...then apologizes for it, everything will be okay?

Because, like, we've sat through so many GOP lies and dissemblings, it's okay to be, um, impolite, right?

Can't somebody at least cane these little sons of bitches on the floor of the House?

Socialized roads....socialized education....socialized criminal protection.....socialized armies....socialized air control....

It's all just Marxism, man, just socialism in its most blatant form.

I'll believe the Right when they give up everything that's socialized voluntarily.

They couldn't even use the sidewalks. And their meat? Would have to be bought off the black market.

...a "myth"!

It's a lie, a flat-out, fucking lie, and the longer the media calls it a "myth" (makes it sound like the ancient Greeks, or the Arthurian legends, doesn't it?) the longer these people will be able to lie without being called on it.

Have some balls. It's a lie.

"The goal of the speech and the lesson plans is to challenge students to work hard in school, to not drop out and to meet short-term goals like behaving in class, doing their homework and goals that parents and teachers alike can agree are noble,” a White House spokesman tells ABC News, “This isn’t a policy speech. This is a speech designed to encourage kids to stay in school.”

Education Secretary Arne Duncan penned a preview of the President’s message in a letter sent to school principles last week.

“The President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning,” Duncan wrote, “He will also call for a shared responsibility and commitment on the part of students, parents and educators to ensure that every child in every school receives the best education possible so they can compete in the global economy for good jobs and live rewarding and productive lives as American citizens.”

If this be socialism, then I say, make the most of it.

But I can why the GOP would be against this. More education traditionally has meant more rational voters, and that means less votes for the fear-driven, idea-free GOP.

And besides, seeing a black man on television will really scare some of those kids.

1) Once the Right redefined what happened in Communist China as slavery, they were fine with it.

2) Concerning Her Hi!ness writing a book, as the character played by George Sanders said of the character played by Marilyn Monroe in "All About Eve," "Isn't it necessary to have read a book before one writes one?"

. . . just not in a good way.

his legacy of institutionalized, multi-generational poverty and massive Third World immigration

Yes, before liberalism there was no poverty, and no culture of poverty. Wages were high, the working man well-respected. No racism, either. It was the 50's, and everything was peachy-keen. Heck, the kids didn't even have sex before marriage, except for a little petting.

As for immigration from someplace else than the First World, well, that started with the Irish, didn't it? Which brought us the Kennedys. I see your (racist) point; why let anybody different than us in? Why build a culture of inclusion?

We can always build camps for them, I guess.

I wish some of my ancestors had been less welcoming, then we could have kept your sort out.

From a letter by Kennedy to the Pope:

I want you to know Your Holiness that in my nearly 50 years of elective office I have done my best to champion the rights of the poor and open doors of economic opportunity. I have worked to welcome the immigrant, to fight discrimination and expand access to health care and education. I have opposed the death penalty and fought to end war.

Ah, I can't stay mad - I'm still too pleased that "man" is dead.

Ah! A Christian, I'll bet.

Always amusing to see one set of immigrants attempting to deny the legitimacy of another set of immigrants.

He murdered Mary Jo

There's no doubt he killed Ms. Kopechne, sympathy for whom on your part goes just so far as you can use her terrible death for political purposes. But if he murdered her, then he had to be far, far stupider than the Right has always feared. A rich man who can't figure out a better way to murder an inconvenient woman certainly would never have been half as successful as the Senator became.

So yes, Ted Kennedy got drunk and drove off of a bridge, and then panicked. His name and his own efforts, and those of his friends, helped him to avoid punishment for his actions. These are all true and terrible facts.

Yet one feels that you care about these facts only insofar as they are useful to you politically. After all, you have far, far worse facts on your side; a President who sanctioned a secret war that killed thousands, yet your side argues that we should name airports after him.

And for all those fetuses, dead (because the Senator said so? you misunderstand both politics and history); your concern, let's face it, stops at birth, otherwise you would stand with some of us and argue for job-training programs, decent health care, and doing something about the ridiculous "drug war" in this country, that condemns so many after birth to the same fate that you decry they now suffer before birth.

But your conscience is quite limited to that which makes you feel good and which you can make political hay out of. I hope this country has the good sense to leave you and yours behind, but I fear that your fear-mongering and your appeal to stupidity will be perennially popular.

Everything modern Republicans know they learned from Joe McCarthy.