Sunday, October 30, 2005

Recommended Reading

Once more, I link to the free version of a Frank Rich column that some of us subscribed to the New York Times "select" service in order to be able to read.

• Posted at 5:16 PM · LINK

Brown Sandwiches and Green Sandwiches

The new production of The Odd Couple, with Nathan Lane as the slob and Matthew Broderick as the neat freak, opened last Thursday evening on Broadway. Just for the sheer "event" of it all, I would have liked to be there for the opening, especially at the end when Mr. Lane interrupted the curtain ovation to say, "Oh yes, there's somebody here you should meet" and brought out Neil Simon. But I find myself curiously disinterested in jumping on a plane and going back to see subsequent performances. Even if someone gave me tickets — which no one's gonna do because they're sold out and they go for a fort-yoon on eBay — I'm not sure I'd be interested.

It isn't just that the reviews are decidedly mixed. Critics often differ but never so much as when they're writing about a show they're helpless to impact in any way. It's that I feel like I've already seen it. I know the play about as well as I know my Social Security number and I can imagine exactly what Mssrs. Lane and Broderick are doing with it. If this production was local to me and reasonably-priced, sure. I'd go and I'm sure I'd be joyously entertained. But theater sometimes becomes a big hassle, what with advance planning and securing tickets and physically getting there and...I dunno. This one just struck me as not worth the effort...not that they'll suffer one bit for the lack of my patronage.

I've seen The Odd Couple (I'm guessing) twenty times. In a live theatrical production, I mean. The movie, I've seen more times than I can imagine. But I've sat in theaters and seen live performers yell about spaghetti vs. linguini on many, many occasions — in productions professional and amateur, starring folks you've heard of and folks you haven't. I've seen it rewritten by Mr. Simon for women and rewritten by Mr. Simon just for the hell of it. It really is bulletproof but that doesn't mean everyone should take a shot at it.

• Posted at 12:05 PM · LINK

Today's Political Rant

A couple of thoughts on the Scooter Libby indictment. One is that with his statement Friday and the release of the paperwork, the prosecutor rendered millions of bytes of Internet discussion inoperative and inaccurate. I don't know if people have gone back and scrubbed their weblogs but an awful lot of armchair legal analysis has been proven wrong. To pick one area of many: All the anti-Bush folks were arguing that Valerie Plame's status as a C.I.A. operative was classified and covert. All the pro-Bush folks were arguing that it was neither. The prosecutor, Mr. Fitzgerald, has access to more information than any of these folks — presumably, he has extensively talked with the C.I.A. about her actual assignments instead of deducing it from questionable press accounts — and he says her status there was classified but declined to say it was covert. (There's apparently a big difference there in terms of whether leaking the fact of her employment is a crime.)

Both sides are actively spinning this as either a blow to Republicans or a disappointment to Democrats. I don't think you can say for sure which it is yet. I mean, Libby's trial — if it ever happens — could get very interesting with guys like Cheney and Rove testifying under oath about reports of alleged uranium guys in Niger and who knew what when about Weapons of Mass Destruction. Which is why I suspect it will never occur...the trial, I mean. If I were Mr. Libby's lawyer right now, I think my main objective would just be to try and run out the clock, delaying that day as long as possible, angling for a more favorable plea bargain. Already, the statements of the guy who has that job, and the view of other barristers who've read the indictment are suggesting that winning is not a likely option.

So I'd try to make the best deal I could. And the options there are to either become a witness for the prosecution of others or to admit guilt, accept whatever sentence and fine I had to, then depend on the famous loyalty of presidents named Bush to their friends. His father pardoned everyone involved in Iran-Contra, in some cases for lying to an Independent Counsel, just as Libby is alleged to have done. Methinks the idea there was to head off a trial that might have resulted in some very embarrassing revelations about that George Bush. You kind of figure that a lot of folks around the White House don't want the Scooter Libby trial to happen for much the same reason.

• Posted at 11:35 AM · LINK