And I don't like Clinton very much...

but this doesn't bother me. Maybe the only thing I like about Clinton is her willingness to play hardball as a campaigner. The Clintons know how to win elections, and I prefer this sort of game to their other 'skill' - attempting to pander to the right. The press has been incredibly unkind/unfair to the last couple democratic candidates, and I don't mind having one that fights back.

when your children become smarter than you are. For GW, that came when Jenna was about 2 years old.

The question, though, should have been preceeded by "do you support your father's war in Iraq?" If she gave the right answer ("no"), then it would be unfair to ask to why she hasn't signed up. But she presumably supports the war (and this would certainly been a time to express a different opinion). She is now out of college, while Chelsea was still a freshman/sophmore at the time of Kosovo-NATO operations. That being said, I think most Salonomanians were opposed to that war as well, and would have considered it appropriate for an interviewer to ask Chelsea about it.

Reducing the meaning of precise terms like 'fascist' to vague pap is the problem. Someone you dislike, and who is perhaps mean, is not therefore a fascist. Someone who believes that the powerful have the right to use their power to oppress the weak is a fascist. That seems to be a good description of most in the extreme right. However, I think it is fair to wonder if some of those in the far right (gun-loving UN-fearing, Christianists, for example) are using the term correctly _in their own minds_ because they really do think of themselves as 'powerless' and oppressed by powerful feminists, Europeans, and humanists (ha!). They might be insanely deluded about the state of the world, but they really think they are using the word correctly.

that my tax-dollars are going to mercs and death-squads, and not to family-planning clinics world-wide, because they violate some Americans' ethical belief systems.

I love how the founders of Blackwater were and still are heavily involved in the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family. What lovely people! I made a joking comment yesterday about funding Blackwater that at least my tax dollars weren't going to Family Planning Clinics in the developing world (you know, because they encourage women to take control of their reproducive health - gasp!). Now I see there is a real connection - the same 'pro-life' groups - FRC and FOTF - that presss Bush not to fund international women's clinics do have ties to these out-of-control/beyond-the-law death merchants.

but I also wanted to express my respect for Golden Boy for seriously reconsidering a long and tightly held belief. I don't know that I'm capable of doing that. Probably because I'm never wrong. :)

eat really creepy breakfasts. I say that as someone who was frequently served rice w/ raw egg and dried fish when I lived in Japan. That really stuck to the ribs. I hear what people are saying about delayed breakfasts. In my office I space out the following between 9:00 and 11:00: a little V8, a granola bar, some dried apricots, some nuts. Makes me feel righteous.

After all that, I'm still ravenous at lunchtime and break down and eat a lot of crap.

There's something wrong with my system, but I can't quite pin-point it.

Here is GG's line that really twists the dagger in the heart:

"But the more they [the lies and lawlessness] are revealed, and the more we do nothing about them, the more they become our own."

There is a vague comfort, that most Americans desire, to not knowing what is going on. However, once we do know, and we do nothing, in a democracy that means we are condoning the behavior of our government. We are parties to it if we do nothing to stop it. Forward this post to your representative (http://www.house.gov/writerep/) and tell them what you think.

I think I get it now.

People who attack the tobacco lobby are classist poor-people-haters.

People who critique the corn syrup lobby are sizist fat-people-haters.

People who don't like Ann Coulter are sexist.

People who hate broadway musicals are homophobes.

People who think Florida screwed up the 2000 election are agist.

There's a certain rhythm to the tune once you figure it out.

about Broder isn't his writing per se, it is the positioning of him in newspapers across the country. He is typically published as representing 'the left' in order to balance the 'right' as represented by the likes of J. Goldberg, Will, etc. True progressive voices hardly appear at all, except in letters to the editor.

Here's a question for all the legal-eagles that I know haunt this community. If 'gender' is already a protected category in anti-discrimination law, is there no precedent for using that to protect all under the LGBT umberella? The trannie isn't fired for not having a penis, 'he' is fired for being a man with no penis - so, fired for being a man (i.e. only women are allowed to not have a penis). When the lesbian is fired she is really fired because she is a woman (only men are allowed to love women). That is, it's all about breaking gender rules. So if 'gender' is already a protected category, why can't that legally be used to protect everyone right now?