Glenn is competent to recover from the effects of any excess affection that Mona may display for him; she harms no one but herself when she "goes groupie" on him.

Now THAT offends me. Michelle's weirdness that I try to sabotage him is one thing, but that is another. Look, the fact is, as Jebbie announced some 3-4 weeks ago, Jebbie, Glenn and I know one another pre-blogosphere. I didn't want to give off any sort of signals that I'm "special," for I am not. Seriously, I've changed my mind about a number of things due to other commenters at Glenn's blog over his blogging career. Many here are much smarter than I am.

But, if I appear "groupie," it is because people who have been friends have usually seen each other through some rough times. Loyalty comes into play. Make of that what you will.

At the same time, we fight and snipe at each other with license to do so, which Michelle doesn't get.

Nothing LWM posted is news: at Glenn's old blog I repeatedly said I'd voted for Bush in '04. Scads of times. That is not news, and LWM knows it. Glenn once even quoted a comment where I said that, describing how my political trajectory closely paralleled that of John Cole, with the Schiavo matter being a major turning point at which I really started reconsidering Bush and his GOP Congress.

Never have I "hidden" that fact.

Glenn knows. So do others who participated at his blog from the start. I hadn't fully changed my mind when he began blogging in October of '05. He knew both by private email before I ever commented there, and because of what I said at his blog, that I voted for Bush in '04.

can we stop with the libertarian flame wars, Mona way-back machine, etc.?

That's all well and good, and I'll stop now. But LWM deceitfully argued that I had lied about voting for Bush in '04, when in fact, he was ridiculing me for it back at Glenn's old blog because I had said so. Newer readers might have been prepared to believe I have lied about it (at least one did), and THAT I'm not going to let stand. It is flatly false, and LWM knows it is.

El Cid: What I think about it is that the mere mention of the word unleashes insanity and viciousness in some. But were you, uh, looking for an extended discussion?;)

Very much of all of our society's infrastructure has numerous strains and weaknesses, from the physical to the electronic and from the social to the political.

A big part of the problem is that politicians in both parties are far more likely to subject themselves to voter fury over tax hikes to build or found something New that said taxpayers like. Maintenance of the old is less sexy. How do sell the bridge that didn't collapse? People tune that kind of thing out with a yawn, until things happen as they did yesterday in the Twin Cities.

IMO that someone who claims to be an informed, knowledgeable, internet-savvy political person and still voted for Bush as well as defending the Swift Boat scumbags deserved all the derision and ridicule they get - period.

And you are entitled to your opinion, but LWM is a liar. That I voted for Bush in '04 -- which I have repeatedly acknowledged is the worst political mistake of my life -- was totally and openly known at Glenn's old blog, because I SAID SO. Further, I made arguments defending the Swift Boat Vets as to some of their claims there as well. (John Kerry did not spend a Xmas in Cambodia.) This is simply not news, I have never lied about or hid any of these views, and LWM knows it.

Were I in your shoes, and reading some of my ancient comments from various blogs that a particular individual constantly cuts and pastes, I would have reached the same conclusion you did about about me, to wit: that I was a fraud and hypocrite. That was the purpose for that whole little campaign.

Any of Glenn's newer readers might have reached your same conclusion since they would not know my history at Glenn's old blog, as well as that I have publicly (and in multiple venues) said my decision was so stupid, I no longer consider myself competent to hold forth on the subject of, say, what to do about Iraq now.

So I have to own an incredibly horrible political mistake (and have and do), but I am no liar. I will revert to again ignoring that individual, but when I saw you believing him, and realized others (understandably) might as well, I had to say something.

finis

I see no reason why a competent adult should not be able to take any substance they want for any reason they wish, without a prescription. Exception being most antibiotics, since popping 'em like candy at the first sign of the sniffles can make one immune to their efficacy and turn one into a walking health hazard for various communicable diseases, and those a potential harm to others.

But, if I'm some lunatic who, after my doctor has strongly stressed to me that laetrile is snake oil and will not cure my cancer, yet I am adamant that it is my choice over chemo, I should not need the doctor or the state's permission to obtain the junk. At a minimum, I don't think I should have to prove any more than that I've fully discussed it with a physician.

None of this, however, applies to minors. Parents have no right to be lunatics with their kids' health.