An article in the travel section of today's New York Times reports on the prospect that U.S.-based cruise ships will be able to dock in Cuba. The article exhibits the typical Times one-sidedness, quoting several persons who favor increased American tourism in Cuba and not a single person who opposes it. Never mind that, though: the real whopper is the following Times sentence: "But the maximum sentence -- life without parole -- handed down to the leader of a Cuban spy ring last month in federal court in Miami after he and four others were convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage appears to be a sign that the Bush administration is not prepared to ease its policies against Cuba."
Well, in the American system, the sentences are set by judges, and the judicial branch of government is distinct and well insulated from the policies of the Bush administration. A Bush administration prosecutor might ask for a stiff sentence, but the sentence itself is up to the judge. In the case the Times refers to, the judge was Joan A. Lenard of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. She was appointed to the bench in December of 1995 by President Clinton. So it's just bizarre to interpret a sentence that she handed down as "a sign that the Bush administration" is prepared to do or not to do anything.