Article & Journal Resources

A subscription to the Telegraph's new educational site, GridClub, is the perfect way to satisfy your child's need to have fun while learn something useful along the way!

Bah! Humbug! It’s Christmas time again, the season of goodwill and of excessive spending on children who seem to have it all, and what’s more, take it all for granted. In my day, you hear yourself say, wishing you could eradicate these awful clichés, we were grateful for a few modest gifts and a tangerine at the end of the stocking.

So what do you buy the little darling who already has the IPhone, the XBox, the Nintendo Wii, a laptop, a desktop, several email accounts and an unlimited capacity to make you feel out of touch with the brave new world? What indeed! It’s no use buying records or CDs as they download music now to the IPod you bought last year. And do they need you to buy books if they are reading e-books online? Maybe clothes are a safe bet, but be sure to choose the right designer label.

Let’s face it, whatever you do think to buy, you know they will ask you what it cost and then announce that, if only you had asked them, they would have found it much cheaper on eBay. Sometimes you must wonder about turning back the clock and buying one of those old-fashioned but timeless gifts. You know, the mammoth jigsaw puzzle, the board game, the climbing frame, the mechano set, the artist pack, a recorder ….. time was when a Roy Rogers ten gallon hat for the boy and a pretend make-up set for the girl would have jolly well sufficed. And no confusion about who was getting what in those days – boys and make up? Never.

Well, the times are changing and it is surely a necessity for the year ahead that you parents (and grandparents, aunts and uncles) box clever, play to the children’s strengths and give them a real challenge. This Christmas, buy your beloved ‘digital native’ (a phrase used by techies to describe today’s child growing up fully at ease with the new technologies) a membership to the Telegraph’s new learning website, GridClub. It’s fun, engaging, challenging and designed to appeal to every child, and to the child in every adult!

It has won a BAFTA, among other awards, and is really aimed at the seven to twelve year old although there is much to attract the five and six year old. The content covers all areas of the National Curriculum and more, including healthy lifestyle, art, design, music, French and Spanish, as well as English, maths, science, history and geography. There are hundreds of activities. You can have a free trial, but take it on the record that hundreds of thousands of children enjoy GridClub already and learn at the same time.

Not only does GridClub give children a rich and rewarding diet, it also offers parents a tangible benefit for that monthly broadband connection charge. In the jargon we do all understand, membership of GridClub is a win-win. And if that weren’t enough, GridClub has some short, animated movie introductions to classic literature, including the seasonal A Christmas Carol, just to get you all into the festive spirit. Bah! Humbug!

The folks who set the rosary to music 15 years ago are back with another version, this one aimed at all Christians, not just Roman Catholics.

John Giaier (pronounced GUY-er) and Bill Gildenstern are ad jingle writers who released the "Rosary Tapes" in 1992. The labor-of-love project didn't earn much money, but it did get noticed by the music industry (it was nominated for a Grammy) and, more important to the Michigan-based duo, caught the attention of the Vatican. Pope John Paul sent them a personal greeting.

Now they have a followup CD, "Mysteries of Light," a "broad departure" that Giaier said is "for all Christians and for all ages. I very much wanted to build this CD for everyone. That's why we made it to be something very embraceable by all Christian traditions."

Although tied to the rosary, a traditional series of devotions to Jesus and the Virgin Mary represented by the set of prayer beads that accompany it, all of the material on the new CD is "pulled directly from the Bible" rather than the prayer, Giaier said. "We studied the Scripture, and, in the end, we discovered five components of a very beautiful, complete prayer -- not just for Catholics this time, for all Bible-believing Christians."

You can listen to samples from the new CD at www.rosarytapes.com.

Slammin' for a cause

American Indian poet Bobby Wilson is hosting an arts gathering/competition/little bit of everything to benefit homeless American Indian children.

Homeless in the Homeland will include, among other things, a slam poetry contest, live art (painters work while the audience watches and must complete their paintings by the end of the show) and music. There also will be free fry bread. The party begins at 7 p.m. today at Ancient Traders Gallery, 1113 E. Franklin Av., Minneapolis. Doors open at 6:30 p.m. A $5 donation is suggested.

A carol concert

The choirs at the Cathedral of St. Paul will present their annual Festival of Readings and Carols on Sunday. The event has become a popular tradition at the cathedral. Both the adult Cathedral Choir and St. Cecilia Choir for children and teens will perform. Their songs will be interspersed with readings and poetry. The concert begins at 3 p.m. Admission is free, but donations will be accepted. If you can't make it Sunday, the program will be repeated at 10:45 p.m. Christmas Eve as a prelude to midnight mass.

JEFF STRICKLER

The Richard & Judy producer Amanda Ross has just led a delegation of leading authors to 10 Downing Street to deliver a petition urging greater efforts to get children reading. We exclusively reveal the letter and the star-studded list of signees, and ask some of the authors involved why they have the joined the campaign

Dear Mr Brown,

As authors, we are deeply concerned at the low levels of childhood literacy across Britain. Official figures suggest that around one in five children leave their primary schools at the age of 11 unable to read to the minimum standard required of their age group.

In a complex world, reading has become increasingly important — if not crucial. As the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has pointed out: “People cannot be active or informed citizens unless they can read. Reading is a prerequisite for almost all cultural and social activities”. The International Reading Association puts it more bluntly: “Adolescents entering the adult world in the 21st century will read and write more than at any other time in human history. They will need advanced levels of literacy to perform their jobs, run their households, act as citizens, and conduct their personal lives.”

We, the undersigned, are therefore pleased to lend our support to Channel 4's “Lost for Words” campaign, which aims to get all our kids reading. The fact of the matter is that all children in mainstream schools are capable of learning to read — and so all children should be taught to read in school, for an hour every day, until they are able to read properly.

In fact, everyone who cares about the future of our children's education needs to ask: What more can we do? A year ago, for example, half the children at Monteagle Primary School in the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham were more than a year behind where they should have been in their reading levels. Twelve months on, after a concerted effort by staff, parents and pupils, the school has managed to cut this level of functional illiteracy by half and doubled the number of children who are reading to their age-appropriate levels or above.

The reality is that the issue of childhood literacy transcends party politics and ideological divisions — and unites all of us who care about the future of our children. You have said that “every child is special, every child precious and therefore no child should be left behind”. It's time to focus on the push to get all our kids reading to make this happen.

Yours faithfully,

Amanda Ross, Joanna Trollope, Tony Parsons, Sophie Kinsella, Kate Mosse, Jacqueline Wilson, Anthony Horowitz, Andrew Motion, Ian Rankin, Adriana Trigiani, Penny Vincenzi, Geri Halliwell, Jackie Collins, Pattie Boyd, Michael Dobbs, Mark Billingham, David Nicholls, Wilbur Smith, Nigel Havers, Howard Jacobson, Polly Williams, Martina Cole, Melvin Bragg, Benjamin Zephaniah, Jamie Oliver, Peter Ho Davies, Johnnie Walker, Mandasue Heller, Alex James, Carol Drinkwater, Richard Madeley, Judy Finnigan, Jeffrey Archer, Jay Rayner, Kate Morton, Eoin Colfer, Nick Hornby, Joseph O'Connor, Alexander McCall Smith, Lionel Shriver, Matthew Parris, Audrey Niffenegger, Andy McNab, Minette Walters, Lauren Child, Sophie Dahl, John Bird, Gyles Brandreth, Victoria Hislop, William Boyd, Rosamunde Pilcher, Peter Lovesey, Robin Pilcher, Brian Clegg, Gareth P. Jones, Mark Hayhurst, Michael Jecks, Tom Lloyd, Harriet Evans, Christopher Brookmyre, Anthony McGowan, Tracy Chevalier, Jon Haylett, Kate Furnivall, Geoff Tristram, Robyn Young, Colin Walsh, Christa Weil, Cari Crook, Sue Moorcroft, Justin Somper, Michael Marshall, Hilary Lloyd, Kim Anderson, Mil Millington, Trevor Montague, Valerie Dunmore, Anna Nilsen, Ronan O'Brien, Sally Emerson, Barney Hoskyns, Natasha Mostert, John Dickie, Katie Fforde, Lisa Appignanesi, Joy Chambers, Vivienne Menkes- Ivry, Dorothy Rowe, Janet Macleod Trotter, Kate Harrison, Barbara Erskine, Tessa Lorant Warburg, June Tate, Professor Bernard Knight, Catherine King, Howard Mills, Charles Allen, Barbara Ewing, David Kynaston, Jill Dawson, Anna Blundy , Tim Butcher, Carole Cadwallader, Marina Lewycka, Adeline Yen Mah, Jeremy Page, Linda Buckley Archer, Cathi Unsworth, Andrew Taylor, Stella Duffy, Karl Sabbagh, Justin Pollard, Frank Rodgers, Anthony Everitt, Brian Freeman, Linda Page, Anthony Adolph, Simon Spurrier, Christopher Matthew, Tony Mitton, Henry Hemming, Mary Hoffman, Liu Hong, Peter Viney, Karen Viney, Deborah Moggach, Isabel Wolff, James Mayhew, Gilda O'Neill, Jane Harris, Sam Baker, Dr Joe Maiolo, Tessa West, Steve Aylett, John Nicholson, Annie Dalton, Marika Cobbold, Amanda Ross, Martin Sixsmith, Justin Cartwright, Michael Frayn, Max Hastings, Sir Roy Strong, Jennifer Donnelly, Frank Cottrell Boyce, Simon Jenkins, Dame Ann Leslie, Adele Parks, Tom Holland, Louise Doughty, Erica Wagner, Meg Rosoff, Cathy Cassidy, Nikki Gemmell, Alan Garner, Selina Hastings, Dorothy Davids, Iain Aitch, Lindsay Ashford, Julia Jarman, Malcolm Gaskill, Lisa Jewell, Carrie Bright, Danny King, Anne Sebba, Katherine Roberts, Maggie Kingsley, Robert Ryan, Claire Rayner, David Rayner, David Bennett, Katie Flynn, Donna Baker, Jill Mansell, Tamara McKinley, Margaret Kaine, Simon Fowler, Paul Burston, Anne Bennett, Karen Campbell, David Cesarani, Bernadette Strachan, Alice Jolly, Pauline Rowson, Nick Wotherspoon, Will Randall, Nicholas Coleridge, Dylan Jones, Polly Samson, Sarah Rayne, Alison Kervin, Margaret Macmillan, Margaret Ryan, Tamar Hodes, Peter Bodle, Jan Jones, Michael Foreman, Marina Peerman, Sarah Morgan, Louise Dale, Sarah Passingham, Michelle Styles, Rachel Seiffert, F.G. Cottam, Suzi Quentin, Wilfred Hopkins, Andrew Robson, Jane Wenham-Jones, Chelsea Cain, David Hewson, Meredith Hooper, David Baldacci, Warren Lakin, Isla Dewar, Ellis Delmonte, Claire Seeber, Jackie Kay M.B.E., Dan Fesperman, Oliver James, Penny Grubb, Vivian French, Kate Long, Rosie Goodwin, Andy Stanton, Mark Walden, Albert Jackson, Angela Woolfe, Penny Halsall, James Chambers, Alan Bissett, Giles MacDonogh, Joolz Denby, Philip Waddell, Rose Wilkins, Gillian Shields, Lynn Brittney, Axel Scheffler, Georgia Byng, Caroline Jayne Church, Gwyneth Lewis, Alice Hogge, Christina Lamb, Leanda de Lisle, Lucy Moore, Sonia Overall, Michael Burleigh, Jenni Mills, Claudia Hammond, Alex Wheatle, Nicola Slater, David Melling, David Wood OBE, Kate Leake, Julia Bell, Jonathan Emmett, Pat Borthwick, Kate Pankhurst, Frances Nagle, Lori Williams, Christopher Foyle, Mark Chisnell, Jenny Valentine, Justin Richards, David Thorpe, Jean Ure, Andrew Cope, Matthew Skelton, Ian Whybrow, Paul Blezzard, Graham Swift, Barbara Nadel, Julian Barnes, Karin Slaughter, Robert Harris, DBC Pierre, Shere Hite, Joanne Harris, Santa Montefiore, Tom Parker Bowles, David Reynolds, Jane Fearnley-Whittingstall, Tony Benn, Jon Snow, Justine Picardie, Bel Mooney, Ken McClure, Chris Ryan, Toby Litt, Francis Wheen, Irma Kurtz, Paige Toon, Andrew O'Hagan, Sarah Salway, Ann Pilling, Judy Astley, David Crane, Paul Dowswell, Kate Williams, Richard Hamilton, Margaret Pinder, Carol Birch, Juliet Nicolson, Kirsty Scott, Joan Lingard, Julia Hollander, Patrick Gale, Lexy Higgins, Martin Davies, Tommy Donbavand, Rosie Harris, Paul Sculthorpe, Mo Hayder, Gary Beard, Aidan Potts, Hilary Green, Edward de Bono, Julian Caldecott, Min Jin Lee, Zoe Sharp, Carol Topalski, Jane Fallon, Mary Lawson, Emily Gravett, Christopher Foyle, Niall Edworthy, Paul Merrett, Eve Ebbotson, Timothy Hopgood, Maggie Bateson, Fiona Loakes, Diana Norman, Jonathan Pugh, Paul Du Noyer, Rhiannon Batten, Stephen Clarke, Adam Zamoyski, Charlotte Mosley, Lucy Lum, Diane Blood, Diana Wynne Jones, Paul Stewart, Chris Riddell, Adam Ockelford, Mairi Hedderwick, Janey Jones, Nick Sharratt, Elizabeth Laird, Tiphanie Beehe, Chris Wilson, Kevin Cahill, Jinny Johnson, Belinda Weber, Cathy Hopkins, Richard Walker, Penelope Hicks, James Riordan, Richard Platt, Steve Augarde, Stephen Savage, Edmund Gregory, Ruth Rogers, Maureen Carter, Timothy Brittain-Catlin, David Tazzyman, Sally Grindley, Jeremy Strong, Angie Sage, Sophie McKenzie, Kevin Brooks, Lauren St. John, Mark Baxter , Josie Henley-Einion, Colin Berry, Kathryn Ross, Belinda Seaward, Adele Geras, Sarah Duncan, Judith Lennox, Juliet Gardiner, Sacha Langton-Gilks, Derick Allsop, Giles Andreae, Michael Norton, Professor Rene Weis, Anne Somerset, Will Hutton, Charlotte Mendelson, Christopher Walking, Norman Lebrecht, Shari Low, Jo Tatchell, Rowan Coleman, Blake Morrison, Peter Mortimer, Naomi Alderman, Beth Webb, Jim Bowen, Jo Bannister, Marian Keyes, Duncan Bannatyne, Bill Granger, Nicola Horlick, James Martin, Catherine Wade, Stephen Wade, Tim Ecott, Sophie Hannah, Graeme Fife, Rupert Thomson, Robin Jarvis, Catherine MacPhail, Justin Marozzi, Tony Walsh, JD Stokes, Anne L Sharp, Rose Gray, Sam Jordison, Ruth Huddlestone, Jon Lambert, Amanda J Wood, Ruth Martin, Libby Hamilton, Stella Gurney, Emily Hawkins, Andrew Hosken, Diana Janney, Rebecca L Royle, Paul Brown, Stuart Wheatman, Leo Hollis, Ben Illis, Ben Yarde Buller, Graeme McLagan, Tessa Codrington, Amanda Lees, Roger Stutter, Emma Brockes, Peter Lantos, Mary Ann Tirone Smith, Janet Neel, Judith Cutler, Priscilla Masters, Paul Gilbert, Michael Arditti, Pete Tanton, Cristina Odone, Roma Tearne, Emma Tennant, Beryl Kingston, Martin Baker, Christopher West, Jonathan Fryer, Christopher Hope, Alexandra Gray, Bill Borrows, Veena S Halai, Alastair Sawday, Stephen Shieber, Razwan Ul-Haq, Simon Blackburn, Lesley Chamberlain, Martyn Amos, Helen Macdonald, Jan Scott, Stephen Richards, Justine Hardy, Anand Menon, Michael Horovitz, Alison Joseph, Karolyn Shindler, Susan Barrett, Jamila Gavin, Scott Frost, Patrick Quinlan, Daniel Hahn, Edward Wilson, Trudie Chalder, Deryn Lake, Frederic Lindsay, Mike Ripley, Rawi Hage, Peter James, Nick Taussig, Jacqueline Pye, Philip Mansel, Mike Daunt, Melinda Hammond, J.O'Donoghue, Aly Monroe, Gillian Greenwood, Brigid Keenan, Tony Booth, Ramsay Wood, Catrine Clay, Flora Fraser, Lucy McCarraher, Catherine Forde, Simon Majumdar, Cassandra Clark, David Nokes, Barney Bardsley, Stacie Lewis, Diran Adebayo, Michael Bloch, Julie Highmore, Bernard O'Mahoney, Adam Ardrey, Susan Elkin, Alex Von Tunzelmann, Miranda Seymour, Jonny Glynn, Laura Barber, Richard Dowden, Anne Marsella, Martyn Waites, Milly Johnson, Rick Glanvill, Linda Newbery, Ian Gittins, Edna Fernandes, Alan Palmer, Sally Spedding, Susan Hill, Gill Hicks, Lorna Martin, Bernie Hare, Allison Pearson, David Nobbs, Kirsty Gunn, A.C Grayling, Christian Wolmar, Karen Armstrong, Barry Miles, Andrew Mawson, Richard Shelton, Amanda Craig, Joan Bakewell, Josephine Hart, Stephen Venables, Jacky Wilson, Tony Hawks, Frederic Raphael, Celia Walden, Charlie Campbell, Everett Coles, Elspeth Wills,

by Peter Cohen

I’m in Los Angeles this week for the first E for All Expo, which kicks off Thursday and runs through the weekend. This is expo is specifically for video game enthusiasts—gamers of all stripes, whether they’re casual gamers or the hardest of the hardcore.

This is a very different show than E3 Expos, which are geared toward the industry itself—game publishers and developers talking with the press, with buyers and with others who influence what gamers buy. This event is for the people—for gamers themselves. And the events that are lined up this week demonstrate that.

E for All Expo is emphasizing gamer participation in the events happening in and around the convention. There are competitions—everything from a cosplay event (that’s when you dress up like your favorite game characters) to a “Video Games Live” concert where a full symphony orchestra and choir will recreate some of the best-known music from video games, complete with a light show and performers. Think Cirque du Soleil for gamers. I know, it might sound a bit nerdy, but it’s really cool. Another thing I’m looking forward to is the “Into the Pixel” exhibit, which shows off artwork created by the artists who make games, some of whom have incredible talent.

There are more than 70 exhibitors at the event this year. Frankly, that’s a far cry from E3 Expos of old, where every corner of the Los Angeles Convention Center was crammed with game companies struggling to get the word out about themselves and their products. But it’s still a good showing for a convention in its first year, and a solid first step; hopefully it’s something for the show to build on.

Companies that are showing this year include many faces that will be familiar either directly or indirectly to Mac users. Electronic Arts (EA), for example, is showing off new stuff, along with Activision, 2K Games, game controller maker CH Products, Konami, Intel, Nintendo, THQ, Treychair and many others.

Notable absentees include Sony and Microsoft. It’s a shame that two of the biggest names in consoles right now couldn’t commit to the show. Hopefully they’ll fix that next year.

There’s an absence of Mac-specific game companies at the show, but Mac gamers can still take heart, because games coming to the Mac will be represented. Activision’s making a big push with Guitar Hero III, for example, which should hit Mac store shelves in time for Christmas, thanks to the efforts of Aspyr Media. Some of the peripheral makers are platform-agnostic, too—like CH Products, for example, and Wolfking, makers of really unusual and cool game keyboards that I’ll be reviewing in the coming weeks.

There’s also plenty of stuff that’s of general interest to gamers of all stripes, Mac, PC and console alike. The Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) will be on hand—that’s a non-profit organization that represents gamers in matters of legislation and other high-profile issues. There are a few colleges on hand that offer training specifically for people who want to become game designers and producers. That’s a burgeoning trend that’s sure to catch fire as time goes on.

I’ll have more to report as the week goes on—I hope you’ll stick with us for all the details.

An earlier version of this blog post mentioned Civilzation: Revolution. Unfortunately, that will be a console-only game—I regret the error.
Recommend this story?

[ E for All creator IDG World Expo and Macworld publisher Mac Publishing are both owned by International Data Group (IDG). ]

Should performance-enhancing drugs be legalized for professional athletes? (12 comments)

MLB and Cooperstown can use these words and still put Barry Bonds and Roger Clemons in the Hall of Fame. Their 7 awards each calling them the Best Player and Pitcher shows the longevity of their accomplishments.

Use roids too long the bodies break down like what happened to Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa using his corked bat. Their talent without enhancement quickly dropped.

These words;

During time period of certain players, performance enhancing drugs were used on a wide scale. Their records of achievement can be considered accordingly.

That’s it!

One year MVP’s and they never achieved it again, those might be suspect.

There is no disgrace by players, MLB demanded the production! To get the big contracts, those great things had to be achieved. Players are victimized and they do take every advantage as well. Players take advantage being well know and appreciated.

A-Rod is being paid $30 Million more to perform on a Historical Level. He’s supposed to pass Barry Bonds Home Run Record. If Bonds did it with some pharmaceutical help, A-Rod isn’t going to achieve it naturally!

Look at the pay, Yankees are demanding in his performance! A-Rod in some respects is being victimized. His expensive lifestyle makes up for it.

A-Rod won’t achieve the amount of steals equal to his Home Runs like Bond’s.

Bonds earned his Hall of Fame getting historical amounts of walks!

By Jessica Hopper

It seemed like the end of the world in 2004. After a decade as Chicago's favorite all-ages music venue, the Fireside Bowl on Fullerton Avenue was returning to a bowling alley.

But in 2007, Chicago's all-ages scene thrives, being shaped by hands new and old. Venues have figured out that an all-ages policy can make more money, and Brian Peterson, the scene stalwart who brought the Fireside to life, now has a host of other venues that carry the all-ages flag. The Fireside's unique booking policy of throwing bands together regardless of genre -- often just who happened to be coming through town that night -- made it the hub of many scenes. The shuttering of the venue decentralized the Chicago all-ages world, and also opened the playing field. Now, three years later, the benefits are evident -- more venues offer all-ages shows than ever before.

At a recent all-ages show at Subterranean, underage attendees apparently outnumbered the over-21 crowd. The kids are easy to spot: The backs of their hands are swiped with big black X's upon entry. The opening act, Paulson, was an emo-pop band with a young fan base that was dancing from the band's first chord.

BY JAMES TARANTO

The debate over the treatment of terrorist detainees is a highly emotional one, with liberal critics of the Bush administration expressing horror and outrage at the idea that terrorists might have been subjected to aggressive interrogation, which they insist meets the legal definition of "torture." What is behind this emotion? We would like to shoot down one possible explanation: that liberals are more compassionate than conservatives, more sensitive to human suffering.

To make this point, we turn to People v. Caudillo, a case decided in 1978 by the California Supreme Court. It is similar to the current torture debate in that it involved the application of an inexact legal standard to a situation in which a person was treated harshly by another. At the time, the court consisted of two justices appointed by a Republican, Gov. Ronald Reagan, and five appointed by Reagan's Democratic predecessor, Pat Brown, and successor, Jerry Brown. It was the Republicans who sympathized with the victim, while the Democrats took a detached, legalistic approach.

On May 2, 1975, Daniel Caudillo accosted a woman, identified in the decision only as Maria, in an elevator of her apartment complex in Montebello, Calif. Caudillo covered Maria's mouth with his hand and held a carving knife to her throat. She tried to remove the knife, cutting two of her fingers in the process; later he cut her in the back of the neck.

Caudillo demanded to know if Maria recognized him. She did, but claimed she did not. He forced her out of the elevator and into a windowless storage room, where he removed her glasses, ordered her to raise her dress, and fondled her rear end. Eventually he forced her to admit him into her apartment. In explicit and brutal detail, the court describes what happened next:

She was pushed inside and blindfolded. After taking her to the bedrooms, defendant led her to the living room, where Maria heard him unzip his pants. He ordered her to undress. Defendant allowed Maria to keep on her panties, pantyhose and shoes; he directed her to "[t]urn around slowly." Then defendant, seated on the living room sofa, pulled Maria toward him, pushed her to her knees and inserted his penis in Maria's mouth. Maria gagged; she felt like vomiting. Then he ordered her to completely undress.

Defendant compelled Maria to stand, and inserted his fingers in her vagina. He asked her if she could get pregnant; she said she did not think so. Defendant then raped the victim.

Defendant asked Maria if she had a boyfriend. He said: "You better not lie to me. I know everything about you. I know what time you leave for work and I know what time you get home. I have seen you from afar and I have admired you for a long time." Maria stated that she had a boyfriend. Defendant wanted to know if Maria and her boyfriend engaged in sexual activity; Maria did not answer.

Defendant then inserted his penis in Maria's rectum. Maria pulled away, telling defendant she was going to be sick. Maria had diarrhea, and evacuated her bowels twice. Defendant kept insisting that Maria satisfy him.

Defendant again forced Maria to orally copulate him; she gagged and spit. He returned to the theme of whether or not she had recognized him; she continued to tell him she had not.

Defendant raped Maria for the second time, but could not ejaculate. He again forced her to orally copulate him, and ejaculated in Maria's mouth; Maria gagged, spit and vomited. Still not content, defendant again inserted his penis in Maria's mouth, wiping away his victim's vomit.

Finally, defendant pushed Maria to the center of [her roommate] Catherine's bed; Maria was still blindfolded, although loosely. He left the bedroom, returning several times to bring Maria her clothes, purse and wallet. He threw the wallet at her, and ordered her to sit up. Through the blindfold, she examined the wallet; money was missing. Defendant demanded more money, and Maria found more in the wallet, which she gave him. Defendant took it, saying "I'll owe it to you." He told her not to report his sexual attack upon her to anyone. "If you do report it to anyone it will be embarrassing for you only," said defendant. He threatened to kill her if she told anyone. Thereupon defendant departed, taking $60 of Maria's money with him.

One of the issues in the case was whether Caudillo had inflicted "great bodily injury" upon his victim. The two Republican justices, Frank Richardson and William Clark, agreed that he had. Richardson wrote for the two:

The victim was pushed, shoved, cut twice by a knife, raped, sodomized and abused to the point of vomiting, diarrhea and hysteria. Her neck wounds were, respectively, three inches and one and one-half inches long. Under no reasonable view of the evidence could the victim's injuries in this case be deemed either "trivial or insignificant."

By contrast, the notorious ultraliberal Chief Justice Rose Bird--who would be ousted by the voters eight years later for her refusal to uphold death sentences--argued that compassion for Maria had no place in applying this legal standard, and was so eager to make the point that she wrote a separate concurring opinion:

The offenses committed by appellant on the victim in this case were "outrageous, shocking and despicable," as the majority state. . . . However, personal repugnance toward these crimes cannot be a legitimate basis for rewriting the statute as it was adopted by the Legislature. It is precisely because emotions are so easily called into play in such situations that extra precaution must be taken so that this court follows the legislative intent and not our own predelictions [sic] or beliefs.

Our purpose here is not to reargue the legal merits of a nearly 30-year-old case, which in any event has been undone by subsequent legislation and court decisions. It is, rather, to point out that the liberal heart does not bleed indiscriminately, and that often liberal sympathy seems to flow in inverse proportion to that which is deserved.

By Sean Lengell

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, lauded the Senate's compromise on the energy bill, which passed 86-8.

Senate Democrats yesterday bowed to Republicans and stripped a proposed tax increase for oil companies from a broad energy bill, clearing the way for passage of the measure that includes the first increase in vehicle gas-mileage standards in 32 years.

The bill, designed to make the nation less dependent on fossil fuels and which calls for greater use of renewable energy sources, passed 86-8 and now heads back to the House for final approval.

"Compromise can be frustrating, it can be exasperating, and it can be maddening," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat. "But at the end of the day, compromise can lead to progress — and that is exactly what we have today."

Added Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican: "This is a good accomplishment — achieved, as everything good in the Senate always is, by cooperation between the parties."

The White House, which had threatened to veto earlier versions of the bill, is not expected to oppose the latest version that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, signed off on yesterday.

The compromise was hard fought, as Senate Republicans earlier in the day defeated a similar bill that included a $21.8 billion tax package with incentives for producers and users of renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar and biofuels. The incentives were to be offset by repealing $13.5 billion in tax breaks for five large oil companies, a move that Republicans opposed because they said it would result in higher gasoline and heating-oil prices for consumers.

The measure was rejected 59-40 after Democrats failed to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster. Sen. Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana was the lone Democrat to break party ranks.

Mr. McConnell had criticized Democrats for pushing a "massive tax increase" that he said "they knew would never be signed into law."

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005; Page A17

Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, called an urgent meeting last week with leaders of civil rights, civil liberties, environmental and women's groups. His message: The Senate faces a nuclear winter that could engulf them.

What emerged at that meeting was an order of battle that could mark American politics for years. Reid told the participants that he had learned from friendly Republican senators that Bill Frist, the majority leader, intended to push forward with what has come to be known as the "nuclear option," a fiddling with Senate rules that would block filibusters of judicial nominees.

And Reid warned the groups that the Republican effort to curb the rights of the Senate minority would not stop with judges. If Frist won on judges, Reid predicted, Republicans would be emboldened to roll other legislation through on narrow majority votes.

The battle over the filibuster seems like an insider's game. In fact it is a historic fight over the structure of U.S. government that could affect almost every issue in the public realm.

The details are clear enough: Democrats filibustered 10 of President Bush's first-term judicial nominees while confirming 204 others.

Under current filibuster rules, it takes 60 votes to shut off Senate debate on most subjects. That means that if the Senate's 44 Democrats stay united, they can block Bush's appointees. Republicans say it should not take 60 votes to confirm a judge.

Under the nuclear option, Republicans would use a simple majority to amend Senate Rule 22, the filibuster provision, even though the rule itself explicitly requires a two-thirds vote for any filibuster changes. They would do this by having Vice President Cheney, in his role as president of the Senate, uphold a "point of order" that would have the effect of ending filibusters on judges. And it takes only a majority to uphold a point of order.

If this sounds convoluted, that's because it is a blatant effort to twist the rules and -- this ought to bother conservatives -- ignore the traditions of the Senate.

Reid's argument to the liberal groups is important because it raises the stakes. (Reid wouldn't confirm the substance of the private meeting, though he did not dispute the account offered by other participants.) On the narrow issue of judicial nominations, Republicans might muster a bare majority to overturn the filibuster. But there is genuine worry across the usual political divides that the precedent set on this one issue would be disastrous for minority rights on all others.

Conservatives say that liberals are a strange bunch to be defending the filibuster -- and the conservatives have a point. Liberals fought the filibuster when it was used by the Senate's Southern segregationist minority to stall civil rights bills. I'll acknowledge that when Republicans used the filibuster to obstruct health care reform and other pieces of progressive legislation in the first years of President Bill Clinton's term, I was tempted to support changes in the filibuster rules.

But conservatives who support the nuclear option are utterly unwilling to acknowledge their own convenient change of heart. They defended the filibuster as long as they were in the minority, but would cast it aside now that they have grabbed the presidency and narrow majorities in both houses. The liberals, moreover, never tried to twist the rules to get rid of the filibuster, as the conservatives are doing.

And if the principle at stake is "majority rule," consider that the Senate is, by its very nature, an affront to majoritarian principles. The 52 senators from the nation's smallest states could command a Senate majority even though they represent only 18 percent of the American population.

According to the Census Bureau's July 2004 population estimates, the 44 Democratic senators represent 148,026,027 people; the 55 Republican senators 144,765,157. Vermont's Jim Jeffords, an independent who usually votes with the Democrats, represents 310,697. (In these calculations, I evenly divided the population of states with split Senate delegations.) What does majority rule really mean in this context? If the Republicans pushing against the filibuster love majority rule so much, they should propose getting rid of the Senate altogether. But doing so would mean acknowledging what's really going on here: regime change disguised as a narrow rules fight. We could choose to institute a British-style parliamentary system in which majorities get almost everything they want. But advocates of such a radical departure should be honest enough to propose amending the Constitution first.

postchat@aol.com

By E. J. Dionne

WASHINGTON -- Congressional Democrats need a Plan B.

Republicans chortle as they block Democratic initiatives -- and accuse the majority of being unable to govern. Rank-and-filers are furious their leaders can't end the Iraq War. President Bush sits back and vetoes at will.

Worse, Democrats are starting to blame each other, with those in the House wondering why their Senate colleagues don't force Republicans to engage in grueling, old-fashioned filibusters. Instead, the GOP kills bills by coming up with just 41 votes. Senators defend themselves by saying that their House colleagues don't understand how the august "upper" chamber works these days.

If Bush's strategy is to drag Congress down to his low level of public esteem, he is succeeding brilliantly. A Washington Post/ABC News poll released earlier this week found that only 33 percent of Americans approved of Bush's handling of his job -- and just 32 percent felt positively about Congress' performance. The only comfort for Democrats: The public dislikes Republicans in Congress (32 percent approval) even more than it dislikes congressional Democrats (40 percent approval).

The Democrats' core problem is that they have been unable to place blame for gridlock where it largely belongs, on the Republican minority and the president.

In an ideal world, Democrats would pass a lot of legislation that Bush would either have to sign or veto. The president would have to take responsibility for his choices. The House has passed many bills, but the Republican minority has enormous power in the Senate to keep the legislation from ever getting to the president's desk. This creates the impression that action is being stalled through some vague and nefarious congressional "process."

Not only can a minority block action in the Senate, but the Democrats' nominal one-vote majority is frequently not a majority at all. A few maverick Democrats often defect, and the party runs short-handed when Sens. Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd and Barack Obama are off running for president.

And Bush is learning that even when bills reach his desk, he can veto them with near impunity. On Wednesday, Bush issued his second veto of a bill to extend coverage under the State Children's Health Insurance Program to 10 million kids. Democrats have the high ground on the issue and more than two-thirds support in the Senate, but the bill lacks a veto-proof House majority.

After Bush vetoed the first version of the SCHIP bill, Democrats changed it slightly to make it more attractive to Republicans. And the new version passed both houses too. When Bush vetoed the SCHIP measure again, almost nobody paid attention. The Washington Post ran a three-paragraph story on the corner of page A18; The New York Times ran a longer story -- on page A29.

Democrats can't even get credit for doing the right thing. If Congress and Bush don't act, the alternative minimum tax -- originally designed to affect only Americans with very high incomes -- will raise taxes on about 20 million middle- and upper-middle-class people for whom it was never intended.

Democrats want to protect those taxpayers, but also keep their pay-as-you-go promise to offset new spending or tax cuts with tax increases or program cuts elsewhere. They would finance AMT relief with $50 billion in new taxes on the very wealthiest Americans or corporations. The Republicans say no, just pass the AMT fix.

Here's a guarantee: If the Democrats fail to pass AMT relief, they will be blamed for raising taxes on the middle class. If they pass it without the tax increase, deficit hawks will accuse them of selling out.

What's the alternative to the internecine Democratic finger-pointing of the sort that made the front page of Thursday's Washington Post? The party's congressional leaders need to do whatever they must to put this year behind them. Then they need to stop whining. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid should put aside any ill feelings and use the Christmas break to come up with a joint program for 2008.

They could start with the best ideas from their presidential candidates in areas such as health care, education, cures for the ailing economy and poverty-reduction. Agree to bring the same bills to a vote in both houses. Try one more time to change the direction of Iraq policy. If Bush and the Republicans block their efforts, bring all these issues into the campaign. Let the voters break the gridlock.

If Democrats don't make the 2008 election about the Do-Nothing Republicans, the GOP has its own ideas about whom to hold responsible for Washington's paralysis. And if House and Senate Democrats waste their time attacking each other, they will deserve any blame they get next fall.