You know, in all honesty, I don't really care one way or the other whether or not the White House's garden "changes food policy." Michelle Obama planted a metaphorical as well as literal seed with that garden, and it may take a long, long time to bear fruit.

In Britain, Prince Charles has, for years, been a proponent of growing locally, buying seasonable produce, and many other Earth-friendly farming proposals. But it took years for any of them to begin to catch on. It is only now, years into his efforts, that some forward motion is becoming apparent. So might it be with the First Lady's efforts.

It is not dissimilar to parenting. Perhaps my kids don't follow all the behaviors I attempt to model for them--clearing the dishes, holding doors open, saying "Please" and "Thank you," giving up their seats to the elderly and infirm, or whatever, but some of them rub off. The fact that they all don't doesn't mean one should stop the modeling. Similarly, I hope Michelle to continue to grow her garden. Hopefully, the effort will start rubbing off on others.

"Minority Report."

Fiorina almost ran HP into the ground. This is what the Republicans have to offer the country as a whole? What's going to be her slogan? "I nearly killed off HP; now it's the country's turn?"

I can't decide which outrages me more: the fact that Bush, Cheney, Yoo, Addington, et. alia engaged in such heinous activities, or the fact that "public outrage" and political considerations are even remotely taken into account when it comes to pursuing warrants, subpeonas, and indictments against people who are suspected (and in Cheney's case, have admitted) of unconstitutional actions, breaking the law, and war crimes (not to mention incredibly immoral acts).

"Public outrage." Good lord.

While we are currently seeing many more examples of the fact that President Obama is a politician (rather than some kind of hope-filled savior), there were indications during the campaign that, talent and progressiveness aside, he had plenty of political B.S. capability. And to me, his recurring mentions of "clean coal"--an oxymoron if ever there was one--was the biggest one.

"Clean coal." Give me a break. The quicker we can develop other energy technologies and get away from an energy source that causes entire mountain tops to be destroyed, rivers to be polluted, and people to be exposed to heavy metal contamination and black and brown-lung disease, the better.

Every time a politician mentions "clean coal," an angel starts coughing asthmatically.

"Huntress"?

If white men were discriminated against for, oh, say the next 150 years or so, and then were discriminated against further after that, they might have some basis for a complaint. In the meantime, though, not so much.

I know that I can be naive about the "politics" of situations like this, but truly, this seems so simple. If proven--and a number of legal authorities have opined that proving this stuff is almost a slam-dunk, given the paper trail as well as things that Cheney, Yoo, et. alia. have said in public--what we have here are illegal, unconstitutional, immoral acts, some of which are war crimes. Indeed, some of which are warm crimes for which we, the United States, hanged Nazis and Japanese for committing.

Illegal. Unconstitutional. Immoral. Precedent. Why is this a difficult issue at all? Addington, Rove, Cheney, Bush, Yoo, Bebee; these people should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This isn't a matter of "making policy a crime;" it's a matter of prosecuting existing statute violations. It's not hard. And it makes me crazy that people like Todd don't press on this point and, indeed, take it lightly.

I hope you have a good conversation with Todd, Clenn. He did a great job during the election explaining the "numbers game" and the primary process; unfortunately, he seems to have "risen to his level" (In the "Peter Principle" sense) as a "White House Reporter." His questions have seemed pretty vacuous, and he's not showing much investigative talent. SA shanme, really.

I fly between Austin and the San Francisco Bay Area pretty frequently. A couple of thoughts on the garbage issue:

o) Southwest planes are, in general, a heck of a lot cleaner than American or US Air (who have the ugliest livery, I must say). Southwest cabin crews must go through the cabin 3 times per short-haul flight with garbage bags, asking for trash, and they ask for you to please not put it in the seat pocket over the intercom a couple of times per flight. This can get tedious, but on the other hand, Southwest planes, in my experience, are much cleaner than other airlines.

o) You treat passengers like cattle, they behave accordingly. Again, the Southwest folks--in the main--treat you like an intelligent human being (no matter what you may see on "Airline" on TV); American, not so much.

One final off-topic note: on one of my flights, there were several off-duty military folks on a flight I took on the fourth of July. They were allowed to board first and, when the flight was preparing for takeoff, the cabin crew noted that there were several military folks on board. And the cabin burst into applause. (I grant you I was flying out of Texas, but still . . .) Americans can be rude, provincial, self-absorbed, greedy, and many other things . . . and then they can turn right around and show some grace.