Next time she's asked, Minority Leader Pelosi may want to remind people that the issue of whether or not the President should be impeached is really up to him. President Clinton's enemies never lost an opportunity to undermine his administration, but impeachment was never a serious option until he handed them the rope. A pretty weak rope, but a rope, nevertheless.

If Republicans are really concerned about this, they may want to take it up with their leader. If he doesn't want to be impeached, he should stop committing impeachable offenses.

Clearly it's time for our weekly reminder about the meaning of the word, "fascism." How else to describe the blatant militarism that defines this administration?

This is still another indication (as if we needed one) of why this election is so important. Shame on us if we're so lulled by the polls that we stay home on November 7th.

Are we talking about the same people? Doesn't anyone remember the Harry and Louise send- up where the Clintons spoofed the anti-healthcare-reformers? Or the post-presidential tape of Bill chasing Hillary's car down the driveway because she'd left for work without her lunch? (This, after he'd spent the morning watching the clothes dryer spin.)

I would have thought these moments were pretty memorable, but in a world where a Chris Matthews can confess that he's never heard Hillary's belly-laugh, I suppose anything is possible.

His loss.

There was an ad in the New Yorker last year, quoting a man whose name I can't even remember, to the effect that "if the President announced that God had spoken to him through the television set and told him to (fill in the blanks), it would precipitate a national crisis." He then asked why the absence of a television set should make this statement any less alarming.

That was one smart man. He was absolutely right, and it appears that we can't do a thing about it.

Biden is impressively knowledgable, but the old plagiarism story is still out there, ready and waiting to drag the ticket down.

Wesley Clark, on the other hand, brings with him nothing but positives.

As a person who was seriously wounded in battle, and then went on to successfully execute the only war this country had won in a long, long time, he's well-positioned to challenge McCain on McCain's own turf. At this point, It doesn't look as if it's ever going to happen, and that's a shame.

Get a grip, folks. Maybe, after eight years, we've forgotten what competence looks like, but we're living through one of the most impressive transitions in memory, and I, for one, intend to enjoy it. Surely, no one expected Mr. Obama to be "ready on day one" while staffing his administration with inexperienced unknowns, or to immediately light into his opponents after preaching "conciliation" for two years straight. The fact is, we have elected a goal-oriented strategic thinker who will probably be three steps ahead of us much of the time, so let's see how things play out before we get too hyper. Brushing away gnats shouldn't be part of our President-elect's transition agenda.

This is pretty bad, if, in fact, it really turns out to be the Obama administration's policy. But, is it? Eric Holder was confirmed just the other day, and has announced that he is undertaking a complete review of the previous administration's policies and actions with a view toward repealing those with which the administration does not agree. It seems too early for this review to have been completed, but, in the meantime, the case in question is proceeded according to schedule.

Is it possible that someone is simply using last season's playbook? We may not have heard the end of this, especially in view of other indications of push-back by Bush imbedded "burrowers" and others.

Otherwise, it doesn't really make sense.

????

Not sure why Sen. Gregg's withdrawal is an example of poor vetting on the part of the Obama administration. Does he have a history of indecisiveness, duplicity, and irresponsibility that should have been uncovered?

I suspect his Party will hail this as a principled decision, but whether the voters of New Hampshire agree is something else again. Good riddance, i'd say.

What mental state, you ask? Shrewdness, plain and simple. And probably pure joy at reading Glenn's over-analysis, which, as much as I hate to say it, is sadly misdirected.

Please, Glenn, let's not feed into this man's ego any more than we already have. Surely, we haven't forgetten the many times during the past eight years when we gnashed our teeth in frustration at having being co-opted by the same tactics that Rove is employing here.

The scenario should be familiar: progressives identify and report on an egregious example of Bush misrule, give it a catchy label that gradually works its way into the public realm, and are then totally poleaxed when the Bushies adopt these catch-phrases as their own and use them against us.

Rather than continue this pattern of misdirected outrage, a better response might be to focus on the particular rhetorical device being employed, identify the way in which it's being used in the present case and let folks sort it out for themselves.

It's called "pulling aside the curtain," and it works.

Reading this horrific article, I couldn't help but wonder if this young man's behavior isn't at least partially based on a seriously skewed hormonal system. Ann frequently mentions her son's hairiness, the fact that he developed a fast-growing beard as a teenager, etc. Given his history, it's not surprising that the professionals working with him would be looking for solutions within the framework of his autism, but it certainly wouldn't hurt to do a good hormonal workup, possibly followed by a course of estrogen, if indicated. Just a thought.

In the meantime, Ann, do get a grip. For your husband's sake, if not your own.