I, and many others, have repeatedly wondered over recent years how high the volume would be in the right-wing echo chambers in this country if ANY Clinton official had done one-tenth of the obvious lying and covering-up we continue to get daily from Dubya and friends.

OSHA would probably have grounds to shut down every radio station broadcasting Rush Limbaugh, as well as FauxNews on cable, based on nothing more than their decibel level alone. The sheer risk of hearing loss by all Americans would be huge.

Oh well -- we'd better stop expecting, or even asking about, consistency, logic and fair play. I'd be the biggest fool in town if I thought such traits were even slight possibilities with the most vocal Dubya supporters.

1. Just to pre-empt commentary by people like "Joe", it is NOT illegal, unconstitutional or otherwise prohibited for the general public to draw negative inferences about someone "taking the Fifth." No, it's only the legal system that is enjoined from making the logical assumption that a person taking the Fifth is quite possibly hiding something. (In a similar vein, defendants are fully entitled to the presumption of innocence IN LEGAL SETTINGS -- but NOT necessarily among the general public, as long as they aren't sitting on the jury!)

2. Monica Goodling should quickly be granted full immunity from prosecution over anything she might say when testifying under oath before Congress. Under the "buck stops here" concept, ultimate responsibility for illegalities in the Justice Dept. (how's THAT for something that OUGHT to be an oxymoron!) should remain with the Attorney General and the President.

No, it isn't a witch hunt now. It was a witch hunt when the GOP harassed the Clinton White House about "Travelgate," the Whitewater "scandal," the "abuse" of the Christmas card list, the "murder" of Vince Foster, on and on, ad nauseum.

Until Clinton's involvement with Monica Lewinsky came to light, the GOP had zilch -- but boy, did they ride THAT political gift for all it was worth.

By way of comparison, just look at the on-going litany of REAL Republican scandals recently -- Abramoff, Ney, Cunningham, warrantless wiretaps, extraordinary rendition, US Attorney firings, the Iraq debacle, and a multitude of other bits of misfeasance and malfeasance.

We are positively knee-deep in scandals, and it's only been 3 months since Democrats took control of Congress! Let the oversight continue, and let the chips fall where they may.

...right beside Dubya's vow that he would find out who had leaked Valerie Plame's name and identity as a CIA agent, firing anyone in his administration who had done so (later narrowed to include only individuals who broken the law during this affair).

Yeah, right. Seems like A.G. Gonzales is a perfect match for Dubya -- completely clueless and incurious about nearly everything. Who knew that Sunnis and Shiites were antagonistic? Who knew that GOP politicians were campaigning for the scalps of several U.S. Attorneys? WHO KNEW???

In a way, this turns the Watergate scandal inside out -- the question of the day then was "What did the President know, and when did he know it?" Now, we're faced with an administration that CLAIMS, defensively and almost proudly, to know very little. Sadly enough, there is some truth to this claim, but not enough to divert ultimate responsibility. There's far too much documentary evidence of the plotting and planning behind this political purge of the USAs.

It's my understanding that impeachment can proceed, regardless of whether a person has resigned from office or not. Why would Congress consider this? Because one penalty imposed upon conviction is that the person can no longer hold any official office on the public payroll.

As Wikipedia puts it in its item on impeachment: "It is possible to impeach someone even after the accused has vacated their office in order to disqualify the person from future office or from certain emoluments of their prior office (such as a pension)."

Even if Gonzales DOES "fold" and resign when threatened with impeachment, there's no reason it needs to end there. Banning him from further feeding at the public trough would be entirely appropriate, not to mention the additional benefit of all those spotlights trained upon the rancid guts of the Bush administration.

...all we need to know about the kind of President that John McCain would make. Heaven help us if he were ever elected, but his sloppy embrace of Dubya's misguided Iraq policy has probably ended his already slim hopes for even the GOP nomination.

...with the analysis of a problem, or the "solution" that's proposed (or actually implemented), then you're IN FAVOR of that problem?

Amazing.

If a doctor prescribes a course of treatment that not only doesn't cure a disease, but in fact makes the disease WORSE, then pointing out that fact means you're on the side of the disease?

Astonishing.

Pointing out that a doctor's diagnosis is wrong somehow demeans the good-faith efforts of the nurses and other professionals who carry out his directives, and indicates you don't support those other professionals?

Incredible.

The illogic and mendacity of some people is absolutely breathtaking.

On another note, wouldn't you have liked to have been a mind-reader yesterday? The vile thoughts bouncing around inside Cheney's skull, as he waited in the vain hope that he could cast a dramatic tie-breaking vote in the Senate, would be priceless (but probably unprintable).