"noblesse oblige: the honorable, benevolent obligation that is the supposed responsibility of those of high rank."

In the military, this idea is enshrined in the idea that an officer is also a gentleman, who has the privileges of rank, but the responsibilities and burdens of that rank as well. In politics, one would hope that those with the high responsibility for representing their districts, their states and, at the highest levels, their country, would feel even more the burden of "benevolent obligation" to those that they not only represent, but those that are below them in rank.

Unfortunately, as one author once observed, noblesse oblige is an emotion felt only by those who are truly noble. This President--who winks at the Queen of England and feels that he can tell her when it is her turn to speak; who gives derisive nicknames to everyone from members of the press to CEOs; who when pressed multiple times cannot for the life of him think of a single mistake that he has made during his term of office--this man, despite his Yankee blue-blood heritage, clearly has no nobility of any kind whatsoever in him. His only impulse is to enforce strict compliance to his cult of personality, and to put down and drum out anyone who does not adhere to it, no matter their years of service to the party or the realm.

It is unsurprising--although profoundly distasteful--to watch the smirk on the face of Alberto Gonzales as he gleefully points to his former deputy and attempts to pin the U.S. Attorney scandal on him, now that he has "betrayed" the only principal that these men respect, which is loyalty, for they have no nobility at all. (One cannot help but be amazed at how quickly Gonzales regained his memory of events, once Comry testified; suddenly, he seems able to "recall" everything.) Gonzales, after all, takes his cues from his boss, and as his boss displays no noblesse oblige, why should he?

The question at this stage is, what can we do to limit the damage to our country while these blatant criminals finish their terms of office? And let us hope against hope that the next batch that we elect does show some slight glimmer of that earlier-quoted attribute, or we're going to be in an even worse spot than we are now.

Good heavens, Debra: first you give Barack Obama grief for not being "black enough" (whatever the hell that means--and after reading her article through a couple of times and seeing her interviewed about it, I have to admit that I still don't understand the point she was trying to make about that); now you dis Michelle Obama because she's decided to put her career on the backburner because there's a good chance that her husband may become the first African-American President, and she wants to support that. What next, you going to complain that he grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii instead of Cabrini-Green? Going to grouse about him going to Harvard instead of the University of Chicago? Irked that his kids don't go to public school in D.C.? Anything else about the guy you in a fury about?

I have to say, I don't know what it's going to take about Obama to satisfy Dickerson. I'm beginning to think the guy could feed the poor, rebuild New Orleans, restructure the national health care system, get all our troops out of Iraq, and solve the Israeli-Palestinian problem, and she would still find something to beef about.

For myself, I find Obama compelling for any number of reasons, but for me, of all the candidates, only Barack Obama fills me with optimism, corny as that sounds. When Obama speaks, he speaks of the future, and makes you believe that maybe there is one. In an era where the Republicans are vying with each other to see who can be the most authoritarian torturer, who can be the most brutal, who can be the unkindest to immigrants, and the poor, and the minorities, it heartens me to hear someone speak positively for a change.

"President Cheney."

After all, from a logistical standpoint, what would you do? Impeach them both simultaneously (which would be totally unprecedented)? Impeach Cheney first, and risk "Impeachment fatigue," leaving us still stuck with Bush? Impeach Bush first, and risk having President Cheney, even for a short time?

I don't think this Congress is the sharpest set of knives in the drawer, but it seems likely to me that at least a few of them have given thought to those two scary words, "President Cheney."

I know that it takes a great ability to overlook one's faults to be a politician, but even by that standard, Biden is surpassing himself. His candidacy was always a long shot, but after this vote, does he really think that he's going to be able to pacify the base well enough to win any primaries? His pious pronouncements to the contrary, this is a cowardly vote.

Even though he would no doubt lose as well, I sure wish Russ Feingold were running; at least he has the courage of his convictions. Does Biden have any convictions?