Tonight's game between the Atlanta Braves and the Washington Nationals marks the official opening of the 2008 Major League Baseball season. It also marks the Grand Opening of the Nationals' brand-spanking new ballpark.

Tonights game, as broadcast on ESPN, was full of pomp and circumstance, introduing America to the shiny new facilities along the Anacostia River. ESPN's broadcast included an opening with George Will and the first pitch by President Bush. President Bush also joined John Miller and Joe Morgan in the booth for some friendly baseball banter.

The Nats fans certainly got what they wanted tonight as the Nationals scored 2 runs in the first inning on RBI's by 1B Nick Johnson and OF Austin Kearns to take an early lead over the Braves. Odalis Perez pitched an efficient 5 innings, giving up only a solo shot to Chipper Jones. Then, after the Braves tied the game in the top of the 9th off of a wild pitch by John Rauch, the face of the franchise, former UVA star and 3B Ryan Zimmerman, came up to bat with two outs in the bottom of the 9th.

Zimmerman sent the Nats fans into a frenzy and himself into the annals of Washington baseball history with a walk-off home run to deliver the Nationals their first win in their new home.

Bottom line: Congrats to the Nationals on their win and thank God baseball is back! The new park looked great on television and I look forward to visiting it sometime this spring or summer.

In honor of opening day, here's some youtube action for ya:

and my favorite baseball commercial:

This whole incident involving Sen. Larry Craig has once again shone the bright light of hypocrisy upon a GOP officeholder and once again spineless party members are scrambling for cover.

Unfortunately, too many individuals who rely upon the good faith of the American people for their jobs are willing to sacrifice moral principle for the sake of some political security. This is revealed by those who immediately blame the "system" or the "media" for allowing Democrats to get away with such shenanigans, but suddenly turning into Miss Manners when a Republican is accused of the same.

Is there a double standard at work here? Yes. But such complaints conveniently ignore the fact that the Foleys, Vitters and Craigs of the world have violated the public trust by failing to live by the standard they have endorsed.

Republicans lose credibility when we call out the other side for their moral failings yet look away or rationalize when one of our own is caught red-handed. We must decide whether or not we believe moral leadership to be an essential qualification for public service, and that standard should be applied equally.

I believe that moral leadership is essential and that it should remain so. Therefore, I also believe that when any elected official fails to meet this standard he should do the right thing and resign his position, regardless of the political consequences.

I was raised to believe that public service is an honor and a privilege, not a right. When a public servant stands convicted of immoral acts, he undermines public confidence in our nation's moral leadership. When such individuals get by with no more than a slap on the wrist, it then sends an implied message that such offenses are acceptable, thereby undermining the rule of law and the moral fabric of our communities.

Republicans should not fear holding themselves to a higher standard than their Democratic counterparts. Indeed, consistency on the issue is what gives the public confidence in our ability to manage the government. A lack of consistency, however, undermines public faith in our governance. In short, if we can't keep our own house clean, how can we ask the voting public to trust us in keeping the statehouse clean?

I think our house is overdue for some cleaning.

Mark Tapscott discusses the public's crisis of confidence in the political class, and wonders what it all means.

Reading this brings to mind an old Lamar(!) Alexander campaign slogan...

"Cut their pay and send them home."

Sure, it doesn't solve any of the problems Tapscott outlines. It might provide momentary relief and a few laughs, though, which are always good.

But it's a gross oversimplification to say that Congress, the President and the Court are out of step with what the people want. On the contrary, they are generally doing exactly what the people want...except that what the people want can be highly contradictory and even irrational (a point I discuss here).

It's almost like the old saying, "when you point a finger of blame, three fingers are pointing back at you."

First Things comes out with another great article, this time wondering aloud just what precisely happened to Christian Socialism?

I keep reading through Rabbi Michael Lerner’s Tikkun, Jim Wallis’ Sojourners, and the parallel writings of the far Catholic left, and I fail to pick up much hankering for the old essential characteristics of socialism: the abolition of private property, the government-managed economy, and at least the pretense of economic equality. Even the soft versions of Christian socialism that Reinhold Niebuhr once cared about have disappeared, like old books and faded drapery put out of sight, upstairs in the attic.

Still, the general flirtation with anti-capitalism seems not to have lost its attractions. It has always infected aristocrats and artists—all the better sorts of people. The ever-ready slogan “The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer” still has some power to stir the jaded indignation.

Even when the facts run to the contrary. As when one reads behind the statistics that are bandied about in newspapers and magazines. If you recall that income, as the federal government counts it, consists mainly of earnings from work, you will probably be able to think very quickly of quite a number of poor persons in your family or your immediate circle of acquaintances.

It's a great read. The shift away from pro-socialist attitudes to a new, amorphorous "anti-capitalism" is both blind and relatively safe, because you never have to assert an alternative to the free market, just assert that the only economic system ever to produce wealth across economic class is a failure.

Odd... but people really do buy it.