George Will bumps head, makes sense

I've often said, usually when making dire predictions about the ramifications of Bush adminstration actions, that this (insert the topic here) is one instance where I hope I'm wrong. To date, I've been proven remarkably prescient, and in truth I never really hope I'm wrong, but it can help make an argument more persuasive.

But that doesn't mean I'm never wrong, and after taking a rather smug stab at George Will in an earlier post, I find him making sense, and self limiting his normal syllabic frenzy in this piece about the Oregon Right to Die decision a few weeks ago. I'm sure his next column will irritate me in some fashion, once I've spent the requisite hour or so looking up words and trying to figure out just what noun he was modifying with the string of verbs and...but I think he's onto something here.

Although rather succint and direct by Will standards, he still ties up a lot of ink and real estate to basically wonder what about the decision makes conservatives mad. Further, he wonders what exactly was conservative about John Ashcroft's jihad against Oregon and the Bush administration's single minded focus on this issue.

Of course, we all know the answer. You can shout "strict constructionist" from every mountaintop in Oregon until the strict constructionist view somehow conflicts with your own religious, social or political agenda. And you can campaign long and hard about "activist judges" until your own guys aren't quite activist enough.

Then the rest of us, watching from the cheap seats, can sigh and say, "I told you I wasn't wrong about that."