The photos, or the existence of the photos, aren't the problem.

The problem is the actions that brought the photos about. We need to get to the bottom of that, and if it means that some more photos come out, so be it.

In theory, our troops are equipped to defend themselves. The rest of us, unfortunately, are not equipped to defend ourselves against unregulated and unwatched tyrannical government.

If our country, and the things it stands for, no longer exist, then the photos become irrelevant.

He's learning that catering to the far left is not always the best course of action for a country as a whole.

Always the troll, aren't you?

I haven't seen a lot of "catering to the far left" so far in Obama's administration. He's against gay marriage. He hasn't done a thing about Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He's increased the number of troops in Afghanistan. He supports Bush's use of State Secrets. He's opposed to prosecutions of what were clearly war crimes committed during the Bush administration. And now he's defying a court order to release photos that would further implicate Bush and company in criminal activity.

Far left? I'd like, for once, to see Obama stop catering to the far Right.

Let them. If she knew about it and did nothing, she can go to prison with everyone else who was involved.

I think the tide is pro-life, not pro-death.

No one is "pro-death."

...the costs will drive the automakers into bankruptcy!

Oh. Never mind. Carry on.

So there you go. Scumbag rich boy drives girl into the water and leaves her there to die, then gets off because of his family. Ah, that's OK, he belongs to a prominent Democratic family! Democrats are the party of the people doncha know.

I guess that makes our moral choice clear, doesn't it?

We're forced to align ourselves with the other party - you know, the one that rounds people up for no reason, charges them with no crimes, and tortures them until they are dead, all in the name of "keeping us safe."

Why wouldn't they be? President Obama is ignoring all of his campaign promises and acting like President Bush.

...the Democrats in Congress will run to the nearest corner and cower.

It also seems that the torturers won.

Torture=Good. Laws=bad.

The thing is, it actually is easy.

If anyone in the Bush administration authorized, committed or knew about torture and did nothing, they can and should be prosecuted.

If anyone in the Obama administration has authorized, committed or knows about torture and has done nothing, they can and should be prosecuted.

It's that simple.

Suppose you opt for a datastream that's ten times as fast. That's great...for a while. Then you'll want 100 times as fast, or a thousand times as fast.

And sooner or later, you'll need a faster processor to handle the additional data.

If you asked the average person if they'd rather have a processor that's ten times as fast or a connection that's a thousand times as fast, they'd all opt for the latter.

And then their machine would cough and die.

The speed of your connection and the speed of the system that processes the information that comes through that connection are forever intertwined.

The historical definition of that word has always been a union of two people of the opposite sex who live together as a husband and wife.

Except, of course, when it meant something else. Like a man and several women, as is the case in Muslim countries or in pre-1890 Utah (legally), or in post-1890 Utah (illegally), or in the Biblical-era Middle East.

Sometimes, in the past and even now, it means an arranged union between a man and a prepubescent girl.

One thing never changes, however. The "marriage has always meant this" argument has always been a load of crap.

Has the U.S. government ever lied to us about anything? Yes.

Has the U.S. government ever lied to us about torture/abuse in Iraq? Yes.

Has any evidence come to light that the U.S. has engaged in anything worse than rape in Iraq? Yes.

So why should rumors of the existence of rape documentation be dismissed out of hand as false?

These allegations may or may not be true, but past performance by the government here suggests that dismissing this as nothing would be foolish.

First fatal US abortion terrorism since 1993-1998

Does this only happen during Democratic administrations?

Pretty much. When Republicans are in power, the faithful sit idly by, patiently waiting for their Leaders to either pass a constitutional amendment banning abortion or to construct a Supreme Court that will overturn the reviled Roe.

Each time a Republican is elected to the White House, these people are certain that one of the above will happen. That it hasn't yet happened in 35 years seems to elude them.

It never occurs to them that:

A. The Republicans have no intention of doing anything about Roe, as it's a huge cash cow for them. Roe=$$$$$ and votes.

B. Simply supporting sex education and birth control would quickly render abortion irrelevant

These people are not rational. It's as simple as that.

Twenty nine members of Reagan's administration were convicted of crimes.

That's the model for the current Republican party.

...and I'm proud to say that I still have no idea which satellte channel carries Fox News.

Come tomorrow, I suspect I still will have no idea. I'm fine with that.

Republicans in Congress will act to outlaw abortion when the day arrives when they need neither cash nor votes.

In the meantime, they are more than happy to keep Roe around as a bogeyman that, conveniently enough, brings in cash and votes from the gullible.

I just cannot come around to supporting ritual child sacrifice.

Then petition your elected representatives to change the law in a way that suits you.

That is how our legal system works.