I would suspect that this prosecutor is either politically motivated, an incompetent, or she is holding her fire for other reasons.

The guy who held the doors: Kidnapping. That's a serious offense. Even if the young woman had consented to be in the room in the first place, preventing her rescue when she might have choked upon vomit or died of alcohol poisoning is surely an offense of kidnapping. Lay it on him and plead him down in exchange for giving up the others.

To me unconscious at any point means unable to give consent.

Also, by any stretch of the imagination, those guys were really slimy. Who wants to have sex with someone who is unconscious and has vomit all over her?

I wouldn't let these guys work at a morgue. I would fear for the corpses.

BTW, why isn't the college taking more heat for this?

This is a no-atheists-in-the-foxhole sort of situation!

If we finally get a Democrat in the White House in 2009, I will abruptly stop praying for Clarence Thomas, then I will add to my No Prayer list . . .

Well you have just met another Hillary neutral. I have to confess that part of me is still hoping for a fat man on a white horse to enter the Democratic field in September, but for financial reasons (along with a possible disinclination) that might not happen.

So far, I think Hillary is the most likely nominee. I also think you may see many people turn yellow dog before the actual election, depending upon many things, among then the war(s) and the Republican nominee. For instance, if the nominee were Romney, here in my neck of the woods that would arouse lots of Mormon prejudice. Hillary is at least a "Good (Christian) Methodist."

I think it is way too early to predict anything, including a Democratic loss if Hillary is nominated.

I am not sure why you don't want to discuss the issue of gender prejudice since you cite it as one of her weaknesses. I suspect that if she is the nominee there will be lots of dinner table clashes between spouses. (My best friend adores Hillary and her husband hates her. In my previous residence of New Mexico, I knew at least a dozen liberal women who were rooting for Hillary.) I think you are very much mistaken if you think women won't vote for her. I think they will. Furthermore, there are not many Republicans now running who will get the black and Hispanic vote. And where are the (true?) Democrats who don't like her going to go? All they have to do is hold their noses. It has been done before.

I would like to suggest another Democratic and possibly winning ticket that may surprise you: Clinton/Richardson.

The Republicans would not even be able to counter with something like McCain/Hutchinson. Kay Bailey Hutchinson may be a woman but she is rabidly anti-immigration.

Ultimately it won't matter who either of us know. This is just amateur pulse taking. I do agree that people who will say that they will vote for a woman may not be telling the truth in polls. They may not in fact ever consider a woman a perfect enough candidate to overcome "femaleness." There are also people who might tell a pollster they would vote for a black person when they in fact would not. My own mother fits both of the above categories. In conversation, it is "Oh my, how awful that Bush is. Why did I ever vote for him." In reality, she will vote Republican and I damn well know it. She is nearly eighty and when we recently discussed whether or not she should see "someone" for her depression, her answer was "Well, I won't see a woman."

As I said, I am still undecided as to who I would like to see nominated. My own politics match Edward's best.

As to the two books reviewed, I am probably not going to read either. I recently picked up a used copy of Hillary Rodham Clinton's "Living History." I will read that. As someone with an English degree, I like to deconstruct a text and autobiographies are my favorites. People trot out all their BS -- usually transparently.

Other than that they think she's cold, why do the people you know dislike her? How is she a liar?

BTW, I think anyone who has held the "office" of First Lady is likely to come off as controlled, maybe even cold. Hell of a "job."

I tried to tell my daughter something similar to what you said, but she really wouldn't listen to me. It is not that men only want sex and are less likely to love where they can obtain it easily. (Although this may be true of some men.)

I think it is morely likely that they are wary of their own sexuality. They are afraid of being led around by their appendage.

(I could be wrong,and I am sure that I am likely to be corrected by some.)

For women, the problem with early sex in a relationship has to do with oxytocin (hope I spelled this right). A woman can produce some oxytocin by just being hugged. For women who have had a child they will recognize oxytocin as a bonding chemical. Women produce oxytocin in order to bond with and ultimately nurse a child. Women produce oxytocin during pleasurable sex. Too many women think they are in love when they are really in the grip of powerful horomonal influences.

It is always better to let our logic and our critical faculties influence us before our horomones influence us when it comes to relationships. That is why a little delay when it comes to sex is good for women.