Oops! I scrolled down the letters too late to catch that RichEmery had already compared the comments in this article to Rummy's "known knowns" statement. He would have saved me the time of looking up the exact wording. But it was heartening to know that someone else saw the connection. And it is sad to know that this administration's stupid comments and screwy explanations and are so well known that I only had to type into a google search "Rumsfeld's known knowns comment" to get a hit on the exact wording.

Frankly, I like Grieve's logic much better:

What we do know is that members of the U.S. military were responsible for acts of torture at Abu Ghraib. We know that. And we also know that the U.S. military is part of the U.S. government. That's a known. What we don't know is whether or not the head leaders of the U.S. government ordered the U.S. personnel at Abu Ghraib to do what they did. But here's our point: Either they knew or didn't know, and what matters is, is that they did it. What's worse, that the government knew or that the government didn't know?

Sadly, it used to be that we in the U.S. held ourselves to a higher standard than anyone else. Now our standards are lower than...well, Rumsfeld's rhetoric.

The Iranian ambassador to the UN appeared on the Charlie Rose show the other evening. He addressed the issue of serial numbers and dates on the weaponry supposedly supplied by some source in Iran to "kill Americans."

I wonder how many people caught his comment about the manner in which the dates are shown. He said that only the U.S. uses the month, date and year (i.e., February 15, 2007). Other countries - including Iran - show the date first, then the month and then the year: (15 February 2007). The dates shown on the material our government says is supplied by Iran uses the former. So where is it coming from? One writer suggests a convoluted movement of U.S.-supplied weaponry through the hands of various sources into the possession of the "insurgents." That's a more likely, in my mind, scenerio. Another is that our CIA-types are supplying it directly to the insurgents to create the illusion of Iran's involvement and in an effort to add to the arguments for us to invade yet another country.

What shmuck will they recruit now - given that Colin Powell is disgraced and out of the national political scene - to present this kind of evidence to the U.N. General Assembly?

....and then have him launch an investigation into his firing and replacement by Rove's friend Griffin. Here in Illinois we call it patronage. There have been U.S. Supreme Court rulings outlawing this practice in state governmental jobs. It would be interesting to see if these rulings might apply at that high level involving federal government employees.

The morning after Richard Nixon got elected, I didn't get up to get my kids off to school. When they - early teens - came to my room to ask if I was sick, I simply said "I'm not getting out of this bed until that man leaves office."

Needless to say, I did get out of bed, and rejoiced later when he resigned. Everyone was in their houses in my republican neighborhood watching his farewell speech, except one set of neighbors who had their portable TV outside and had gathered around to watch. Instead of sitting in the house, my husband and I took a walk and, as we passed the group gathered in front of that TV, one turned to me and said "I'll bet you're happy this is happening" to which I smiled sweetly and shook my head "yes."

We lived through Nixon.

Then came Ronald Reagan. A "B" actor, no less! I didn't stay in bed that time. At first, he seemed less ugly than Nixon,and I didn't think a stumbling hasbeen who enjoyed dabbling in politics would do much damage. I was wrong: should have stayed in bed!

But he, too, eventually left office. We lived through Reagan. Surely things couldn't get worse in my lifetime.

Omigod! Then came George "Shrub" Bush!! This figurehead president is nastier than Nixon (oh, how I miss those good old days of Tricky Dick) and less equipped to run the government than Reagan (I almost miss his silly jokes). Dumb beyond the likes of the actors in "Dumb and Dumber." Worse, he has an unelected co-president who is nastier than all of them combined. Dick Cheney is the ultimately evil Tricky Dick.

I couldn't stay in bed that time because it took so long for the Supreme Court to make its decision to enthrone him--and I confess to hoping against hope Al Gore would pull it off, despite the fact that the "fix" was in. Had to follow the action and keep my hopes alive until the last ugly minute!

Well, I'm 65 now. Don't hold out much hope for the future of our republic. The bad guys (and some gals) control everything, including the machines on which we stalwarts religiously perform our democratic duty of voting (who said anything about honest counting of votes?) in hopes that things will get better for our children and grandchildren.

And I confess to returning to bed often these days for long periods to dream of a better world, or to just blot out the reality of what's happening in this one today because of Bush/Cheney.

Nixon, Reagan and Bush/Cheney in a single lifetime! Every one of us who has retained our liberal integrity through all of this HAS to have a special place in the afterlife, if there is any fairness in human existence.