgust social conservatives and change their voting behavior. They might also believe that they are demonstrating hypocrisy and that doing so will motivate Republicans to abandon social conservatism. I would like to see Republicans abandon social conservatism, and I'm not cheering on these slimy outings. But, honestly, I think these creepy, gleeful efforts at outing will only make social conservatives more conservative, and they will continue to look to the Republican party to serve their needs.

Well, this isn't about Senator Craig or sex in public bathrooms. (And it doesn't link to Glenn Reynolds either.) This is about the general practice of outing gay Republicans, which I find offensive. Moreover, I didn't even say that I thought this would produce a backlash. I said that lefties wouldn't use this tactic if they didn't think it would stimulate homophobia and turn voters away from socially conservative Republicans. Of course, I am hoping the tactic backfires and that the voters are not really homophobic. This is a longstanding theme here, and Greenwald either can't understand it, won't take the time to see what I'm saying, or is deliberately misstating what I say in a low, sleazy attack. Which is it?

Let's see if Greenwald apologizes and corrects his post. Now that he can see how inaccurate and inappropriate his attack is, a failure to correct is outright deceit.

Also, Greenwald's post is incredibly boring and windy. Maybe he actually can't understand things that aren't blathered about at great length. Ugh!

NEXT DAY UPDATE: Over 300 comments, and I know some of them are abusive. I'm not able to comb through and delete, so I apologize to readers who find some of this offensive. Please try harder to argue with each other in a way that doesn't involve name-calling. And don't use the F word!

Fie on fluorescent.

Maybe fluorescent bulbs meet your needs, if you have meager lighting needs, but some of us care how things look and expect some glow, some shine. Just because you don't notice the inadequacy doesn't make it okay to force those of us who do. If you think it does, I'd like to find the thing that you like to do that I don't care about and force you to go without it because it's no trouble for me to do without it.

Via Instapundit, who's been pushing these damned things, which is just fine for people who are able to take it. Let me make my contribution to environmentalism by using dimmer switches, turning off the lights when I leave the room, getting up at dawn to use more natural light, and sitting in nearly dark rooms at night when I'm not reading something on paper.

I hate this fluorescent oppressiveness -- the bullying and the light itself.

ADDED: I bought an LED reading lamp, by the way. It sounded great in the catalogue description, but it is absolutely impossible to read under. It's not bright enough, and if it were, the color would drive you insane. Some crazy blue.

MORE: A literary reference, from "A Glass Menagerie" by Tennessee Williams:

Look, Mother, do you think I’m crazy about the warehouse? You think I’m in love with the Continental Shoemakers? You think I want to spend fifty-five years down there in that - - celotex interior! with -- fluorescent tubes?! Honest to God, I’d rather somebody picked up a crow-bar and battered out my brains -- than go back mornings! But I go! Every time you come in yelling that Rise and Shine! Rise and shine!! I think how lucky dead people are! But I get up. I go! For sixty-five dollars a month I give up all that I dream of doing and being ever!

(Copied from my old high school script.)