Also see Justice Robert Jackson's concurring opinion in Youngstown, for a paean to why we are not going to vest our Executive with the powers of a king or dictator, not even during war time (in that case, Korea). Jackson notes the Founders fully well understood the exigencies of war, and still refused to establish "one man rule." (This opinion is so excellent that John Hinderaker has twice called it "silly.")

The media elite, like so many others, fail to understand that while 9/11 did not "change everything," its happening during the tenure of George Bush did alter the old political truisms, including what constitutes '"right" and "left." It further eroded the GOP's monopoly on the national security issue.

They are playing by an old, superseded script.

I try to be open-minded about these things, but the day "irregardless" becomes a real word, I'm gonna lose it.

At least one dictionary once said it is acceptable. I know this because I made fun of an ideological opponent who used it 4-5 years ago, only to suffer one of his supporters tracking down some source that validated its usage.

Makes me ill, but there you are.

And he picked up the Obama thing, as did I. I think those remarks were in very poor taste, and frankly offensive.

...in his post, his comments, and especially this comment:

http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/04/19/prescription_drugs/permalink/36be54bb690101c94615f98568736c4e.html

could not be more complete.

You all grew up with an FDA and Prescription Drug System controlling a great deal about not only what you may ingest no matter what you and your doctor think, but also controlling what you may ingest if you (gasp!) differ with your dotor -- and so many of you think this is is all normal and do not see what an affront this system is to your basic liberty interests or right to control your own body.

Glenn sees it all clearly. As I said, my concurrence with him is total.

I’ve worked in Microbiology for years now, and we are all terrified about the onslaught of antibiotic resistant organisms we are seeing, because people use antimicrobials incorrectly even when under doctor’s orders. They insist on getting them for viral infections and will shop Docs until they find one that will prescribe.

I believe you. Glenn does, too. In his post today, and mine yesterday along similar lines, we both exempted antibiotics from the general right to decide what to put in one's own body, because overuse of some antibiotics can make one dangerous to others vis-a-vis contagious diseases.

His argument stands, and includes your concern.

And my co-blogger Jim Henley has the links to prove it: http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2007/04/21/6275

Jim jumps off from Glenn's post, but doesn't merely link to Gaubatz's personal website, but also to his SANE organization, which must be read to be believed. That Melanie Philips relies on this demented Gaubatz creature for anything is, well, all you need to know about her.

I'm thinking, tho, of joining Dave's "Mapping Shari'a in America Project," for the entertainment value.

As "Avram" commented at Henley's about Gaubatz's discovery of under-the-Euphrates WMD bunkers and how they were constructed:

That’s right — Saddam’s urge for secrecy was so great that he diverted the Euphrates for the duration of a major construction project. Because there’s no way that the US would have noticed that with spy satellites or anything.

http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2007/04/21/6275#comment-50006

I'm with Prunes, this silliest of silly stuff is too hilarious.

Oh, I took enormous comfort from my total inability to understand that intro at Gaubatz's SANE site. Had it made sense to me, it would certainly be time to conclude that in addition to some of my other issues, I must add psychosis to the list.

Be glad for your confusion; embrace it. You are healthy.

Or at least admit, if you have any shred of honesty left, and, lieu of darting out from the mob to hurl an insult at me, to dart back in again, that maybe the prognostications of the left are as full of shit and hot air as the lame ass policies of the administration.

I'm no leftist. But why do you pose this? What do the sins of the left -- real or imagined -- mater in light of what is current reality as to who is in power and sinning?

I got it from Greg Sargent and wrote about it here:

http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2007/04/23/6280

was not racist. I know she apologized 'n all, but it was simply biting political satire. NOT RACIST. Some on the left, and the hypocritcal, gleeful blogswarmers on the right, disagree. I'm not even Jane's biggest fan, but there is not one damn thing racist thing about her, including the Lieberman *E*V*E*N*T.

f you seriously can't figure out what was offensive, you're either very young, very insensitive, or you've not spent any time in the USA.

I'm not very young, few would describe me as insensitive, and I've lived in the U.S. my entire life (but have traveled abroad). Blackface is a cultural artifact with many meanings, including the one Jane Hamsher properly applied to Joe Lieberman.

Jane Hamsher was not communicating that African-Americans are inferior (that's racism), or anything at all negative about them. Any culturally literate person knows what she was saying. And I write that as one who is not all that enamored of Hamsher.

She violated a taboo, or as Glenn put it, a Code. That's all, and anyone -- left or disingenuous right making hay over the episode -- trying to depict her as having committed a crime of racism needs get over it, like now.