...rather than a non-apology apology.

Well Done, Congressman

I'm going only on the Salon article, but it was stated that in the 2nd response by the DoubleX author, she questioned much of what the letter writer wrote as one of her justifications for her original reply.

Ok, maybe it was a slow week for letters received by the columnist, but it seems to me that if you doubt the veracity of the letter writer don't use the letter!

Unless, of course, as someone else pointed out your goal was just to get talked about.

Mao? Tse-tung? Chairman Mao?!?

I do not recall previously seeing anything McCain said attributed to Mao. OMG! If a Democrat quoted Mao, s/he'd be pilloried.

I guess this is another example of the so-called liberal media bias...

"perspective models"? I'm bettin' you meant "prospective," although the concept of a "perspective" model is a little amusing. ;-)

I would agree that much of this financial sector compensation is indeed egregious, but regulators seem to be missing the point. Where is all this money coming from that allows these institutions to pay out these outrageous amounts (and have enough to line the pockets of congress)?

If there's that much profit, somebody is getting ripped off, and you can guess who that is--consumers and taxpayers.

It is entirely possible that Joe Wilson is indeed offended by rascism and works to eradicate it.

However, I don't recall anything President Carter said as directly addressing Joe Wilson.

Perhaps had he acknowledged Carter's point and then went on to say that rascism did not, in his case, have any bearing on his outburst...

But by refusing to apologize to the House, he is continuing to show disrespect to the institution and thus far he has not apologized to the President, except through Rahm Emmanuel. But then, I doubt he's particularly sorry for what he did, especially since he's been filling his campaign coffers off of his "persecution."

Or Michael Steele gave this quote?

Why is a Senator from Illinois listening to "people from all over the country"? It's not like he's "done" anything or is leading major change initiatives that nobody else will step up for.

Perhaps I was gone that day or the news didn't reach California on the great things Senator Burris is doing for "people...all over the country".

All one can really say is, "DUDE!" (no matter how old you may be!)

...that Goldman-Sachs itself is flourishing, but my 401K is in the tank? Why are they getting profits out of my losses? What am I missing here?

(And no, I'm not directly invested in Goldman, but my point is the same, "Wall Street" profits from the money "we" provide, and we continue to lose value--how does that work???)

One would think that if the Governor resigned or was removed from office the Lt. Gov. would take over per the state constitution, is this not true in SC?

If it is true, then why would Bauer need to negotiate with the state Republicans? I would have thought the electorate would decide Bauer's chances at actually being elected Governor in the next election, no? And with his issues, I would think his opponents would have plenty of ammunition to use against him.

The AP article linked in the posting indicates It was Thomas and that he felt previous decisions had given school districts great amounts of leeway.

I can't state for a fact, but Thomas probably does not believe in a right to privacy in the Constitution and, right or wrong, probably voted consistent with that belief.

I should have researched a bit before posing the question.

Who was the one, and on what basis was the dissent?

There really isn't an inconsistency here. The video made the Iranian government look bad. The photos make us look bad for not pursuing accountability. No more photos, nothing to prosecute. See how that works?

Pretty pathetic.

"Sex scandals are passé in the political world these days."

As doubledave27 pointed out, it's only passé if you're a Republican.

Clinton was tried for impeachment. Spitzer was forced to resign as Governor.

Vitter is still a Senator. McCain was the Republican candidate for President. Foley wasn't forced to leave the House. Ensign is still a Senator.

Double-standard much?

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/obama_admin_mimics_bush_again_white_house_records.php

The Secret Service is denying FOIA requests for White House visitor logs

Even though the administration is "admitting" that there will be an increase in cost due to the standards, on what are these cost increases based? Making a more efficient engine is more expensive just because?

If it's due to retooling, then automakers wouldn't make minor changes to their products every year because of increased costs to consumers, right? Yeah, I didn't think so.

Ya gotta love the knee-jerk reaction that because change is being ordered or mandated, that the manufacturers suddenly care about the consumer's pocket book...or safety. The comment that cars would be safer if they were even bigger and give consumers the choice between safety and fuel economy is just laughable--surely there are ways to maintain a level of safety and improve efficiency. I suppose we'd all be better driving tanks around so we don't hurt each other at what 3 gallons per mile? And then we could pay more for the steel and reinforcements and reduction in fossil fuel usage be damned.

Seriously, it's not like the auto manufacturers provide much real choice to consumers, they just whine when they are told their offerings must include X.