Of course the GOP's political enemies are going to be labeled as terrorists. The whole point is to divide our country further. Demonize terrorists, label people with liberal political opinions as terrorists, and exploit the results.

Never mind that a great many ACTUAL terrorist acts in America were committed by right-wingers! The Oklahoma City bombing, the bombing of the Atlanta Olympics, the murders of doctors who perform abortions, shootings and bombings at abortion clinics, bombings of gay nightclubs, and various other acts of terrorism were committed by 100% Jesus-fearing right-wing patriots. But since their own people are the ones who are committing acts of terror, the Bushistas are essentially giving them a free pass.

The right wing certainly doesn't have a lock on domestic terror. Animal rights and environmental extremists have fire-bombed and vandalized environmentally sensitive sites and animal experimentation labs. And the Unabomber's Luddite politics are left-ish, too, although he was a lone operator.

Terrorism is the act of the weak against the strong. All of the terrorists that I've mentioned here were passionate supporters of an ideal who felt marginalized and persecuted by mainstream society. They felt powerless to change things and their extreme beliefs led them to justify the use of violence as a means to achieve their goals, whether it be saving animals or unborn babies. Whether they were left wing or right wing is less important than their willingness to believe that the ends justifies the means.

I have no problem with law enforcement using its resources to identify dangerous and violent groups and prevent them from committing crimes of terrorism. But it should be done even-handedly as a matter of public safety, not a means of eliminating domestic opposition.

The story of how these clowns botched everything they touched would be funny if thousands of people hadn't died because of their incompetance.

Most people feel a strong impulse to help friends and family who are sick. And a lot of us think that we can "fix" things -- that if the sufferer tries just one more thing, the situation will miraculously become better.

But the LW doesn't need to be fixed -- she's managing that herself. She needs understanding and empathy and space. And that's harder to find than the latest miracle herb cure. When something can't be fixed, we don't always know what to do. So we do the wrong thing and end up bugging the crap out of the person we're trying to help.

If your friends want to do something to help you, let them -- but under your terms. If you are feeling too sick to run to the grocery store, for instance, you could ask the friend who's pushing the milk thistle cure to go there for you. If you need some rest but the floor needs swept, ask the friend who urges you to go down fighting if he'd like to vacuum it for you. And tell them that you no longer want to discuss your illness, that you need to be distracted. You need to set boundaries and direct your friends' concern into appropriate channels.

Good luck!

Personal responsibility is for poor people and women, not Republican congressmen!

He'd better start writing his resignation letter!

"Heckuva job" indeed!

Foie gras is an easy target because it's expensive and few people eat it. The campaign against it gets its milage from the quintessentially American distrust of elites and foreigners (particularly the French).

If the people who run PETA really had balls, though, they'd put their resources into going after CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations). The suffering of animals in factory farms is many orders of magnitude greater in scope than that of the relatively few geese and ducks being raised for foie gras. In the grand scheme of things, cleaning up the CAFOs would be far better for the overall welfare of animals than going after a few foie gras producers.

But taking on the agribusiness establishment is an expensive and dicey proposition. It's a lot easier to score cheap publicity and little victories against small-time farmers and chefs.

It's a pity because many Americans are uncomfortable with how meat is mass-produced. PETA could tap into this discomfort if it appealed to our natural sympathy for animals instead of scolding us. But they would have to tone down some of their more extreme positions to appeal to the masses and I doubt that they could bring themselves to do it.