i work in this field, and i would say that just about every person who is serious about climate change and wants a policy that significantly decreases carbon emissions would love to support a carbon tax.

a carbon would be fair (non-regressive), simple and efficient. but its a political non-starter. so the least bad alternative is cap-and-trade.

for the GOP today. mcnamara came of age in WW2 and so was understandably enthralled by the awesome power of the US military, so why couldn't it be used to bomb vietnam (and SE asia) into submission?

likewise, with the GOP chicken-hawks so awed by the US' advanced weapons, the easy victory in Iraq War (the Original Recipe) two decades ago, etc, why shouldn't we expect such a massively misplaced response (smart bombs vs. boxcutters; abrams tanks vs. IEDs) to our new geopolitical reality.

the sad fact is that mcnamra seemed caught up in his own ego and intelligence while trodding what he thought was a respectable path to stop the spread of communism. it's hard to believe -- and that's not to say we should forgive -- that he operated with the same carelessness, violence and ignorance that characterizes our current warmongers.

how does it feel to protest and be totally ignored, wingnuts? granted, you are ignored cause you're crazy, and the 1.5 million i marched with in NYC in 2003 were ignored for completely different reasons, but i digress.

we had a war criminal for 8 years, royally screwing those at home and abroad, and then when a smart young black guy gets into office, and tries to give everyone health care, you call him a fascist/marxist/insert another contradictory title here.

the majority has spoken. now go home and shut up if you don't have any constructive criticism. your kind is hopefully becoming extinct.

because Patrick must appoint someone who will not seek to win the seat in a special election.

Dukakis has, for his entire career, worked to solve the problems that hit middle and low income Americans hardest, and health care is at the top of the pile. It would be a fitting salute to a man whose great career was overshadowed by that fucking tank attack ad in 1988.

What a great way to say thank you, from all of us Massholes.

the bad law was in 2004, when the house changed it in case kerry won the presidency.

if a governor isnt held to appoint a successor of that same ilk of the one being replaced, that is a clear circumvention of the people's wishes: they voted for a liberal dem, so why would a GOP governor be able to appoint a right winger?

the problem was in 2004 they didnt change the law to what is is now: the gov can appoint a short term appointment/seat warmer who cannot run in the special election.

a) you get a senator who is beholden to no special interests and will be acting in the good faith of his predecessor.

b) you take another chink out of the ridiculous armor of incumbency, which is slowing killing off our political system.

i agree that it looks like opportunism, but viewed in this light, it's merely correcting the mistake. if we switch everything around -- take alabama as an example -- would GOPers really want it any other way?

....to quote everett ulysses mcgill.

it's a damn tight spot to judge the best coen bros. film. it's like picking a favorite beatles song. just can't do it. but the top contenders

the obvious ones:

lebowski

fargo

the crowd-pleasers:

o brother

no country

the over-looked:

barton fink (buscemi's tiny role as chet is too good for words)

the man who wasn't there

intolerable cruelty (screwball at it's finest, imo)