... is Mickey Kaus, busting out this line:

If you were Arnold Schwarzenegger and were preparing, by your own admission, to combat womanizing rumors, would it be a good idea to describe your wife as "the greatest wife in the world ... a fantastic partner"? [Emphasis on wildly unromantic word added.] ... Just asking! ... 12:27 A.M.

Hey asshole, I often describe my wife as my partner because in addition to being the love of my life, my lover, my mate, the mother-to-be of our children, she is also my business partner and co-worker. You think there might be a bit of that in what Arnold was saying at the time? You think that maybe the business-partner angle of a married relationship was involved in discussing Arnold's run for governor -- at least as a career move?

Let's go to the transcript:

QUESTION: How much did Dianne Feinstein's decision play into this?

SCHWARZENEGGER: Nothing that has happened in the last 14 days made any difference in my decision making. My decision was based on how my family would respond, my children and my wife. My wife, I happen to have the greatest wife in the world. She is a fantastic partner. She said to me that she supports any decision that I make. That was, to me, the most important thing. If she would have been against me campaigning and me going for the governorship, I would not have done it.

And a little bit later:

QUESTION: Mr. Schwarzenegger, when did you tell that beloved wife you were going to run, because everybody around you says that you have caught them in a big surprise. When did you tell Maria Shriver you were going to run.

SCHWARZENEGGER: Maria and I had discussions over the last two weeks. Slowly it crystallized of what my decision will be, that I would be running for governor of the state of California. And this is a process that was a very long and very difficult process, because you have to put all of those things on a scale. You have to put on a scale, you know, that you're stopping with the movie career, you're stopping some of the business relationships that make you a lot of money. You have to put on that scale also of what effect this is going to have on your family and your children. The children are very important to me. I had a terrific upbringing in Austria, so obviously, I want to provide a great upbringing for my children and be there for them as they grow up. So all of those things were very important. So--but as time went on it crystallized this is what I should do.

This article in the National Post (reprint from the Hill Times, link via the corner) predicts that orthodox Catholics will leave the Democratic party, and that orthodox Democrats will leave the Catholic church.

I believe the article is correct in principle, but I don't think the transfer will be complete or even significantly started before the 2004 election. Look how long it took for conservatives in the South, traditionally Democrats, to hold their noses and vote for conservative Republicans over liberal Democrats.

At present, the last comment on the discussion thread for the article is by someone named "What Right?", a student from Calgary with unusually cruel parents. "What Right?" asks:

I don't see the problem that everyone is arguing over. Let your religious beliefs guide you in your personal life and let the beliefs of others (or even the lack thereof) guide them. If you are Catholic then don't have an abortion,etc. But don't tell others what to do. No one forces you to commit such acts. Why should you have the right to force someone not to commit such acts? Your moral compass may not be the same as someone else (either rightly or wrongly). Failure to let people follow their social views is a form of persecution that no one should stand for. Imagine if every female under 20 was required by law to have an abortion, this would hardly seem fair, why then should we have the right to stop others? Finally, it should be pointed out that GW Bush and his gang use the religous limitations placed upon muslims persons as one reason (of many) for war, yet they themselves wish to limit the choices of their nations people along the lines of their personal religious beliefs.

I quote this at some length because it's rare to see such a breathtakingly clear statement of moral relativism made in public. And without visible irony! I can only conclude that "What Right?" really means it.

I am a Catholic, and I'm not considering conversion, but if I were let me say that my new religion would require the ritual murder of students from Calgary. Perhaps that clarifies the problem?