Let me, first, admit that I went to the 1:50 pm showing of Harry Potter ... on Friday afternoon. First day. Popcorn, lemonade, Goobers, and trying to remember whether the first Christmas gift Harry got was the cloak or the magic map.
Harry Potter was great. If someone tells you that they didn't like it, it was because they really wanted to go to the Brie & Fellini Festival at the Kennedy Center, but they had to take their kids to Harry Potter. They should have waited in the car, re-reading their well-worn copy of "The Collected Essays of Sir Thomas Malory" memorizing some obscure passage with which to impress people at the cocktail party that night.
For those of you who have not read any of the four J.K. Rowling books the arch-villain is named Voldemort, although he is often referred to as "He who must not be named."
Which gets me to the point of this morning's column.
In yesterday's New York Times, Maureen Dowd wrote about the treatment of women (and women's effect on men) in the Middle East from the time of Cleopatra to the Taliban.
Before you begin gritting your teeth, keep in mind Ms. Dowd wrote the following a few weeks ago: "This is not just a war. This is a just war." Which is yet another reason she has won a Pulitzer Prize and I have not.
In yesterday's column, Ms. Dowd wrote: "The White House, suddenly shocked by five-year-old Taliban excesses, began a campaign against their treatment of women."
Excuse me? Suddenly shocked? The White House? This "White House" has not been in a position to have been shocked for five years. Effective noon yesterday, this White House had only been in office for 43 WEEKS. In fact, at this point last year the absentee ballots had just been counted in Florida. One year ago today, the Bush team would not even be given the keys to the transition office for another three weeks.
So this "five year" business goes back to the "White House" run by a guy who was actually in a position to have been shocked. The guy who the American press corps treats like Voldemort: "He who must not be named."
William Jefferson Clinton.
If anything, America had spent a good deal of the second Clinton Administration being shocked by the treatment of women IN the White House.
Remember the public denunciations of Bill Clinton by the many vocal, Liberal women's groups during the Clinton era? No? That's because there weren't any.
In fact, let's see a show of hands from those in the class who can quote a single leader of a vocal, Liberal women's group supporting President Bush's effort to rid the world of the Taliban.
None? Hmm. Now I'M shocked.
Here's what one woman said about the subject this weekend: "[The Taliban] is now in retreat across much of the country, and the people of Afghanistan - especially women - are rejoicing. Afghan women know, through hard experience, what the rest of the world is discovering: The brutal oppression of women is a central goal of the terrorists."
That was part of First Lady Laura Bush's radio address to the nation on Saturday.
Where was First Lady Hillary RODHAM clinton during the second Clinton Administration? Speaking out for the rights of women in the Middle East? Nah. In fact, she was embracing - literally - Mrs. Arafat.
Hillary RODHAM clinton was too busy being "shocked" by anyone who raised questions about her husband's activities. No mention of her being "shocked" by the treatment of women by the Taliban. Or, for that matter, by Voldemort.
Speaking of missing persons, insiders in Washington are beginning to suspect that the "undisclosed secure location" at which Vice President Dick Cheney has been spending much of his time is actually the subway underneath the Capitol. Like the hero of the old Kingston Trio song, Cheney "may ride forever 'neath the streets of D.C.; he's the man, who never returned."
� 
