Bush is bin Laden's man.

There's no conspiracy here. Bin Laden is just an opportunist and Bush is just an idiot. The rest of us are just unlucky.

Al Qaeda attacked us for over ten years before Bush finally snapped at the bait. 9/11 is just the attack that finally worked (from Al Qaeda's POV).

Al Qaeda NEEDS turmoil to flourish and Bush has given them all the turmoil they can use. They'll feed off the Iraq invasion for 30 years or more now. Stability OTOH is death to terrorists.

...taking Ms Wolf seriously now?

But, really, I have to wonder: what does a celebrity have to do to get ignored in America anymore?

So which two first ladies did Marlon Brando sleep with?

Mame and...?

...is the sort of phrase Hitler would have loved and understood.

If we tolerate this sort of rhetoric, then what is it that we won't tolerate? If Justice Stevens is a rat, then which liberal isn't a rat?

This isn't the sort of rhetoric that ends in 'ha ha,' it's the sort that ends in a gas chamber. And it needs to be stopped now.

Democrats should go nuclear on this if Bush's Justice Department refuses to prosecute her. There are some things that just can't be tolerated.

This is no joke.

...is that oil is going to run out. And when it does, we'll find out if biofuels are energy efficient or not. If the price of biofuel goes up with the price of oil, then eventually we'll be forced to abandon biofuels along with oil. But if this doesn't happen, then we'll at least have one alternative source of energy.

The worst thing would be to give up and not try.

If you were 20 years old in 1940, you were 40 in 1960 and 60 in 1980. At that point, at 60 years of age, your cohorts were now presidents, CEOs, and leaders of society in general. You could look back at forty years of liberal social progress. That era saw the rise of the UN, put men on the moon, invented rock and roll, passed the Civil Rights Acts, insituted the first real environmental protections, and did so much more. And it was an era of unparalleled prosperity.

Now we are supposed to believe that that generation after 1980 somehow elected Ronald Reagan, the two Bushes, and a conservative Southern Democrat over the objections of the increasing younger generation, even as it dwindled in age and numbers. This is abject nonsense. The conservatives were voted in by the boomers. The boomers are conservatives: conservatives are boomers. George Bush and Karl Rove and Tom Delay are boomers. And they are entirely TYPICAL boomers. Tax cuts and living off the deficits are boomer policies. The war in Iraq is a boomer war. Driving an SUV is a boomer activity. America is now regarded by the rest of the world as an arrogant country, just as boomers are. Boomer, thy name is arrogance, just as George Bush's is.

Let's do the numbers again: if you were born in 1945, you were 20 in 1965, 40 in 1985, and are now 60 years of age. Your cohorts are now presidents, CEOs, and leaders of society. You can look back on forty years of conservatism, from Richard Nixon to George Bush, an era of stagnant or declining wages, increasing economic disparity, and increasingly ludicrious and more stupidly vicious wars overseas. We now see a nation that cares less, thinks less, lives more selfishly, and takes less responsiblity. This is the boomer generation, and they are not going to have a good name in the future.

Are girls really so delicate and suggestible that thousands and thousands of them will start starving themselves at the mere word of a fashion editor?

I seem to recall a day when girls were 'shielded' from racy and coarse stories, lest they get it into their heads to turn into loose women of the streets. Isn't this just the same damn thing?

It seems that we still view girls as delicate and in need of protection, while boys are allowed to be exposed to anything.

I note that in spite of all the terrible 'messages' women are alleged to bombarded with in this society, most women turn out fine.

Maybe the real message we should stop sending girls is the message that they're so fragile that tbey can't think for themselves.

men aren't thinking about eggs, either "consciously or subconsciously"; it's Ma Evolution who does all the 'thinking' in these matters.

and I'll say it again: the Bushies lie just to stay in practice.

when he visted Whittington in the hospital and reported that he was 'pleased to find him in good spirits?'

Wbat kind of raw, bald nerve does it take to accidently shoot a man and then saunter out and say, "I was pleased to find him in good spirits?"

It would be no different if Cheney had come out and said, "I was disappointed to find Mr. Whittington is, for some strange reason, angry at me." In this case, however, Cheney has simply chortled that the man isn't angry at him. But what right does he have to be either pleased or disappointed with his victim's attitude?

If you hurt someone, you have no right to judge your victim's attitute. Your only right is to be grateful that the man is still alive and sorry that you hurt him.