The epitome of the Establishment right wing -- Americans for Tax Reform -- is not, NOT, going to claim any sort of propoganda rights over the Beatles. No, I refuse.

If Mr. Norquist ever says anything more about the Beatles, other how they were communist-loving hippies, I will go to DC and lecture him myself on the cultural revolution!

So what do you think the over-under is on the number of years before the "free, fair and representative" democratic institutions we brought to Iraq are having the government-backed candidates winning 95% or more of the vote?

I say 8 years. We would have just replaced a repressive secular Sunni regime, isolated and allied with no one, with a repressive religious Shiite regime, allied with Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas.

That will also probably be the point when opposition candidates stop even appearing on the ballot and the "elections" will consist of dictators' favorite method of voting: "Should X be the President? Yes or No."

So what do you think the over-under is on the number of years before the "free, fair and representative" democratic institutions we brought to Iraq are having the government-backed candidates winning 95% or more of the vote?

I say 8 years. We would have just replaced a repressive secular Sunni regime, isolated and allied with no one, with a repressive religious Shiite regime, allied with Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas.

That will also probably be the point when opposition candidates stop even appearing on the ballot and the "elections" will consist of dictators' favorite method of voting: "Should X be the President? Yes or No."

That phrase along with "I do not recall," etc., are among the biggest cop-outs ever conceived in the English language.

It doesn't exactly mean "I do not remember," though they are very close; it's more like "that may or may not have happened and I do know with absolute certainty one way or another, but I'm just choosing to not bring it up to completely conscious level of awareness right now for whatever reason." You could have talked about the topic three hours ago and choose not to be aware of it now.

"I do not remember" implies that you are actually unsure and you can rightfully be called a liar for claiming not to remember a topic you talked about three hours ago.

And, yes, there is NO WAY anybody can EVER not be 100% sure on whether s/he ever committed sodomy, especially in the broad way the law in Virginia is written.

Cop. Out. Pure and simple.

These higher fines the prosecutors will supposedly go after will result in only one thing: the drug companies charging even more for their next wonder drug which'll also end up being poisonous so that they can build up the cash reserves to pay the inevitable fine.

Anybody who thinks these fines will ever actually hurt the companies without meaningful price controls is naïve but the feds would rather make noises about going after the 'bad apple' drug companies (I.e. All of them) than -- God forbid -- interfering in the holiest of holies, the free market.

And, as someone already pointed out, Obama gave away the store to these companies because he was afraid of a fight with them.

Nothing to see here folks: just the new bosses being the same as the old ones...

The things that Buchanan said re Hitler being peace-loving MAY have made sense if it weren't for one niggling fact Buchanan completely papers over: Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust; the Holocaust that specifically targeted and killed 6 million Jews along with millions of other non-"Aryan" minorities and political prisoners; the Holocaust that would have wiped out the Slavic population of Eastern Europe if Hitler had the resources. Yes, THAT Holocaust.

Judged through the lens of THAT Holocaust, all of Hitler's supposed peace overtures and other moves Buchanan pointed out can only be viewed as one thing: strategic moves to preserve the Third Reich and continue his ultra-racist murderous plans in peace, not any heartfelt desire to stop the violence.

I have this idealistic hope that someday one of these establishment journalists will publish a true "tell all" article or book about all of these little secrets they know about, who their sources were for some of their more incendiary accusations, and how DC really works.

I really do. But that involves the journalist losing his precious access (as well as, probably, his kids' access ::cough:: the Kristols ::cough::) to the powers that be. And no journalist would do that.

Also, they live is such a bubble that they truly believe that publishing their anonymous-ridden articles is actually a service to journalism and democracy. In reality, secrecy democracy; we don't know who is saying these things or, more relevantly, why, which are immensely important in framing an informed debate in a democracy.

On a side but related note, I do believe the late Bob Novak got entirely too much grief for his involvement in the Plame scandal. He was given the information; it was his absolute constitutional right to use it or not to use it. The government's privilege of secrecy is not anywhere in the Constitution; if the government abuses it, the government loses it.