You see, I'm not going to vote for someone who is "strong on the 'war on terror' and on defense" (at least as defined by Washington) because it violates my values. So we are at an impasse here.

I also question whether the nation demands a glib hawk who is "tough enough" to "campaign hard" and not commit to liberal issues. I think the media tells us this, but I'm not so sure it's true. In fact, I bet if even fringe candidates like Kucinich and Gravel would be doing a whole lot better in the polls if they were covered with the same amount of ink and respect as Clinton and Obama. We may never know.

I'd expect more out of liberals than to judge value on income -- in either direction. The rich should pay more for our collective enterprises (they should be heavily taxed), but they are not evil for being rich -- some are evil for how they got rich. At least people chose to buy Spears tickets and cds. I didn't choose to pay my electric company or insurance company (through my employer) -- I have no choices but to give those CEOs money.

Mukasey must be rejected, not just for being wishy washy about torture but as Jay Gold point out, he doesn't believe the President lacks the power of a king (if you can authorize the breaking of any statute, how are you not king?)

We are moving too slow because the debate should not be about whether the Democrats will vote to confirm him, it needs to be about how we will get Democrats to filibuster him. Mukasey will get Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman, so a filibuster is the only thing that matters in the real world.

I don't give two shits about whether Senators make a statement by voting "no" on a successful nomination. This isn't about whether they have the courage to cast a meaningless vote. This is about who will be our Attorney General.

Let's move the debate on to urging a filibuster. The GOP has filibustered just about everything since the 2006 elections, so if it's okay to "obstruct" health care for children, then it's okay to "obstruct" a law enforcement officer who has said in testimony that he won't enforce the law.

So shooter242 is announcing to the world that he would support anything Arlen Specter would support. Remember that.

And tell them to fire her.

I am amazed at your overt racism here -- and your ignorance. Do you really think the Koran contains more embarrassing violence than the Bible or Talmud?

First, religion is whatever people think it is. There are pacifist Muslims and there are ethnic cleansing Jews and Christians.

Second, you make the assumption that the people who are being tortured are all guilty anyhow, so why lose sleep over them.

I suggest you look into the Republican Party, it suits you.

Please provide examples where the men on stage attacked Clinton on the basis of gender (or even implied an attack based on gender).

Cheney can now just lie outright. He's permanently lost the support of most of the nation and no mainstream media will call him criminally mendacious, so why not go all the way? The only people he has to satisfy are people who want to believe him -- die hard team fans. So in this venue, all he has to do is say something, anything. He explained himself to his fans with an answer that creates little cognitive dissidence inside their frames, so mission accomplished.

One note to Picko - anger at Bush and the war goes through all the states (I think he has positive numbers only in Utah). So while I agree that some right-wingers in the middle of the country think anti-Bush sentiment is restricted to the non-American coasts, they are wrong. Though again, Cheney only has to fit their frame, so if for them "American" doesn't include the coasts and they have been led to believe by the radio that their neighbors are all with them, they will believe this Cheney lie too.

Just think, it would be a cold day in hell before Fox and Limbaugh point out to viewers/listeners that Bush is disliked in Montana, Idaho, Oklahoma, Texas, South Dakota, Nebraska, Alaska and Wyoming. It's always "the liberal fringe, who have an irrational hatred for Bush."

With this interview, Cheney is speaking to people who have no idea what's going on in the real world (no global warming, no imminent collapse of the dollar, no powerful corporations picking their pocket, Iraq is great, Latin Americans aren't fully human, and Bill Clinton tied children to railroad tracks back in Arkansas.

The interests that want to see Mukasey installed are happy, the Democratic presidential candidates can still vote "no," and what are voters gonna do? Vote Republican?

Isn't it fun being taken for granted?

Shooter

Yes it does [make it correct]. Certainly in fact, if not in theory. The shape of the Governmental landscape is being negotiated between the President and the Congress, with the Supreme Court as referee. When all three branches agree on something, it's a done deal until reshaped by other agreements.

So all liberal legislation ruled constitutional by the SC, and all other "liberal" decisions by the Supreme Court are "correct," according to Shooter.