Jebbie, I've never been considered Christ-like, or even Christmas-tree like, except by my nearest and dearest. And even then, that was while they were debating whether to expel me from "The Family." Did I ever mention that my last name ended in a vowel?

I'm unsure of the meaning here.

Jebbie, I don't know him/her.

I'm safe. I'm sound. I'm of strong mind (kinda).

Fear for me not, GoodCelery!

And if all else fails, I'll run away and hide.

(Good at that).

I'll come back another day to fight? struggle? whine? stumble?

All of the above.

I hope you're doing well, poet mine (and of all others).

I looked up King Oscar, sardines and olive oil and discovered this:

King Oscar brisling sardines in olive oil is our premier brisling product, and our most popular item in this category. We use only top grade extra virgin olive oil. Like the majority of our products, King Oscar brisling sardines in olive oil are Kosher certified - an extra quality guarantee, since only the purest products receive this distinction. King Oscar brisling sardines in olive oil is a natural product, free of any additives or preservatives.

Premier, popular, virgin, kosher-certified, natural, no additives or preservatives. These are their words of choice.

Hmm. I shall be careful. In any case, despite the above, who would enjoy eating sardines?

Objections may now commence.

Thank you for that NYTimes Congo link.

These abuses ...

I'll stop with that. I'm sure you don't want a series of feel-good bleating lines about injustice from the likes of me.

Now let's see how long it takes for lenn and Salon to delete this post.

Maybe if you post a thing or two of substance and stop with this obsession, the issue of deletion would no longer be an issue, n'est-ce pas?

I've decided: you're crazy.

Renate Künast, the Green Party's parliamentary leader, told the eastern German public television station MDR that the measure was unconstitutional and accused Schäuble of wanting "to create a German FBI." [...] In response to such accusations, Schäuble has responded [...] that it was unacceptable for people "to defame our liberal constitutional state to the point that young people think that the matter is related to something like what the Stasi would do." [...] - - Der Spiegel 11/13/2008

That's very funny, in a morbid sort of way. Kudos.

Ouch.

Pick me up some organic bandaids.

just what, in your opinion, is behind this sort of weirdness/peculiarity/insanity (in this case, supporting Lieberman's Homeland Security committee chairmanship)? Is it merely a matter of maintaining the status quo? Is it something less apparent (and I'm hesitant to resort to the AIPAC thing)? Is it a matter of hating the so-called "netroots"?

And sonofloud, While I think Leiberman should be kicked out of the Dem party all together don't forget it was MoveOn, etc. who hijacked the Dem party this year and forced an inexperienced and unqualified Obama upon us.

As I recall, Moveon had little if any role in Obama's campaign.

to my statement that As I recall, Moveon had little if any role in Obama's campaign.

Yes, it's true that they endorsed Obama. However, he moved pretty quickly to distance himself from them: "All too often our politics still seems trapped in these old, threadbare arguments -- a fact most evident during our recent debates about the war in Iraq, when those who opposed administration policy were tagged by some as unpatriotic, and a general providing his best counsel on how to move forward in Iraq was accused of betrayal."

That last clause is a direct shot at the liberal group MoveOn.org, which greeted Gen. David Petraeus’ congressional testimony last fall with a full-page ad in The New York Times that asked the question: 'General Petraeus or General Betray Us?'"

-snip-

this is the second time in a week that Obama is lining up in opposition to MoveOn.org."

-snip-

Now, with this speech, Obama seems to be going out of his way to tweak his erstwhile allies.

-snip-

To be clear, Obama was never a pure Netroots candidate -- many in the liberal blogosphere were more keen on John Edwards or Chris Dodd in the primaries. But these breaks with MoveOn.org are interesting -- and seem to me at least partly separate from Obama’s migration from liberal positions on issues like guns, welfare, NAFTA, and even FISA.

http://tinyurl.com/6or5kg

Doh!

I knew I wouldn't be able to anticipate fast enough.

WIth the exceptions of the neocons and a few Jewish octogenarians in south Florida, Americans don't give a damn about Joe Lieberman and most wouldn't pee in his mouth if he were dying of thirst.

Man, that's cold.

but I would not argue that MoveOn had little role in promoting Barack Obama as a candidate.

Up to the point of their endorsement, I would agree. Following that, however (which is what I was really referring to), Obama chose to distance himself from them. I don't cite any links because I'm incorrigibly lazy, but that's how I remember it. If I'm recomembering wrong, well, c'est la vie, as the Chinese have it.

I'd wager that most moderate voters don't give a crap about Joe. The election is over and most people have little interest in micromanaging the Obama transition and who is sitting on Senate committees. They've gone back to watching Survivor. Hell, I love politics and I'm watching Survivor now. In any event, the next election is far away and whatever the dems end up doing to Joe isn't going to be remembered in any way by anyone outside of CT.

I'd disagree with this. If by "moderate" you mean "average," that might be true. Yet some here, to be sure, are keenly interested in who ends up "sitting on Senate committees." I know I'm one of those. As for the "average" voter, well, there not here reading this anyway.