You know what? Conservatives are allowed to belong to all sort of crazed, nit-wit societies. They can be ex-members (or even current members) of everything from the Federalist society to the KKK to whites-only clubs, and God help the mainstream media if they point that out. But let a person on the left is a member of anything that can in any way be derided, the Right jumps all over it.

To which I say: screw 'em. Ignore them. The American people spoke in the last election, and relegated these racist, isolationist, alarmist, fear-mongering jerks to the Outer Darkness. Time to treat their mindless bleatings for what they are--equivalent to the complaints of tiny kittens in the basket, trying to get out. They are powerless, their "base" is shrinking, their power is waning. Let them holler at the dark rather than light a candle.

But for God's sake, don't give them the danegeld they demand, or we'll never be rid of them.

Despite its reputation, Texas does have any number of liberal/progressive strongholds. Lloyd Doggett is from Texas, of course. Tom Delay practically had to do backflips in his post-gerrymandering gerrymandering in order to give the Republicans a majority in the state lege (as Molly Ivins would say). And speaking of Delay, the guy who prosecuted him was . . . a D.A. from Texas.

The growth of the hispanic population, the movement of the younger generation away from Republicans and towards Democrats, and the influx of more liberal folks from other states (Californians escaping the high California state income tax, for example), make it seem, well, pretty durn likely.

My only regret is that we didn't send John Cornyn packing. You can't have everything.

Isn't this hate-filled clown aware of the fact that Democrats have been living their nightmare for going on 8 years now?

Well! Perhaps since congressional Democrats appear to be spectacularly spineless, our new President can loan them some. Or at least lead by example.

I know everyone is withholding judgment in order to not give Obama too much credit, or get their hopes up, but seriously: he has done more good in three days than Bush did in his final 4 years.

Or maybe I'm just happy to have someone my age in the White House.

Fred Hiatt? War-cheerleading, Bush apologist Fred Hiatt? Are they kidding? Makes one think that if Gengis Khan were the editor-in-chief of the Post, he'd be on the list too.

I don't understand this list, honestly. I'm glad to see Glenzilla on it, though. But where's Digby?

So let me get this straight: they won't apologize for running the country into the ground, torture, unnecessary wars, Gitmo and Abu Ghraib, distributing "Barack the Magic Negro" CDs, racist comments ("I'm sorry if anyone was offended"), sexist comments, or anything else they've done wrong, but if they actually tell the *truth* but it's something negative about Limbaugh, they *will*?

And these clowns wonder why they're out of power. Good God.

I have a lot--a lot--of respect for Paul Krugman, but when reading (or listening to) his comments about Obama and Obama's plans, I think it's important to bear in mind that Krugman was never particularly enamored of Obama, and stated that he preferred Clinton.

This is not one of those "Clinton bashing" points; I'm just saying that Krugman has been relatively negative about Obama and Obama's proposals for quite a while, so this is not really that new.

I know that it's fun to report on elections, and it's also fun to engage in some schadenfreude over the mess that is the current GOP, but I ask you: is the race for RNC chair really worth nine posts in one day? That's a bit much, don't you think?

Just a note: Ultram, or tramadol, is used in place of narcotics in pain management. Tramadol is used for pain management to some degree because it does not have some of the undesirable side effects of opiate/narcotic usage, nor does it have the liver and stomach toxicity of mild analgesics/anti-inflammatories like ibuprofen or aspirin.

I understand, it a story, wanting to give people a quick handle on a particular drug, but the term "narcotic" is very loaded, especially in our society. You might consider rewording it.

(I have taken both Ultram and various opiates such as hydrocodone for pain, and believe me, the effect of Ultram outside of the pain relief area is as "un-narcotic" is it gets.)

Jesus Christ, Gary; it's been three weeks, for crying out loud. Hold the guys feet to the fire (like Josh Marshall and Digby and Glenn Greenwald are doing), absolutely. But this article? A little over the top for a mere 21 days in office, doncha think?

Uh huh. Unless you had AIDS. Or were middle class. Or a union member. Or needed food stamps. Or were a minority. Or lived in the inner city. Or were on welfare. Or weren't a defense contractor. Or were educated in a public school. Or needed student loans to get through college. (Grants? Ha!) Or cared about the environment. Or wanted clean water. Or wanted to hold big business to account for their bad deeds (e.g., dumping hexavalent chromium into groundwater).

Under Reagan, the deficit exploded. Under Reagan, government grew. Under Reagan, the seeds of deregulation were sown that recently grew into the nasty weeds of our current economic mess. Under Reagan, the wage differences between the upper 5% and everyone else grew at a greater rate than in the 60 years previous. Under Reagan, Casper Weinberger never saw a weapons system he didn't like, and sign up for.

Yessiree, a great time to be alive. If you were a defense contractor. Or in the upper 5% of the income distribution curve. Otherwise, not so much.

But then, you're clearly just trolling. Good luck to you.