I had enough of Jennifer Aniston as soon as I saw her picture on Salon's front page.

I hope this generates lots of clicks and makes it possible for Salon to keep doing the kind of fearless investigative journalism that I read it for, because I can't think of any other reason for this waste of perfectly good electrons.

If it is, I hereby donate the following campaign ad script to whoever runs against Phil Kline:

EXTERIOR DAY: A nice suburban house in a nice suburban neighborhood. A pretty teenaged girl comes out of the house, locks the door behind her, and walks off down the street. A disreputable-looking man in a 3-piece suit (who may just happen to resemble AG Kline) enters the frame from the opposite direction. The camera tracks him as he scuttles up the walk to the house, jimmies the door open, and moves down the hall into what is obviously the girl's bedroom. He begins rummaging through dresser drawers, tossing her clothing onto the floor until he comes to the underwear. He picks up a pair of her panties and examines them minutely, finally burying his nose in the crotch and inhaling deeply. FREEZE FRAME.

Voiceover: "Would you elect this man to the number-one law enforcement office in Kansas? Sadly, you already have."

Candidate: I'm [name] and I respect your family, I respect your privacy, I respect your rights. Vote for me for Attorney General on Election Day.

...was Terry Jones.

This reader thinks that if there is a God, and if He's just rather than merciful, then President of American Life League Judie Brown can look forward to being kidnapped and impregnated from a days-long gang-rape by dozens of large, greasy, dark-complected felons carrying the genes for a variety of crippling diseases, and being blessed with such a strong constitution that carrying the baby to term will in no way impair her health.

Not that I would ever wish such a thing on anyone.

OF COURSE little girls pudge up between 9 and 12. That's what their bodies do right before launching on the first growth spurt of puberty. It's normal, for fuck's sake. If a preadolescent isn't putting on weight, something's probably wrong. Like they're starving themselves or being starved by clueless parents.

The bold section that starts with the quote "which are part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards..." is not properly closed. That might be affecting the font on the earlier poster's browser.

Welcome to Salon, Glenn.

1. Unclosed bold tag after the graf ending 'But in 2005, Lieberman assured Americans that he had just returned from Iraq and that "the administration's recent use of the banner 'clear, hold, and build' accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week."'

2. It should be "put the brakes on", not breaks, in the 4th graf from the end.

Great work, Glenn. Hope you're happy in your new venue.

"When the information conveyed turns out to be not true, it's a little harder to identify the person who was doing the lying."

Why, goddamit, why is it harder?

When will the press start acting as if they were accountable to their readers, and burn anonymous sources that lie to them and the country?

Wasn't the "Very Happy Tick" episode from a previous season?

...would imprisoning a 13-year-old for a YEAR be celebrated as a lenient response to acting like a typical 13-year-old idiot.

This country has lost its fucking mind.

who needs enemas?

You just wanted to use that translucent-popup code that's become ubiquitous and rather trendy.

Yes, long about 1957 or so.

Next question.

Lie down with asshats, get up with dingleberets.

If you look back to the very beginning of the republic, the same surnames pop up again and again in the lists of Congressmen, top Executive officers, Federal judges, etc. Is it truly the case that this is more common now than it has ever been?

As one surveys the smoking ruin to which the Wrecking Crew has reduced the country, occasionally there's a nugget of good news. In context I think a report that the Republicans will continue to be led by repellent, incompetent losers qualifies. Thanks for the day-brightener.

...which I'm too lazy to track down again, but you can Google up easily enough. The core of their argument is that the pictures in question do not in fact meet the Pennsylvania definition of child pornography which requires either exposure of the genitals or the Potter Stewartesqe I-know-it-when-I-see-it "lewd and lascivious intent" or somesuch. And they're not requesting money damages from the prosecutor (except for fees and costs), but rather injunctive relief: a declaration that the pics are not pornographic, the attempt to force the kids into diversion is a violation of parental rights and the threat of charges retaliation for resistance. Thus I'm not sure how qualified immunity comes into play.

Oh, and TC-F, the claim of interference with parental rights is based on the Fourteenth, not Fourth amendment.

Ignorant about the world, and proudly so; hypocritical; thieving; uses power to carry out personal vendettas; lies freely in pursuit of her goals; subordinates her children's needs to her own desires...

I'm going with "yes". Who cares why she quit? Just be glad she has.

I think the phrase you're looking for is "forced birthers" or perhaps "fetus fetishists".

Concern troll is concerned.

@2ndGenerationPilot -

It's true enough that TSA frontliners vote, but I don't see any candidates trying to talk sense about security. No President is going to spend the political capital needed to make changes and then risk having any kind of incident, no matter how unrelated to the changes he or she made - not with the ignorance and hysteria that rules our discourse these days. There's no political upside to reforming our stupid security policy, and infinite potential downside.

Call me back when Bruce Schneier is on the ballot in all 50 states, and polling at 40% or better.