What Cheney said was no accident of gaff or fumbling of words. He meant what he said because he doesn't care about defending the Constitution. He's made that quite clear by now.

Bush has again and again said something like "I took an oath to protect the American people! That's the most important part of my job!" He never uses the actual words from the presidential oath , as far as I know, that he took an oath to 'preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States. Maybe twice he has said that...when he had to while being sworn in with the actual oath, wherein it states just that.

I never asked that goof to protect me. I sincerely wish he would stop trying. He just might get me killed someday with all that "protection" he insists on lavishing upon me.

He's not despised

but he's also not popular. If the war had gone better things would be different and it's as simple as that.

-- tiberius

If pigs could fly things would be different. And "it's as simple as that". So profound you are, Mr. Tiberius.

Another profound truth from Glenn

-Scientician

What the right is doing is quite predictable but needs to be stopped.

-GG

A lot of Glenn's posts are for that purpose. That's one reason why he gets one commenter or another popping in with some regularity with that dopey comment that goes something like, "...and why is this surprising?" When, of course, Glenn, and usually none if any of the people who had posted comments, had voiced any surprise about the subject of the post. The point of the post is to connect the dots and keep them connected until such time that the piper is, finally, paid...in full.

I think that lost comment thing happens when you forget to close the tag or mistype it in some way. I always check preview' before clicking 'publish'.

Of course, we could take any grammar discussion threads elsewhere, so they wouldn't clutter the space.

-- Karen

That would be much appreciated.

Seriously, I'm aware of a lot of the grammar goofs, and I certainly contribute a few myself. But grammar police? Popping in at will? Please? I've seen that on other boards. It's really an unwelcome interruption, and you'd find a lot of people feeling insulted or embarrassed by it.

Thanks, though

Do liberals think the 4th amendment should be done away with? Some do, depending on the issue. Liberals are for change.

-Mack

Come the hell on, Mack. You are really stretching to make that claim. "Some do" is unacceptable. The buzzer rang loud and clear after that bogus answer.

Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Kitt,

There were historic circumstances in which Progressives and liberals were willing to constrain Habeas Corpus and the 4th Amendment

Lincoln for example suspended habeas corpus.

Yeah, I know all that shit, Mack. But that's like that old poo argument that the Democrats were against the Civil Rights Act, when in reality it was guys like Strom Thurmond and the rest of the 'dixiecrats'. Bunk

By the way, whatever you may think of Lincoln, he was a Republican.

Of course, most if not all of the Dixiecrats turned Republican after '64. Where are these guys and gals who are trying to distance themselves from Bush going to go? Sure as hell not to the Democratic Party.

You've, umm, shall I say, completely misread Valentian's post.

Kitt

Perhaps it was you, and not I, who misread Valentian's post. And perhaps intentionally, at that.

-- walter_map

Read back a couple pages or so. Valentian was replying to Mack. No, it wasn't me who misread the post. You need to slow down.

with ghosts like these...

-Valentian

"the Repubs have to suffer with their ghosts"-Svenkser

Ghosts? Name one.

Reagan is now a National Airport...

-- Valentinian

That Valentian replying at 4:45 Pacific time

Kitt

You don't like my posts, don't read them. And neither shall I correct your spelling, or comment on your lack of content, or your other deficiencies.

Okay by you, Boss?

-- walter_map

I didn't express an opinion one way or the other about your posts. I said you'd misread the post you got all hot about because it's true, you did misread it. All you have to do is read back a couple of pages and you'll see what I'm telling you.

No worries, Kitt!

Location: TBD

-- Karen M

I didn't think you were serious really. Location:TBD? What does the TBD stand for?

Thanks, Igirl.

Walt-Map drops by, acts all self righteous and convinces a couple of you that he is well read. But yet, in the span of about an hour he insults about a half dozen posters only because he isn't well read enough to go back two tiny Salon pages to see that he was wrong and had been, consequently, showering people with insults because he had misread something that someone had posted.

Unapologetic when wrong, self righteous, verbally abusive, and apparently too lazy to retrace his steps to, if for no other reason, save himself from making a fool of himself.

You sound like a kid in a candy store. ;o)

Working on a name, format, etc., for the language/grammar blog...

More later.

-- Karen M

"The last thing America needs in 2008 is another incompetent President who cannot articulate a credible rationale for their positions."

-politicallyrunonsentence

That might be the only true line in your entire drama queen post.

I'll say one good thing about libertarianism, the subject seems to keep 'Shooter' comments down to a bare minimum.