The official Inaugural website lists the corporate donors to Bush's inaugural celebration.

The donations are raising eyebrows in the media.

Critics call the arrangement too cozy, while others say the lavish spending is inappropriate in a time of war and as South Asia recovers from a devastating tsunami.

Bush told reporters Thursday he sees no problem with either how the money is raised or how it is spent. "There's no taxpayer money involved in this," he said.

Who pays isn't really the issue. It's what they expect to recoup from their investment.

Just watched Mick Jagger accept a Golden Globe for "Old Habits Die Hard" - song from the "Alfie" movie. It was the best part of an otherwise very dull show. Which might be because I've seen so few of the movies and none of the winning tv shows (Nip and Tuck? Desperate Housewives?)

He was relaxed and funny, although I didn't get the inside joke about Paramount. Does anyone know what he was talking about?

I would have liked it if Jamie Foxx won for Redemption, the film about Stanley Tookie Williams, doing life at San Quentin. He won for 'Ray Charles' though, which was also outstanding.

'Closer' and 'Million Dollar Baby' were big winners. 'Sideways' too. Those seem to be the three to see.

Update: Add the Aviator, Leonard DiCaprio just won best actor award for it. Humble speech, too. Further update: Aviator wins for best picture as well.

As Atrios and Ignatz say, if this is true, it's a very big deal:

An Alabama SC justice claims, according to a Birmingham News reporter, that Clarence Thomas told him:

[A] judge should be evaluated by whether he faithfully upholds his oath to God, not to the people, to the state or to the Constitution.

Atrios says,

"This is indeed a big deal, no matter what your personal religious views happen to be. Did he really say it? Will anyone else in the media bother to try to find out?"

by TChris

Should Supreme Court justices serve until they retire or die? The Framers thought so, but Linda Greenhouse reports on the academic argument for proposals that would limit a justice's tenure on the Court.

The academic critics see a variety of negative consequences from life tenure. One is that the scarcity and randomness of vacancies promise to turn each one into a galvanizing crisis. Other drawbacks include the temptation for justices to time their retirements for political advantage; an overemphasis on youth and staying power as a qualification for nominees; the likelihood that even those justices who escape the infirmities of old age - and, predictably, not all will escape - will tend after many decades to lose touch with the surrounding culture; and the fear that if the court is seen as out of touch and unaccountable to a democratic society, its legitimacy will erode.

One proposal would allow the president to appoint a new justice every two years. Each new justice would bump the most senior sitting justice into "senior status." Senior status justices would occasionally emerge from semi-retirement to perform temporary judicial assignments.

Critics worry that the plan would produce a Court that will follow the moment's prevailing political winds rather than precedent. Professor Ward Farnsworth wonders whether we can envision the problems that such a radical change would create:

"Life tenure has costs that we have learned to live with, and we ought to hesitate long before switching."

Rick Roach is the elected DA of four counties in the Texas pandhandle. This week he was indicted on federal drugs and weapons charges. He is being detained without bond pending a Tuesday detention hearing. A lawsuit has been filed to remove him from office. The Indictment alleges he is a drug addict.

As an addict, he "knowingly and intentionally" possessed several firearms, including a semi-automatic pistol, according to the indictment.

He is also charged with possession with intent to distribute meth and coke. He was arrested while at the courthouse. His secretary provided a sworn affidavit saying he shot meth twice at an apartment and was about to at the office when she walked out of the room.

Sgt. Kevin Benderman of Georgia refuses to return to Iraq. He's had enough of viewing bodies stored in mass graves and children's burned limbs. [Via Raw Story.]

Benderman is seeking conscientious objector status. Here's what he saw in Iraq:

He told of bombed out homes and displaced Iraqis living in mud huts and drinking from mud puddles; mass graves in Khanaqin near the Iranian border where dogs fed off bodies of men, women and children.

He recalled his convoy passing a girl, no older than 10, on the roadside clutching a badly injured arm. Benderman said his executive officer refused to help because the troops had limited medical supplies. "Her arm was burned, 3rd-degree burns, just black. And she was standing there with her mother begging for help," Benderman said. "That was an eye opener to seeing how insane it really is."

Zephyr Teachout keeps digging herself into a bigger hole. But, she's cagey. Today, she apologizes to Jerome of MyDD but not Markos of Daily Kos, and makes Joe Trippi out to be the ethical villain. Then, to get everyone talking about a topic other than her, she decides there should be a political bloggers' code of ethics. Her key idea is this:

...one thing we should do is engage citizen watchdog groups in finding out what bloggers are tied to what consulting companies, and prominently publish any contracts – and ask candidates not to hire any of the truly prominent bloggers unless they, like Jerome did, agree not post while consulting.

Cagey, because her latest idea will be so offensive to so many bloggers that her inaccurate allegations of last week unjustly smearing Jerome and Markos' reputations will be forgotten as everyone jumps into a discussion of whether bloggers should be policed.

My advice: Ignore her and don't take the bait.

Charles Graner faced 15 years for abusing Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison, and was sentenced to ten years.

Air Force cadet Jonathan Belkowitz faced up to 50 years after being found guilty of solicitation to buy and use steroids and making a false statement. He was acquitted of "wrongful use, importation, introduction or distribution."

The judge in Belkowitz' case is recommending dismissal from the Air Force as a sanction for him, but still, why does a drug offense carry up to 50 years while human rights violations and crimes of violence like Graner's carry only 15?

Is Iraq just the first target in Bush's war? According to the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh, who uncovered the Abu Ghraib prison abuse, the U.S. has been conducting secret missions inside Iran since last summer looking for nuclear and chemical weapons.

One former high-level intelligence official told The New Yorker, "This is a war against terrorism, and Iraq is just one campaign. The Bush administration is looking at this as a huge war zone. Next, we're going to have the Iranian campaign."

The White House denies it, if you call this a denial:

"We obviously have a concern about Iran. The whole world has a concern about Iran," Dan Bartlett, a top aide to President Bush, told CNN's "Late Edition....."No president, at any juncture in history, has ever taken military options off the table," Bartlett added.

[Comments now closed, this thread has been hopelessly hijacked off topic. I will finish cleaning up the comments this evening.]

The Wall St. Journal Friday (free link) has an editorial on federal sentencing, warning of the return of mandatory minimums:

Judges have never liked the guidelines, which from their perspective amount to 1,800 pages of Congressional micromanagement. But somehow we think they're going to like what's coming even less. Congress is not about to sit still and accept what it sees as a power grab by the judiciary.

Hearings on the guidelines are already being discussed, and legislation could follow apace. One quick fix would be for Congress to expand the number of mandatory minimum sentences, a solution that would have the ironic effect of giving judges less flexibility in sentencing than they had before Wednesday's ruling.

We warned of this back in September:

If you're by a television tonight, (or the internet, you can watch here ) the big celebrity fundraiser for Tsunami victims will air on NBC, MSNBC and other affiliated stations at 8 pm. Funds raised will go to the Red Cross. You can download the live performances afterwards at Sony Connect, where proceeds also go to the Red Cross.

The jury has sentenced Charles Graner to ten years in prison. He leaves court, in shackles, still smiling.

Parole and clemency are available to Graner, to be determined by the Army Clemency and Parole Board. Regulations as of 1998 are available here (pdf.) For sentences betweeen 10 and 20 years, the prisoner comes up for parole after two years and is reviewed every year thereafter. Guidelines seem to suggest he would not be paroled before serving 1/3 of his sentence. The criteria or salient factors for parole are in section 3-2.