I think the thing that bothers me the most is that Bleeding Heart Liberal (BLH) even asked the question. Of course its right to sit and eat with the people you're feeding. Claiming controlled diet is a cop out. Cary's response framed it rather well. In this age of situation Christians it really isn't surprising that BLH is confused. We have the Ann Coulters of the world saying we should go to other countries and subjegated them all the while she aligns with the "Christian Right" who are Christian when the political situation is convienent for them. BLH is doing the right thing. Listen to your heart.

As with most conservative apologists you have a great skill at spinning your thoughts in denial of facts. That said Mr. Keillor could have made the point in a more focused way. Padilla was held for years in Guantanimo Bay being accused of plotting to set off a dirty bomb within the boundries of the United States. When his case finally made its way through the court system and it became clear that as a United States Citizen he would have to be charged, the Justice Department changed the charges and brought him to trial. Mr. Padilla was then convicted based on his application form to Alqueda (they have these?) having his finger prints on said form. The link provided by the New York State judge has no bearing on the current case. As I understand it, the constitution provides for the exemption of past acts as it would be prejudicial to the facts of a specific case. This is what has been refeerred to by many both liberal nad conservative as "legal technicalities" while others simply refer to it as protections under the Constitution. The belief that brown skin and the worship of Islam constitues an assault oon the United States has done irrepairable damage to this country. I would point out that this point of view has lost favor in this Country and that specific view of the world has cost those supporting that narrow point of view, control of the government and rendered the village idiot in the White House a lame duck for the last 3 years of his administration. I refuse to label people as haters of America as others have labeled me although it is a tempting thought. The rule of law is a critical underpinning to the basic framework of this country. If the elected government doesn't understand that and administer that justice in such a way so as to continually support the rule of law instead of acting in blatant politcal actions then it places the entire republic in a very dangerous position.

To those who make the comment "a trained monkey could do it" I say baloney. I'm not getting any contraption that does 500 miles an hour at 5 miles above the ground that is being operated by the someone with that limited amount of training and skills and suspect that those who think like that are talking without the benefit of too much knowledge. Usually the airlines spout that amount of hubris when contract negotiations are near.

As I see it airline pilots are totally worth whatever they are paid and more. What you don't see is just how busy they are while always staying ahead of all situations. There are checklists to be done, response and commuinications with air traffic control, weather congestion in the skys and on the ground and a host of other responsibilities. What is the most important skill is not the everyday stuff but what they do when something goes wrong. Airplanes are complex machines and yes flying computers. And when the software goes bad or the landing gear won't come down, you'll be very thankful that an expereinced well trained and properly compensated person is at the controls. You go Patrick!

When I was in high school every anti drug message I got was that if I even was in the same room where marijuana was being smoked I would become a heroin addict. When I went to the first party that I saw it being smoked I knew that was a lie. If we've learned anything from the past few years is that drugs and occasional social use while not really a great idea, has less health issues than say smoking and drinking. The last several Presidents have used drugs, one openly admitting it the other not so much. Granted using W as an example is probaly a bad one, it is not the end of the world. In fact those that have come back from "the dark side" probably have a better foundation of experience that those who simply reject it and do not understand the reasons why people use drugs. I would say simply if the girlfriend is now using regularly then you've got a concern. Impaired judgemnt while drunk makes me think you've got your prejudices a bit bit confused.

We have two Corgi's (triple coats) and the older model works quite well. Yes the compartment is a little small but hey it works while we're gone and that is what's great!

The way I was raised and educated, intellectual curiosity was encouraged and was a hall mark of learning. That was the basis of knowledge, you devoured information and learned from it. My religious training required that I own up to my mistakes, take resposibility for them and learn from them. That is my definition of maturity as well. Draper seems to be giving W a lot of latitude in this book. Way too much latitude.