By the way I haven't seen any news on the myriad investigations ongoing.

Google up "investigate Bush".

Two million results.

See ya next year. No fair ripping your eyes out.

Do you like your torture wet or dry?

Yeah, right, like the Bushites are going to give me a choice. Bush hates my freedoms.

I just hope they put me in the cell with Glenn or Paul Krugman or Noam Chomsky or Patrick Cockburn before they gas the lot of us. I'd be delighted to compare notes with them on right-wing hate mail, especially the ones with the death threats.

If I could have been bought off with a fake $119 tax break I wouldn't have this problem.

He presumes to know all about me based on a single statement I made

I just go by what you post, neocon. Maybe you should pretend to be a Democrat, or a brain-damaged veteran who's all gung-ho about "The War". That works sometimes. Get it while it lasts.

And I never claimed to have any details on your child-molestation conviction or your vote-rigging investigation. Probably because I'm in no position to arrange for plea-bargains with your ex-friends.

Give us a hint, Bushite. Who signs your paychecks?

And please, explain to us again why the Almighty Bush is as Pure as the Driven Snow, and should under no circumstances ever be investigated ever, for anything, or you'll call us Islamofascist American-hating traitors who need to be put down.

Your turn.

Of the necessity of impeaching Gonzales and removing him from office.

It does not relieve the country of the obligation to prosecute and sentence him for his crimes, which are legion.

Mere resignation does not serve justice. The failure to prosecute Gonzales in particular, and the Bush administration generally, represents acquiesence to the grossest possible criminality, and establishes crime in high office as acceptable nevertheless. Resigning does not absolve Gonzales of his crimes, however much he would hope that it does.

And it's still possible that Gonzales might not actually be going anywhere, but will still be calling the shots and needed a ruse to get him under the radar. Just don't say it's unlikely: this is the Bush administration, after all, where all manner of unlikely things have already occurred. And those are just the ones we know about.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Senate Democrats must commit themselves to blocking any and all nominees until Bush nominates someone whose independence and integrity are beyond reproach.

Let's face facts, folks. A "someone whose independence and integrity are beyond reproach" would be compelled by duty and conscience to keep writing up indictments on the Bushites until his/her small plane mysteriously goes down.

What else would a "someone whose independence and integrity are beyond reproach" do? And which do you suppose would be more difficult? Finding another crooked lawyer, or one whose "independence and integrity are beyond reproach"?

I like you, Glenn, but if you had thought this through you'd see just how silly it is. Try settling on somebody who's only half the slimeball. That much might be remotely possible, assuming the Democrats don't blow it again.

Nice story. Let's continue the comparison and contrast.

Bush wishes he were Napoleon. Bonaparte was actually a halfway competent general, as generals go, and led actual soldiers. Bush is a chickenhawk who couldn't lead second-graders to recess. Bush is such a brick-brain you wonder how he manages to remember to breathe.

Bonaparte had no compunctions about deliberate mass murder, and neither does Bush.

Both demonstrate how megalomania prevents the megalomaniac from recognizing his limitations (few female examples are known), and it is those limitations which lead to overreach and ultimately to failure and catastrophe.

Neither had any genuine interest in "freedom" or "democracy", used by both as mere tools of propaganda to further the interests of military imperialism. Empire is antithetical to democracy, and you cannot have both at the same time: their methods and their goals are very different. The US is no more a "democracy" than was Napoleonic France. Bonaparte was an emperor. So is Bush, as he's likely to inform us in 2009. Like the catchwords of democracy, "God" also makes an excellent political tool, in Bush's case something of a bludgeon. "God" really doesn't seem to mind. Nobody knows why.

There is one other major difference between them: Bonaparte didn't have the means to ruin most of civilization, while Bush does. That should frighten the powers that be who keep Bush in the presidency into rethinking their support, but they're megalomaniacs as well and equally unable to recognize their limitations. This does not bode well for the other six billion of us who are not megalomaniacs.

After the Napoleonic Wars, Goethe said "I thank God I am not young in so thoroughly finished a world." Europe, as Durant noted, had a terrible headache in 1814. Goethe was of course exaggerating, but would not have been exagerrating about Bush, who will leave the world not with a headache, but with organ damage, blood dyscrasia, and multiple amputations.

Anyone, does the FISA law really protect us?

Don't be absurd.

Bush has clearly violated FISA millions of times, with no consequences at all. Nobody has been accused, much less prosecuted, and there are apparently no plans to do so.

A law that is not enforced is a dead letter. Emperor Bush can do exactly as he pleases to his subjects, because that's what emperors do.

The Constitution clearly prohibits 'search and seizure' in the absence of genuine cause, but the Constitution is a dead letter also.

You do not live in a 'democracy', sir. You live in a right-wing corporatist police state. They're just maintaining pretenses to discourage you from complaining about it too much.

The Bush Gestapo is upon you. Deal with it.