The more I know that this is the central problem we will have for the next months. The "reasonable centrists" who will fall for that crap hook, line and sinker. Be realistic, they'll say, in almost the exact same way these morons were urging Big Dems (Kerry, Clinton, et. al.) to vote for the Iraq debacle, which had to be clearly insane to any sentient being when they took the vote. We see how well being intimidated into going along with a stupid meme serves the party. People don't forget. They remembered Kerry's "flip-flop" -- Rove helped them remember it -- and they haven't forgotten Hillary's either, and Rove will remind them. Pandering doesn't help you in any way.

But the other thing, the "support the troops" meme, is more difficult. We have to meet it head-on for what it is: a near-fascistic ancestor worship; we must follow the Divine Leader, we cannot break with orthodoxy, or we're dishonoring the gallant dead. We must find a way to present the people with what they already know is true: this corrupt reasoning is simply consigning many of those there now, and generations to come, to more aggressive wars, more adventures, and a further brutalizing of the American people. In fact, I think we've somewhat been on the wrong model as we study Bush and fascism: the model isn't at all in Germany, but in Japan. Imagine, if you will, Dobson at the head of a National Church, who blesses the president -- always of the same party -- and keeps those arms dollars going. That's the kind of fascism we're headed for: the Rising Sun.

Remember, the Japanese military, and the Japanese nation, was on a hunt for oil, too.

If they passed the same thing again, it would be vetoed again. They have tried three times, and they can put a veto-proof bill through the Senate. Yes, it stinks, and it stings. But we have Liebermans and Blue Dogs. The Republicans who know this war is wrong won't vote against it. So what's the alternative, exactly?

Now the pressure comes with convincing enough people, starting about, oh, September, that they should vote with us.

Sorry, but zeal doesn't work in the Senate.

It may have done Tom Edsall well in Washington to have a poker face, but in his new job at Huffington Post, it's not going to wash.

Just a side-issue, of course, but why is it that so many of the very biggest websites look and act like they were programming by your twelve-year-old cousin? I'm thinking of Drudge, eBay, Craigslist, and of course, MySpace. Nice new Web 2.0 graphics they aren't. Slick operability? No can do. But they're making money hand over fist. Well, I don't know about MySpace. Lots of people are leaving for Facebook and Virb.

Just askin'.

It would be a very good idea to define "sex by fraud" as rape.

However, maybe not. Let's say, every broken engagement is actionable. "He said he loved me, but then I found out he--"

If you follow this logic through to the end, you have the Office of the Prevention of Vice and the Promotion of Virtue.

Now, this case, if the facts are as alleged, gets awfully close to real, honest-to-God rape. But I'm wary of muddying the distinction between rape and bad faith sex.

I suspect that new law, something like "stalking" changed the landscape in that arena, may be what is necessary. Once upon a time, the law was such that some creep of a boyfriend could phone multiple times, act deliberately to creep a woman out, and make her life a living hell, but break no laws. Well, that changed.

Make a suggestion for new language that clearly distinguishes true "rape lite" from merely falling out with a live-in girlfriend or breaking an engagement and having an argument.

He doesn't call names. He makes charges, but they're always clear and backed up with evidence. It's Klein who calls names.

From reading Glenn's article about Broder and the Beltway, it's clear what he's criticizing, and it's definitely not "going outside the beltway." Yet Klein takes one of the most unfounded accusations you could make, and runs with that.

I think Joe should become a barber -- say in Buffalo -- and talk to the patrons every day. In a month or so, he might have something interesting to say.

But I must.

She sees a funeral for a soldier coming home from Iraq --

"The melody from a classic 1960s song, Simon and Garfunkel's "Scarborough Fair," floated piercingly into my mind."

And like a lamprey, she fastens on to the most insipid song they ever did.

Then she follows up with a bunch of thoroughly conventional "insights" into the debates, in which she believes the Republicans have won, of course, for the same reason she believes that Donald Trump "won" -- they're sexist males! Ooh, how contrarian!

Then she dumps on Rosie, I guess because she still regards herself as the bull goose loonie of prominent lesbians. And then she says that she and her partner are whiling away the hours watching recorded soap operas.

How tiresome. How on earth did this babbling old lady get a column in Salon?

I lived through the '60s and felt there was a solid core of American institutions that were fundamentally sound. That what was needed was votes in the Senate, and resolutions, and debate. The Nixon administration was taken down for crimes against democracy.

I still think it's possible we will pull this off again. But more and more, the Washington and business establishments are reminding me of corrupt elites just before cataclysms. Remember the summer of sharks and Gary Condit.