It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know – no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor. And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice – in this world, and the next.

Although this paragraph will get the conservatives howling about political correctness:

This generation of soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen have volunteered in a time of certain danger. They are part of the finest fighting force that the world has ever known.  They have served tour after tour of duty in distant, different and difficult places. They have stood watch in blinding deserts and on snowy mountains. They have extended the opportunity of self-government to peoples that have suffered tyranny and war. They are man and woman; white, black, and brown; of all faiths and stations – all Americans, serving together to protect our people, while giving others half a world away the chance to lead a better life.

What it also sounds like is … Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. Dana Priest reports:

The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that to avoid “adverse events,” the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims.

At least we know now that extremists of all stripes agree that U.S. Muslims shouldn’t serve in the U.S. military, an institution through which so many Muslim-Americans have heroically given their lives for their country. The more polite version of this rancid argument is provided by none other than Bill Kristol.

Marc Lynch, thankfully, breaks out of this entire frame with an eloquent and thoughtful post about the advantages that safeguarding an open space for Muslim-American identity poses to national security. It’s long but worth your time. A brief excerpt:

There is a connection between what these critics are calling “political correctness” and national security, but it runs in the opposite direction. The real linkage is that there is a strong security imperative to prevent the consolidation of a narrative in which America is engaged in a clash of civilizations with Islam, and instead to nurture a narrative in which al-Qaeda and its affiliates represent a marginal fringe to be jointly combatted. Fortunately, American leaders — from the Obama administration through General George Casey and top counter-terrorism officials — understand this and have been acting appropriately.

Really, read the whole thing.

In response, Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol is going after Scozzafava’s campaign.

I have full confidence in the truth of John’s account. And I won’t allow a desperate campaign to try to tarnish the fine reputation John has built as a fair and accurate reporter — and, for that matter, a very decent and mild-mannered young man. As it happens, I was standing near John’s desk in the office this past Friday. The phone rang. It was Scozzafava campaign spokesman Matt Burns, who didn’t like something John had reported, and started yelling abusively at him the moment he answered the phone. We could hear Mr. Burns ten feet away. I gather Mr. Burns called later to apologize. I suppose John would accept another apology by the Scozzafava campaign.

This is not what a struggling campaign needs to deal with two weeks away from an election. One more reason why it’s tough to find Republican strategists in Washington who think Scozzafava can win.

The group’s mechanics are largely a product of former campaign aides to Senator John McCain: Michael Goldfarb, now a Weekly Standard blogger, is an adviser to the group; its executive director is McCain war room chief Aaron Harison, and the video was produced by Justin Germany, the McCain aide who produced a campaign video titled, “The One,” which mocked Obama as a messianic figure.

Cheney’s constant TV appearances have, so far, been a function of her family name and of the strong possibility that she’ll run for office someday. This effort gives TV hosts something else to say when they introduce her; it will also, says Cheney, publish “memos by Bush Administration lawyers justifying waterboarding and other practices to make the case that they aren’t torture.”

Go for the kill … This is the week to highlight every problem, every terrible provision, in the Democratic bills: from taxes and spending to government control and rationing to federal funding for abortion and government-required death-with-dignity counseling sessions for the elderly. Throw the kitchen sink at the legislation now on the table, drive a stake through its heart (I apologize for the mixed metaphors), and kill it.

The punchline is Kristol’s afterthought of a final paragraph, the suggestion that “we have plenty of time to work next year on sensible and targeted health reform in a bipartisan way.” Republicans had, of course, plenty of time for bipartisan health reform from 2001 to 2009, but they punted, because they don’t believe that the country needs fundamental reform that covers everyone. Everyone knows this, which is probably why the White House is attacking Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) for making it explicit.

On Fox News, Bill Kristol said that “the more he thought about it,” Palin’s decision looked like a “shrewd gamble.” On MSNBC, Pat Buchanan compared Palin to Richard Nixon, who made a political comeback in 1966 by campaigning for Republican candidates.

I’m checking the reaction from pro-Palin sections of the blogosphere, and the general sense is one of bewilderment. From the thread at Conservatives for Palin:

WHAT THE EFF????? Why is she resigning??

we need to pray.

I can see not running for a 2nd term, but resigning? That’s insane. She’s not even a 1-term governor then. And SarahPAC just sent out the email for more donations on Monday.

if you want to, please pray now- for her family, for her, her staff. we need to be behind her.

I AM GONNA THROW UP. WHAT THE F***

Scheunemann, confirming that his e-mail had been searched, accused Schmidt of “acting in a manner of Iranian secret police” in going to his account.

Fourteen paragraphs later — this is a war of inches! — comes this:

“So after that, they went nuclear with ‘diva’ the next day,” Scheunemann said, referring to the Palin-bashing done to CNN’s Dana Bash the day after the POLITICO story. “But did anybody search Mark or Nicolle Wallace’s e-mails for leaks to Dana Bash?”

I hope for Scheuemann’s sake that he’s actually complaining about a double standard, as the alternative explanation is too awful a crime against self-awareness, but in either case, I just don’t know how these guys lost the election.

I asked Examiner opinion page editor Mark Tapscott whether there’d be any cross-pollination between the two publications. “I am ecstatic about the move and the prospect of working with Bill Kristol and Fred Barnes,” he said.