Want to note something: I don't have all of Cohen's columns memorized. But when he makes an assertion that doesn't make any sense, it tells me that this is a disorganized mind. And that tells me that he's probably contradicted himself on whatever it is that he's talking about.

http://realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-10_4_05_RC.html

There are times when I sorely miss boilerplate -- those entirely predictable statements made by politicians that often begin with the word ``frankly,'' then proceed to the phrase ``I don't think the American people want,'' and conclude with a thundering banality that a drowsy dog could see coming. That was especially the case last week when I started reading what Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, had to say about Tom DeLay, her Republican opposite. I fully expected boilerplate, something about innocent until proved guilty. But Pelosi crossed me up. DeLay, as it turned out, was guilty until proved innocent.

``The criminal indictment of Majority Leader Tom DeLay is the latest example that Republicans in Congress are plagued by a culture of corruption at the expense of the American people,'' Pelosi said -- apparently forgetting to add the boilerplate about the American system of justice. If she had those thoughts, they're not on her Web site and not mentioned anywhere. Instead, the reference to a Republican ``culture of corruption'' shows that when it comes to a punctilious regard for the legal process, in this instance the Democrats ain't got no culture at all.

This is an example of why the Democratic Party is in such trouble. Democrats are aping what Newt Gingrich once did to them when he was speaker of the House, a leader of the GOP and a self-proclaimed dazzling revolutionary. His incessant cry of ``Corruption! Corruption!" helped end Democratic rule of Congress but it was accompanied -- Democrats seem to forget -- by an idea or two and emerging Republican majorities in the country as a whole. Stinging press releases alone do not a revolution make.

For prominent Democrats, it seemed it was not enough to forget their manners about DeLay. They then abandoned their party's tradition -- I would say ``obligation'' -- to defend unpopular speech by piling on William Bennett, the former education secretary, best-selling author and now, inevitably, talk show host.

Responding to a caller who argued that if abortion was outlawed the Social Security trust fund would benefit -- more people, more contributions, was the apparent (idiotic) reasoning -- Bennett said, sure, he understood what the fellow was saying. It was similar to the theory that the low crime rate of recent years was the consequence of high abortion rates: the less African-American males born, the fewer crimes committed. (Young black males commit a disproportionate share of crime.) This theory has been around for some time. Bennett was not referring to anything new.

But he did add something very important: If implemented, the idea would be ``an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do.''

He should have saved his breath. Prominent Democrats -- Harry Reid in the Senate, John Conyers and Rahm Emanuel in the House and, of course, Pelosi -- jumped all over him. Conyers wanted Bennett suspended from his radio show. Emanuel said Bennett's comments ``reflect a spirit of hate and division.'' Pelosi said Bennett was out of the mainstream, and Reid simply asked for an apology.

Actually, it is Reid and the others who should apologize to Bennett. They were condemning and attempting to silence a public intellectual for a reference to a theory. It was not a proposal and not a recommendation -- nothing more than a possible explanation. But the Democrats preferred to pander to an audience that either had heard Bennett's remarks out of context, or merely thought that anytime that conservatives talk about race, they are being racist.

A little boilerplate would do the Democrats good. It's never bad to remind the American people that an indictment is not equivalent to conviction, and speech is not free if it's going to cost you your job.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58833-2004Nov17.html

Ashcroft's order to Massino's prosecutors is part of his herculean effort to spruce up the death penalty, to make it presentable by eliminating bias. It can't be done. The ultimate bias is identification -- the extent to which the jury can identify with the defendant. This, essentially, is what happened in the O.J. Simpson case, which is why he walked. It is what happens all the time when juries have to decide to take the lives of people like them. It is a lot easier if the defendant is caricatured as an animal -- fierce, merciless and beyond rehabilitation. That's easier to do with minority gang-bangers than with middle-aged mobsters who sometimes have an avuncular demeanor and a loving immediate family. Mostly, the death penalty is reserved for society's outcasts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060202590.html

I loathe above all the resurgence of racism -- or maybe it is merely my appreciation of the fact that it is wider and deeper than I thought. I am stunned by the numbers of people who have come out to vote against Barack Obama because he is black. I am even more stunned that many of these people have no compunction about telling a pollster they voted on account of race -- one in five whites in Kentucky, for instance. Those voters didn't even know enough to lie, which is what, if you look at the numbers, others probably did in other states. Such honesty ought to be commendable. It is, instead, frightening.

Maybe they're worried that he'll commit a bunch of crimes; why silence them?

I loathe what has happened to the press. I loathe the incessant blogging and commenting and talking and yapping and hype.

http://realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-10_13_05_RC.html

This is why I want Fitzgerald to leave now. Do not bring trivial charges -- nothing about conspiracies, please -- and nothing about official secrets, most of which are known to hairdressers, mistresses and dog walkers all over town. Please, Mr. Fitzgerald, there's so much crime in Washington already. Don't commit another.

Not nice, but it was what Washington does day in and day out. (For some historical perspective see George Clooney's ``Good Night, and Good Luck'' about Edward R. Murrow and that most odious of leakers-cum-character assassins, Joseph McCarthy.)

This is rarely considered a crime. In the Plame case, it might technically be one, but it was not the intent of anyone to out a CIA agent and have her assassinated (which is what happened once) but to assassinate the character of her husband. This is an entirely different thing. She got hit by a ricochet.