What does "pressure and intimidation from the administration" amount to? Some have suggested that Rove and his band of merry thieves has a dossier on every law-maker, like a latter-day J. Edgar Hoover, and uses it to cow them into submission. That just doesn't cut it for me. You can't blackmail that many people all at once. I haven't seen anything credible that explains how a lame-duck administration with baggage that almost amounts a pair of cement overshoes is able to "pressure and intimidate" politicians many of whom just rode a wave of popular support, in defiance of the administration, into office.

Somebody help me out. What gives here??!

Indeed, the power of positive thinking is an old American value. But sometimes it causes people to fall for pyramid schemes, or even worse.

Iraq is a pyramid scheme, only it's made of bodies, not bucks.

Until I realized what he meant was we're not waging a SERIOUS enough war -- in other words we're not waging enough war on terror. That we should get serious about waging war on terror like we did the Krauts and the Japs. Just when I thought maybe Newt didn't still scare the shit out of me...

I don't mind having MS boil down these debates for me. Even the boxing metaphor, so what? This race, on both sides, isn't going to mean much until we get into the last six-nine months. Things are going to change, issues are going to be affected by events, aliens may even kidnap a candidate or two. This much posturing and jostling, this early, is a reflection of the country's thirst for new leadership but practically speaking it's just too damn early to be taking any of it terribly seriously. So I'm glad to let Mike write his articles his way and that I didn't have to sit through the whole thing myself.

And in case there's one person left who hasn't seen this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFGit_tZDqs

Lest we forget that while this early campaigning is welcomed by a country pining for new leadership (or leadership at all), it's also mother's milk to the media, especially television. A huge -- increasing as time progresses -- chunk of the zillions raised by candidates goes straight into TV ads at the same rates paid by top corporate advertisers. Now that war news has gone from exciting to distasteful, is it any wonder that the media want to gin up as much early interest in the ad-creating campaigns as possible? And here we thought they were just being patriotic.

Of W and his father, 41: They talk almost every morning by phone, and Mr. Bush studiously avoids saying anything critical of his son, close associates say.

If you want to talk to W, you don't say anything critical. Otherwise, you don't talk to W, even if your his dad.

The Boy in the Bubble.

The way Bush and Cheney are ginning up the faithful for an attack on Iran, given the fact that it's quite believable that they'd start another war and declare martial law or the equivalent (if they can get a real shootin' war going) right around the time of the next elections -- hey, who says we're going to have elections? These guys, I kid you not, are capable of trying anything. The only thing that might stop them -- it sure as hell won't be Congress -- is the military itself, refusing to go along.

We're in for an interesting year and a half. I won't believe we're rid of Bush until the next prez is on the stand with the bible under his left palm.

If a majority of Americans, during your administration, and according to reliable polls, want gay marriage legalized, would your feelings about the issue compel you to veto legislation in spite of the public majority's expressed will?

It's the Executive, dammit. Not the throne.

No #$#@$! way. Not a single one of the television interviews Pollack and O'Hanlon gave about their Op-Ed included any reference to the fact that they were both supporters of the war and of the Surge. And whose job was it to clear the record about that? Why, Pollack and O'Hanlon, of course. But they sat there and let themselves be called war critics because they knew goddamn well that it jacked up the pro-Bush, pro-war content of their "report." It's nice that Glenn can sit down and be all collegial with O'Hanlon, but what he should've done is punch the scumbag in the face.

People are dying for these lies and everyone who furthers them is a murderer.

WWII enthusiasm was drummed up by slogans that implied if we didn't beat Hitler, we'd all be speaking German after the dust settled. It's the way civilian populations have been revved up for war since the first rock was thrown in anger.

But if you haven't seen this, you don't want to miss it: Cheney on Iraq, 1994. Is it power that corrupts, or did he just get old? What happened?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I

I wonder if the Dems will have the balls to start calling Rove "Mr. Cut-and-Run." Look at the messes he's created and now...what? He goes back to private life, maybe writes a book with a fat advance, works in industry or academe -- while other people bleed and die and struggle to undo the disasters he spawned?? I don't think so! He should be dragged bodily back to Washington and forced to serve out Bush's term.

Yes, Rove is a cheater. A clever one. If you can bring it off, it's a good way to win elections. However, it is a lousy way to govern. That's the tragedy of the Bush presidency.

Turns out David Corn said it, too, and better, in the Nation.

You're joking, right?