The whole point of the escalation was to create some breathing room for a specific set of political gains to be made. Just how many of that set of gains has been made? (Yes, that's rhetorical).

I guess they got so busy dealing with the alligators, draining the swamp just fell out of view ...

And this litigation would be unfair, because any companies that assisted us after 9/11 were assured by our government that their cooperation was legal and necessary.

Well then, if the cooperation was "legal and necessary", the telcos have nothing to fear in court, do they? It's not like George & Co. would give bad advice - is it?

and so true.

I must say, I'm a little envious. If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.

Junior, we got to see what you'd do if you were slightly younger and not employed. You got string pulled to get into an Air Nat'l Guard VIP unit, marked your form as not volunteering for overseas duty, and then then managed to avoid completing even that minimal service.

I don't denigrate the Nat'l Guard, after I completed my active duty service, like a lot of veterans I chose to go into the Guard and I served with a of of good, dedicated people, like the ones who are currently doing multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, despite treatment as second-class soldiers. But you Commander Codpiece were the worst kind of skate and your record belies your words.

Excellent advice. Clinton and Obama should hang Bush around McCain's neck like a millstone (or an albatross, if you're of a literary bent).

If McCain's going to run for Junior's third term, he may as well get to defend him.

I see the quotes of Kipling and Owen, but I think that Bill Mauldin says it quite well in "Up Front". Full disclosure - while I am a veteran, I never heard an angry shot, but I have enough imagination and enough training to be pretty sure that I want no part of the real thing and what it entails and to be equally sure that I don't even know the half of it. Because of this, I have enormous respect for those who did. Anyway, here's Mauldin:

Many celebrities and self-appointed authorities have returned from quick tours of war zones (some of them getting within hearing distance of the shooting) and have put out their personal theories to batteries of photographers and reporters. Some say the American soldier is the same clean-cut young man who left his home; others say morale is sky-high at the front because everybody's face is shining for the great Cause.

They are wrong. The combat man isn't the same clean-cut lad because you don't fight a kraut by Marquess of Queensberry rules. You shoot him in the back, you blow him apart with mines, you kill or maim him the quickest and most effective way you can with the least danger to yourself. He does the same to you.

He tricks you and cheats you, and if you don't beat him at his own game you don't live to appreciate your own nobleness.

But you don't become a killer. No normal man who has smelled and associated with death ever wants to see any more of it. In fact, the only men who are even going to want to bloody noses in a fist fight after this war will be those who want people to think they were tough combat men, when they weren't. The surest way to become a pacifist is to join the infantry.

May all the Republican candidates tee them up like this. I'm sure we all know where we can find a quick $12B per month in savings. And let's see who the average Louisianan would want taking that phone call when the next hurricane comes.

That said, it is a bit of a hoot.

The point is not whether or not it would be safe to eat a cloned animal. As pointed out, if the original animal was safe to eat, we can reasonably expect that the cloned offspring would be as well. Besides, cloning an animal isn't a cheap process, I understand that cloned offspring would be more like to be used to produce reproductive cells, e.g. sperm for artificial insemination, rather than meat.

The question is whether or not we have the right to know what we're buying and what we're eating. As I see it, FDA and USDA approval is the base requirement for a product appearing on the market, it's not enough to get me to actually ingest it. As we've seen in the past with bovine growth hormone and other routinely administered veterinary pharmaceuticals, the FDA and USDA are far more interested in protecting agribusiness than they are in protecting consumers.

Why should he care? After all they've had their "accountability moment". The Dems are certainly unwilling to hold them accountable.

I would like them to have another one in front of the ICC, but somehow, I just can't see that happening. But is it to much to hope for that a Spanish judge will issue a warrant that will at least prevent them from leaving the country to travel to any place civilized, a la Pinochet?

The "saucisses grillées" (AKA "grilled hot dogs") in Paris really need to be tasted to be believed!

I didn't notice that any URLs were provided. You can get to the Pharyngula site at:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

and Richard Dawkins' site is at:

http://richarddawkins.net/