It will take years, vats of disinfectant and many sessions on their shrink's couch to cleanse the White House of the stink spread there by Karl Rove and to analyze why supposedly law-abiding Republicans would embrace this miscreant's misdeeds with such fervor.

I suggest that Bernstein & Woodward write yet another tell-all book on the Bush Administration with Karl Rove as the focus. Instead of "All The President's Men", they could call it "All The President's Sphincter."

Best descriptor of Karl Rove...ever.

Mr. Rove's legacy is in the smoldering ruins of lives torched by his politics of destruction, in the careers destroyed and devastated by vilification, innuendo and ad hominem attacks as well as honor and dignity having been skewered nonstop by a vile cretin dedicated to winning at any and all costs.

No, Karl Rove should get down on his knees and ask forgiveness from a higher power for the evil that he has employed against others. He is one of the most vile human beings ever to ooze from the sewer; he will be missed only by those who have bastardized the traditional American precepts of fairness, honesty, decency and honor.

ER wrote: "Get in your goddamn car, drive to some medium or small town that begins with your favorite letter. Stop at a restaurant and sit at the counter and start a conversation with the person next to you. Ask them about guns, God, abortion, gays; if you're brave you can try to change their mind on any of it."

Thanks, buddy; you've just proved the point of those of us who point out that the divisive politics of Rove are EXACTLY the above: God, guns, gays and abortion. He used the politics of hate to further the Republican "cause". He used these so-called wedge issues to win. He enlisted the Religious Right in a shameless devil's pact to mix religion with politics and to portray Republicans as one with God. Give me a break.

God isn't spelled GOP, Smith & Wesson weren't two lost prophets of the House of David, gay people have been a part of humanity forever and abortion wouldn't be so pervasive if the Religious Right would at least inform teens of the consequences of unprotected sexual relations rather than "just saying no".

Given the politics of hate as practiced by Karl Rove/The Religious Right in small-town America versus the enlightened politics of the "Silicon valley crowd"...I'll take the Valley crowd every time. At least the Valley crowd has weighed both sides of the equation and chosen a path rather than simply acquiescing to the bloviation of bigots.

"Turd-Blossom" Karl Rove, shit-shoveler-extraordinaire, is mis-named as "Bush's Brain"; considering all the fecal matter that's been dispensed through his office, he should be called "Bush's Sphincter."

After considering the Progressive candidates and their relative strengths versus their weaknesses, I've decided to support Hillary Clinton for President for several basic reasons: she's intelligent, she's articulate, she's competent, she has a vision of America that includes ALL Americans and she's incredibly compassionate. Those are the main reasons, although, there are many more subtle and nuanced ones that shape my opinion...all of them positive.

Barack Obama is a motivating person...just a little inexperienced. John Edwards is a compassionate guy...just a little wimpy on issues. Joe Biden, while experienced and articulate, is an '80's candidate; he's looking backward rather than forward. Chris Dodd...same rap as Senator Biden. Dennis Kucinich? While I admire his passion and respect his positions, he simply doesn't have the gravitas to be President.

If the Republicans are so "terrified" of a Hillary Clinton candidacy/Presidency, that simply validates my choice. Her core values of responsibility, competency, compassion and strength through the PROPER use of American military power are diametrically-opposed to those of the Bushites and their ilk. What, may I ask, is wrong with that?

I neither fear nor cheer Rudy Guiliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, et al, as the Republican Party's choice for President; each has his strengths as well as numerous faults. Those faults, imho, out-weigh their strengths.

In a recent poll, more than 30% of Republicans want "none-of-the-above" as their choice for President. That number suggests that the Republicans will be running more AGAINST the Democratic candidate for President in '08 rather than FOR their candidate.

The Republicans...once again...will engage in the politics of personal destruction rather than having an honest debate about the issues. Demonizing Hillary Clinton is exactly how they THINK they'll fool the electorate and, thus, elect their candidate.

Surprise, surprise.

On the one hand, America supports Israel in whatever action(s) Israel takes viz-a-viz her neighbors in the Middle East. On the other hand, America supports Israel in whatever action(s) Israel takes viz-a-viz her neighbors in the Middle East. We're caught in a conundrum wrapped in a paradox.

With the Israeli lobby in America so strong, with our interests in that region so compelling and with few other viable options available, we are in Israel's hip-pocket, no matter what. We can't do the right thing because of that lobby.

No wonder then that the Palestian problem's solution is so elusive: we are precluded from hauling Israel up short when they step over the line because that same Israeli lobby tosses around the "anti-Semitic" epithet freely at anyone who dares question how Israel operates.

I'd be MORE inclined, not LESS inclined, to support a candidate for President who remains a close ally of Israel but also has the cojones/cojonettes to confront Israel when they're wrong. Our credibility in that region is at stake if we fail to do so.

However, any candidate who stands UP to that Israeli lobby on principle should be prepared to be called an anti-Semite. That's just what they love to do.