On the side of the hawks!

My wife wonders (aloud, and in my presence--though I must admit her opinion was solicited) whether I'm not getting a bit long-winded in this journal. Will my reader's attention flag, she asks, if I make too burdensome a demand on their time? Good question. I trust you'll let me know, Bush, when I begin to bore you.

Meantime, I'm very excited this morning. I think I've finally found an issue on which we might both be able to end up on the same side: the side of the hawks. You've probably been reading about those good rich folks on the Upper East Side of New York City--the board of a fancy co-op on Fifth Avenue--deciding to destroy the nest of a pair of red-tailed hawks who had been happily residing, rent-free, at this upscale address for years, and raising a succession of families there. Their eight-foot wide nest of twigs and debris, which straddled a cornice on the twelfth floor, was deemed unsightly; the hawks' droppings were causing damage to a canopy down below; their habit of bringing back live prey--rats, etc., for God's sake!--at dinner time and, I guess, tearing their red meat apart and causing acute distress to residents of more delicate sensibilities, was considered beyond the bounds of acceptable behavior; and to top it all, they attracted bird-watchers with cameras and binoculars in the street below. Imagine how unpleasant for the likes of the camera-shy Paula Zahn--one of the offended residents--to be exposed to the daily stares of a bunch of Audubon Society freaks!

Anyway, Bush, they tore down the nest--to howls of protest from the many New Yorkers who had taken some understandable pride in the welfare of their wild and handsomely feathered fellow-citizens. So what I want to know is: which side are you on? Instinct must surely draw you to the side of the hawks. On the other hand, political contingency might constrain your support for the ultra-wealthy. A quandary for you, Bush. But I think you'll be happy to hear that I, for once, am firmly on the side of the hawks.