The LW informed the supervisor of this young woman about her "inappropriate attire". This is as far as he gets to go with his personal opinion-after that, it's all ego-busting.

He should stop looking at the T-shirt and just get on with his damned work. The bosses will take care of "kitty" soon enough.

I hope his wife knows that he is a sexist pig, too. Sounds like a real winner to me-and I hope she slaps him up side the head next time he thinks he's the only person in the universe who has sartorial taste.

Lots of us belabor under dress codes-and for those who break them, all hell comes down soon enough. Let the girl alone!

It has been a long time coming, this ruling-and it is a big deal, because all the other courts (excepting the SC) have held that the enemy combatants do not have any rights of appeal or habeus corpus.

To rule that it is illegal for Bush & co. to indefinitely hold anyone (let alone enemy combantants) puts a check, if not a total stop to this entire shameful episode.

Finally, judges are standing up for the Constitution, instead of hiding behind it.

The saying goes: "What goes around, comes around".

Just because the Senate may vote a "no-confidence" Monday does not mean that Gonzales will go. He'll have to be kicked out by Bush, who happens to be conveniently on a trip to Europe.

Guess what?

Nothing happens until the big boys in the Senate demand his resignation from Bush or all hell will break loose in the GOP for the rest of his term. Nothing gets done until he gets rid of that idiot.

Bush, faced with an entire party revolt, will back down and fire Gonzales.

He can't afford to ignore the party's leadership if he hopes to get anything done for the next few months.

It's not about the spectacle that she has presented to everyone.

It is about her facing real consequences for real actions that everyone else does.

She can't face the reality. We have to face her being a spoiled little brat, throwing temper tantrums and crying for her mommy.

I truly think that the jail sentence (if it is actually all the time ordered) might make a dent in that little empty head.

After all, that is what adults do-and maybe she might even grow up after all these years of aimless celebrity.

Welcome to the real world of real people. Hope you enjoy your stay.

PS: Stop dragging the family name through the mud, will you? It's bad enough when you get busted for being stupid, and I have to tell everyone that I'm not related to you, you insipid fool!

All the concerned Senators have no idea what the hell they're talking about-most of them couldn't find the space bar on a computer, let alone the Internet.

This discussion is dangerous, because it gives them a reason to crack down on the Internet even more than they already have-and all for "the children".

Where do the adults fit it-you know, the 80 percent that do use the Internet? Does everything have to be for the damn children?

I'm so sick and tired of these arguments that everything must revolve around a non-voting, non-ruling segment of our society.

I'm tired of being given the finger by those who give us the finger every time I turn around.

They're running the country, or so they think.

Actually I think the kids are running it by the merit of existing. The adults don't matter, but we pay the bills and the price when "concerned interests" decide to trample our rights just a little more every day.

Enough of the "danger of the month club"!

I guess that all the letter writers are breathing a sigh of relief for having done their duty.

They must be very happy they were not the ones that were convicted, hence they were more than obliging to write about someone who actually was.

The thought might have occurred to them that if they were in the same place, who would do the same for them?

No wonder they were all so very slimy and smarmy. It's not hard to do something merciful when it could very easily have been them being the subject of discussion.

After all, there were some crimes that were never prosecuted, and they were the perpetrators.

The previous letter said that if the administration had gotten away with their illegal detention they would have done so with great ease.

They have gotten away with it for 6 years-and they will continue to do so under every guise that can be had until someone (such as Peter Brownback, a true legal hero) stops them in their tracks.

These actions serve as a reminder to the government that not everyone is a willing subverter of the Constitution and that some people do still respect human rights.

It is strange, though, that it should come from the one area of the government where obeyance to authority is unquestioned.

Sometimes you have to step out of your own mindset to declare the truth.

It is a sorry state of affairs when people are reduced to talking about sex in any way that makes it appear that they have to be liberated to have sex at all.

Women have huge steps to take in most fundamentalist countries-sex might be a starting point, but what about human rights and equality for women, too?

When they grant a woman the status of a human being, then I'll listen to them talk about the quality of sex for women.

I defy anyone to say that women have equal rights in Iran or Afghanistan.

The article is also a stark reminder that women are only the baby makers (preferably male) in Muslim society-sex is basically procreative for the men, and that is why the greater emphasis is on it.