The Daily Show pretty well summarizes a day’s worth of testimony into a couple minutes:

In short, Alberto Gonzales didn’t remember anything, except that he had acted properly. He also apologized for the mistakes that were made, and yet would handle the firings the same way all over again.
You know that things are bad when at least six senators from your own party have called for you to resign. This is reminiscent of when the Harriet Miers nomination blew up; the only person left supporting Bush’s guy (or gal) is Bush himself.

Like Atrios, I surprised by the margin of this poll number:

A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken last weekend found that 78% of respondents feel people now in the country illegally should be given a chance at citizenship.

Given election results in a few border districts last November, I’m not necessarily surprised that a majority of Americans support a path toward citizenship, but I am surprised at the 78% number. That’s strong support.
If you’ve only been listening to right-wing radio types the past few years, you would be lead to believe that there’s a mass political movement afoot to build a 3,000 mile wall and ramp up deportation. Well, if GOP candidates want to run on American nationalism in 2008, more power to them. I think there’s a political reason Karl Rove never went down that path.
I’m not good at reading the public mind, but I suspect this poll question reflects the American realization that:
(1) We have a lot of illegal immigrants,
(2) They’re needed to do jobs most Americans don’t like,
(3) We aren’t going to deport them, so
(4) We might as well work them into the system rather than force them to live as second-class humans.
At least that’s my thinking. It’s about time we get past this “amnesty” red herring and move forward with a realistic immigration policy.

I don’t expect this to become a regular feature, but I have a positive post about Senator Corker. Via the League of American Bicyclists, I sent e-mails to my U.S. Senators and Representative voicing support for the Bicycle Commuters Benefits Act of 2007 (HR 1498, SB. 858). [I’m not a commuter, but I generally support all legislation favorable to cyclists.]
I got an e-mail back from Corker (the only one thus far) which reads, in part:

It is important that we continue to reduce energy consumption when possible, and now is a perfect time for us as a country to really get serious about energy alternatives and conservation. As Mayor of Chattanooga I promoted cycling and created bicycle lanes in our urban areas and wrote a bicycle master plan. I am an avid cyclist myself. I appreciate your interest in a letter being circulated by Senators requesting support for the Bicycle Commuters Benefits Act of 2007. I have received this letter and as I look into signing it I will certainly consider your thoughts about S. 858 and incentives for bicycle commuters in general.

That sounds like support. Let’s hope so. It would be nice to have your senator vote your way every once in a while.
On related note, earlier I posted on the “Jeff Roth Bicycle and Pedalcyclists Protection Act of 2007.” It appears that the House and Senate bills have been consolidated and the measure is awaiting passage in the House.
UPDATE: Congressman Duncan mailed a letter suggesting that he also supports the Bicycle Commuters Benefits Act of 2007.

Perhaps the Imus-inspired, heart-searching national dialog on race relations that the chattering class promised us will resume in a few days. Or maybe not. American Idol is still going, isn’t it?
For the time being, MSNBC has short profiles on the VA Tech shooting victims.
Talk Left sensibly points out that now is not the time to debate gun policy. I agree. I’ve grown weary of news programs filling air time with silly gun control arguments. Sure, there’s a time to debate firearms, but it isn’t now. The discussion is too colored by this isolated incident. Wait until things cool off and we again have a broader perspective.

A horrible tragedy. The bottom line is that sometimes awful things happen in life and there’s not a satisfactory explanation as to why. Sometimes people fail to recognize this.
There’s a lot of idle chatter regarding whether or not Virginia Tech handled the situation properly. I’m reserving judgment until more facts come out (interesting concept, cable news). I will say it’s a lot easier to fault decision in the hindsight of a disaster than it is to make them in real time with incomplete information.
In the interest of saving many hours of TV airtime, I’ll answer a few questions:
–Yes, this could happen at X college. (Whatever your nearby school is.)
–There are no security measures which will stop people intent on going on Kamikaze-style killing sprees.
–No, we don’t need metal detectors and other fortress-like security measures on college campuses.
–No, right-wing radio, the fact that the shooter was an alien does not mean international students are about to lay waste to America.
–This could have occurred regardless of what the Blacksburg gun laws are.
–This could have occurred regardless of how many violent movies or video games were sold last year. [Not that those aren’t legitimate issues, but speculative cause/effect chatter on these topics before you know anything about the suspect’s background is silly.]
A trivial matter in the grand scheme of things, but I thought this clip yesterday afternoon is insightful in how our news media works. Here Wolf Blitzer asks if President Bush will be attending today’s ceremony at Virginia Tech:

HENRY: No indication yet. Obviously, that’s one event certainly the White House is weighing.
Typically in situations like this, although there’s never been anything quite like this on a college campus — but whenever there’s some sort of a disaster or tragedy, the president, and this president in particular, tries to stay away in the early days, let local and state official do what they need to do. And then within a few days he usually goes, after they’ve had a chance to grieve, but also deal wit situation on the ground — Wolf.

Huh? Where did reporter Ed Henry get that analysis from? Sounds to me like he merely repeated a talking point the White House floated as it decided whether or not Bush would attend. Anyway, it was obviously wrong. Apparently, Mr. Bush is going to get in the way of local officials doing what they need to do.