The opt-out has the potential to embarrass those that choose not to join in, while it provides some stimulus to the government to get it right.

Trigger? Meh - just kicking the can down the road.

for America's first Atheist president. Frankly I don't give a damn about the president's religion, and we'd all be better off that way.

BWAH HAAA HAAAAAA!

Don't make me pay for my hatred!

What if Christ was queer?

1. We need more soldiers

2. Justice delayed is justice denied

3. 2 People a day are having their lives ruined by this out and out discrimination.

Is there ever a wrong time to be fair?

"It was one of those things where I thinking I was saying one thing, and it came out differently."

Serious question to everyone... Has this ever happened to you? Have you ever said something that is not at all what you were thinking?

What ever happened to "I was wrong?" "It was wrongheaded thinking and I apologize."

This is a non-apology. Steele is actually blaming those pesky words that somehow fell unconsciously from his mouth. Those traitorous words that failed to accurately portray the pristinely pure correct thoughts that were serenely floating about his head.

Poppycock is what I'm thinking.

Yeah, that's the right word.

A'DS?

I've always loved the Questions to the Prime Minister in Parliament. This summit is the closest I've seen our government come to that kind of public dialog. Naturally it was stilted and the Senators seemed uncomfortable but it was an amazing piece of political theater.

I'd think that it could actually become a constructive vehicle for developing responsible dialog between the Congress and Executive Branch.

What do you think?

...would have looked at that cartoon and said, this could be extremely offensive to some. You need to make your intent more clear on this. What else have you got?

That is if he didn't want to print something that could be interpreted as a coded racial insult.

At any rate "I'm sorry you are so over-sensitive" even when repeated twice, doesn't cut it.

"When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry,"

First prove your disgusting assumption true. The current administration respects the rule of law and believe that demonstrating our belief in human rights and trust in our justice system will actually keep us SAFER that running rogue on the constitution, trampling global human rights standards and behaving like power mad criminals.

So I read the first paragraph and thing STFU you egocentric-self-serving-soulless-liar. Then I'm so happy you have no power any longer that I go all liberal misty eyed. I hope that while I'm off guard a terrorist won't see my defenses are down and attack me because I showed some human decency.

No Tom, it's not about what the New York Times and The Republican party are saying. It is about what you have been doing since you left public service - CASHING IN.

Why not admit that you've been forced to look at your behavior and apologize for enriching yourself off health care barons after years of pretending to be for reform.

Sadly disappointing Tom.

"It comes down to this: Congressional Republicans have an interest in the political fortunes of their governors."

In my fantasy world it reads:

"It comes down to this: Congressional Republicans have an interest in the lives and fortunes of all citizens."

What, am I delusional?

Just WOW. I'm so encouraged by the GOPs trembling death-grip of their base.

So the left is leading the country in the wrong direction? It's the opposite of the rights direction, which has been war, financial ruin, moral bankruptcy and infamy.

And their solution is to keep going in that direction.

BEAUTIFUL.

YOU GO GUYS!

The headline surprised me.

Now having read the transcript, I've never been more proud of a president in my lifetime.

This guy's good!

And he's ours!!

wooo hoooo

Okay, buy your donuts from Dunkin' Donuts - they're now owned by the Carlisle Group a long standing republican favorite. Okay? Now STFU!

I have the right to be anti-gay?

COOL

As a righteously anti-gay, what are the limits of my activities?

Can I lie about gays to others?

Can I try to get those gays fired so I don't have to work with one?

Can I actively work to make their life more difficult?

Oooh! Can I promote separate rights for the gays, so that I don't have to sit next to them?

Please tell me more about my right to be anti-gay, I'm pretty psyched about it.

Chevy Lover

I would like to advise my new friend Pastor Warren that when you compare my 15 year loving relationship to bestiality, pedophilia and incest you are far from being civil.

If you were to listen to me, pastor, I'd heartily suggest you base your judgment on modern scholars, doctors and highly educated people that have made it their life's work to truly understand same sexual attraction and human gender.

My friend, if you haven't read the news recently, it is considered normal, human behavior to find a partner and try to love and support that person. Many of us humans find that love in people of the same sex. So when modeling civility, I suggest you go with the modern facts of science rather than with the long-ago attempts to codify behavior and explain the mysteries of life that came into being before the advent of science to the world.

And lastly my dear brother Warren, if you simply can't accept modernity, please sir go somewhere quite and contemplate nature as you understand it to be, quietly while letting the rest of the world evolve.

Thank you for listening, sorry I don't have a donut for you.

my post should have been directed

@ Dmagnificent