The lead editorial in today's Washington Post laments the return of the $1-million political donor, amusingly noting that when it comes to bills in Congress, "you can assume that the measure will accomplish almost precisely the opposite of what its name boasts." Sure enough, the "527 Fairness Act" isn't about regulating the independent "527" groups that were the loopholes of choice in campaign finance laws during the last election cycle, but rather about lifting the limits on how much individual donors can contribute.
For the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Thursday's 5-4 Supreme Court decision to uphold a city's right under the 5th Amendment to buy homes to make way for a hotel and corporate offices is another example of a "judicial encroachment on our liberties." The issue: What constitutes "public use" when exercising eminent domain? Justice Anthony Kennedy sided with the four liberal justices. He is vying with David Souter to be the most disappointing justice to conservatives.
In reacting to a bid by a Chinese company to buy Unocal, The Journal agrees with us that the potential deal is hardly alarming: "The fact that a Chinese oil company wants to buy an American one is a sign of progress, not concern." The Financial Times is happy to see Tony Blair arguing that the failure of the proposed EU constitution at the polls in France and Holland amounts to a wake-up call for the continent: "He was right to bite back at those people -- chiefly Jacques Chirac, French president, and Gerhard Schroeder, German chancellor -- who portray change as some kind of betrayal of the European ideal."