When the so-called "left" is more worked up about a sick guy cruising kids than, say, the repeal of habeas corpus, we deserve rulers like Bush, Clinton, DeLay, Lieberman etc.

What the fuck, folks? Sure the GOP is hypocritical about being anti-gay, but it's hardly a news flash that they don't stand for the things they campaign on. Is anyone actually surprised they don't care about "the children?"

If, given what Bush and his allies have done to our country, it takes this sad Foley episode to rally our side and win an election, I have zero confidence that our nation will ever tackle global warming, poverty, war, human rights, etc. - whatever party is in charge.

No Name Given uses the word "we" a lot. I'm not sure what that means. What "we" screamed about habeas corpus? Harry Reid, who said he wanted to pass detainee legislation? The 46 or so Democrats in Congress who voted for it? Aside from Leahy, I didn't hear any Democrat in high places vent a spleen over this - but Foley - oh boy - that's important.

You see, what seems to differentiate me from No Name Given is that I expect leadership from Democrats. Simply winning because the other guy's car stalled isn't good enough at this late hour in human history. Cruising into office with no agenda and having campaigned on Foley at a time of global war and ecological disaster is about the weakest thing I could possibly imagine.

A Democratic Party that doesn't know how to fight for our Constitution is never going to win a victory for our Constitution. They never even tried. They could have called Bush and the GOP chickens for cutting and running on our Constitution after just one terrorist attack - it would have been a great message. Instead, they cut and ran too.

...for joining in with all other US media to help push off the radar what was growing outrage over the repeal of habeas corpus.

Let's compare: a minor GOP hack, who has already resigned, wasn't outted as a sicko fast enough by his party leaders...

...versus...

the repeal of, literally, the most fundamental underpinning of all other constitutional rights -- the right not to be "disappeared."

How courageous of you to resist running the story that matters, so that you can fixate on the story already getting saturation coverage, a story that won't matter at all 2 years from now and beyond. (For those who say it will matter because the Dems will take back the House, I say, it takes more than a few seats advantage to stop Bush legislation, given that at least 20 Democrats will alwasy vote for his worst shit -- that is if they don't just rig the election and keep both houses no matter how this scandal affects voters.)

The Foley focus is proof to me that many of my compatriots, who argued alongside me against the Monica bullshit, are actually hypocrites just like the GOP; it's all about their team winning. No wonder America is going down the drain.

I am surprised at the responses of some who call Dawkins arrogant for asserting what he believes is a useful outlook. In fact, his argument is the opposite of arrogance; what he claims is that it is not useful to make up explanations for that which we do not know.

Once you figure out where babies come from you no longer believe in the stork, but that does not mean the stork is true until you know where babies come from. The fact that science can’t answer everything yet (or likely ever) does not make religion true. Of course Dawkins has already made this point very clear for anyone who reads his comments and writings.

And instead of thanking Dawkins, I challenge others to step up their game. Dawkins is being honest, while those who wish to preserve a place for religion despite knowing better are doing culture a disservice. Many people believe or tolerate interpretations out of social convenience, which is what has allowed most of the evils of our species to take root. It’s rude or extreme to call our President a figurehead for a global criminal enterprise, despite the clear evidence. I’m sure it was rude or extreme to call Hitler similar things in Germany before or even after the invasion of Poland. But these social discomforts don’t make such allowances okay.

...will everyone invested in Democratic control (at least 60% of the public, judging by any number of polls), including Salon, just throw up their hands and say, "they pulled it out somehow." Or, will Americans realize that our votes, and with it our democracy, have been stolen by a corrupt voting infrastructure? The question should be, what are we prepared to do if the "official" count comes in and, mysteriously, right-wing voters appear out of thin air? Will we take to the streets? Will our media openly denounce our government as non-democratic and unrepresentative - even treasonous? I am not optimistic.

I encourage everyone to watch "Hacking Democracy" on HBO November 2. I've seen it and the documentary moves very methodically, not taking any leaps. Doubters about the potential for electronic voting theft will be left with a chill.

The question is: if the GOP retains both houses through statistically improbable events (e.g. disproportionate victories that are at odds with exit polls in only electronic voting/counting precincts), will we shrug our shoulders or stand up for democracy?

...at least they will have an explanation for the miraculous GOP performance.