At a recent Reason magazine confab, (senior editor) Nick Gillespie asked the South Park dudes how they thought they'd vote in '08, and they figured for Hillary.

-- -Mona-

At this point in time, I would not be surprised if Grover Nordquist announced his intentions to vote for Hillary in '08. Rats, sinking ship, fill in the blanks.

My assertion about Stone and Parker is based on an interview with them published in the New York Times a couple of years ago, not someone else's book.

If Shitter is making fun of us, why are we getting all the laughs at his expense?

You clearly long to be somebody's bitch! Sorry, Shitter, I already have an actual female dog; she won't tolerate another one in the house. You'll have to find some other big, strong man to take care of you, since you admit you're not capable of looking out for yourself.

Fuck him.

Sing along, everybody:

I'm al-Qaeda,

They're al-Qaeda,

He's a-Qaeda,

She's al-Qaeda...

Wouldn't you like to be al-Qaeda too?

Probably the best thing about this country right now is that knuckle-dragging laughing-stocks like yourself are fading into the fringes of the margins where you belong.

And that's based on empirical evidence.

You're accusing someone else of harassing other commenters and hijacking threads? Do you own seomthing called a mirror? What a fatuous, self-important asshole you are.

By the way, can you name a political candidate that you could support yet?

-- bucky1

What's next, another reiteration of the Glorious History of Libertarianism and the Magic Healing Powers of Ron Paul (regardless of the actual topic at hand)?

You just can't help it, can you? But the rest of us can help it by ignoring you. Or suggesting a reputable psychotherapist.

That, of course, is exactly what right-wing trolls desire when they come here: to disrupt the thread – to guide the discussion away from Glenn’s post. They want readers to give up on the comments attached to what Glenn writes – which, when on topic, are the best of any blog I’ve seen.

-- _zack_

You're right, of course, although bucky1 claims he isn't a right-winger or a troll. But when it comes to disrupring a thread and dragging us away from Glenn's topic, he's the Gold Standard.

Who's hiding inside of me? Bears? Escaped convicts? Japanese soldiers who don't know WWII is over?

Either bucky1 has me confused with somebody else (improbable) or he's mentally ill (read his comments and watch his multiple personalities take turns!) Whatever the explanation, I've had quite enough. And Mona, wise up -- this guy is NOT your friend. I doubt he's anyone's friend.

Since Glenn links to Shailagh Murray's WaPo article twice, I'm surprised he didn't point out that she makes no reference whatsoever to Vitter's (very recent) role in championing the federal marriage amendment. (I'm not surprised at Ms. Murray, however -- we wouldn't want to be too hard on another sordid GOP hypocrite.)

The even bigger mystery to me is how Palfrey's name could resurface in any context, no matter what. I thought her name and her story were permanently expunged from the media's consciousness after it leaked out that Dick Cheney's name was on her list. Yes, THAT Dick Cheney. If we're free once more to discuss the Madam and her misadventures, it must mean the Cheney angle has been safely incinerated down the memory hole.

Maybe we should eliminate the middleman and start electing real prostitutes to political office. Let the former politicians fend for themselves by walking the streets.

The WH connection seems to have disappeared with the remaining 20%...

-- Strangely Enough

I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you. Simply shocked. Did I mention I was shocked?

"Fetch me a bromide. And put some gin in it."

Here, I fixed this for you.

defining "forgivable" adultery as between a man and a woman should read: between an affluent, white, Christian, Republican, nominally heterosexual man and anything he cares to stick his dick into. And anyone who even thinks about having sex who doesn't meet all the above criteria is shit out of luck.

Much more realistic in today's USA, don't you think?

CNBC has a new series ... with daily reports on the government’s “War on Wealth”.

-- Kevinsf

And this would refer to the government of which country?!?!

That's fine for the sycophants here, but the beginning of the end for real world credibility.

-- shooter242

So I guess the Bush Administration is the end of the end for real world credibility.

And you, sir, are merely a vicious rumor.

BTW, isn't a "sycophant" a Republican who's seen Michael Moore's new movie?

The easiest way to avoid predicaments of hypocrisy is to have low or no standards. Is that a good thing for leaders and citizens?

-- shooter242

Gee, I don't know, Shitter -- it seems to suit you just fine!

You folks are upset that Bush refers to the murdering Muslims in Iraq by the same name as the murdering Muslims in Pakistan?

-- shooter242

Here's the actual quote from Bush on 7/12/07:

"The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th," quoth the Chimperor.

Not the "by the same name," Shitter; literally "the same folks."

Does President Butch mean the actual hijackers, all dead now, have miraculousy returned to life? Neat trick; perhaps he should ask his close personal friend Jesus Christ how this was accomplished. Or does he mean the (loosely-defined) "members" of a (loosely-defined) "organization" that didn't exist on September 11, 2001 was somehow responsible for the events of September 11, 2001?

And shouldn't someone point out to His Majesty that "folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq" includes the Armed Forces of the United States of America under his command?

I suspect the fact that Shitter's head has yet to explode into a million bloody pieces is a testimonial to the efficacy of barbiturates and duct tape.