Q: How many Muslim women does it take to screw in a lightbulb? A: However many a Muslim man says.  Now go fetch me my hooka, woman! A multicultural dilemma:  When it comes to fashionable scarves, modest clothing, the Muslim patriarchy, and the free market —what’s a good feminist to do…? **** (h/t Allah, who points to Amir Taheri for context)

—Now wait just a second, hard chargers. If anybody owes anybody anything, it’s that “Official A” fella.  So, y’know—let’s just wait to hear what he’s got to say before we go making all sorts of wild demands.  Ahem. THE DEFENSE RESTS!

Here’s what I’m getting out of this from a cursory reading of the indictment:  Libby, after learning about Plame’s identity from either Cheney or some undersecretary or other (another unnamed administration official—Official A—seems to be the Novak source), told reporters that he’d heard about Plame’s CIA ties from other reporters.  That is, he lied to reporters about how he knew what he knew [update: he confirmed for reporters, however tenuously]. 

Two years later, and I still don’t have a freaking clue.  Question:  Does Patrick Fitzgerald know?  If Ms Plame was “outed,” was it intentional?  If not, should the investigation even have proceeded?  I ask all of these questions in good faith, because I honestly don’t know.  What I do know, however, is that what pushed this investigation is the suggestion that the White House used classified information to “out” Plame

From the NYT, Oct 28: Lawyers in the C.I.A. leak case said Thursday that they expected I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, to be indicted on Friday, charged with making false statements to the grand jury. Karl Rove, President Bush’s senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, will not be charged on Friday, but will remain under investigation, people briefed officially about the case said.

Some folks won’t like this Peggy Noonan piece much. But for me, it struck a nerve.  Of course, had today been a Friday, maybe I’d feel a bit differently.  Being naked in a tub of Guinness wouldn’t hurt things, either.

Hugh Hewitt: Because the assault from the left on the next nominee is going to be so intense, it makes sense to nominate a judge who has recently been vetted and FBI-checked. Fairly recent Senate hearings are also a plus, as they will demonstrate the necessary ability to handle the heat that is on the way. Because cases coming before the SCOTUS in the near future include some crucial decisions—including

Question:  how many “bases” does the President have, exactly?  I mean, for years we’ve been hearing from Democrats and the legacy media how James Dobson, Hugh Hewitt, the evangelicals, et al, are Bush’s “right wing” conservative base—but these are the very people who, in addition to GOP party pragmatists, by and large were most supportive of the Miers nomination. And yet today, all I’m hearing is that Bush caved to

From the WSJ (subscribers only, so I’ll excerpt at length): In addition to the prospect of indictments looming in the CIA leak case, the Bush administration faces another threat: civil litigation that could expose top officials to damage payments and years of wide-ranging scrutiny. Former diplomat Joseph Wilson, whose criticism of the administration’s Iraq policy sparked the current furor and led to the outing of his Central Intelligence Agency-operative wife,

Via Raw Story: Washington, D.C. – Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid released the following statement on Harriet Miers’ withdrawal of her nomination to the United States Supreme Court. “The radical right wing of the Republican Party killed the Harriet Miers nomination. Apparently, Ms. Miers did not satisfy those who want to pack the Supreme Court with rigid ideologues. “I had recommended that the President consider nominating Ms. Miers because I