Every federal search warrant results in the FBI seeing things that are beyond the purview of the investigation. This is precisely why we require a judge to issue the search warrant, rather than just giving the FBI carte blanche to search everything and everybody. The idea is that when a criminal commits a crime, he/she gives up some of the privacy rights that innocent civilians have.

This should be no different for a member of congress than for every other American. Members of congress get to write laws, not be above them.

Pixar has had an amazing string of success, and yes "past performance is no guaranty of future results." But you are letting your expectations color your perception. If Cars was a Dreamworks release, it would be running 98% on the Tomato Meter.

I have seen a number of posts here that say that Republicans have built this uneasy alliance with the working class but actually work against them, and it is really the Democrats who represent the interests of the working class. Not only is this wrong, but if we continue to believe it, we will continue to lose elections.

The working class are a majority white population with non-union jobs. There is nothing in the Democrat platform for them. Democrat support for the money grubbing (and US corporation destroying) unions is bad for the working class. Programs to help the poor just mean more taxes for the working class. Environmentalism is not a working class issue. Affirmative action, amnesty for illegals, support for trial lawyers, and protection of abortion rights (nothing for the working class there either). Raise the minimum wage? No sorry, the working class largley makes more than minimum wage already. Balance the budget? That is going to mean raising taxes (i.e. not popular with working people). Maybe we could pay reperations? Or, how about a gas tax?

I think that the working class see the Democrats as the party of rich liberal ideologs, and minorities. They are not going to come over to our side as long as we work against their perceived interests.

Let's be honest here folks. If the working class turn out to support the Democrats, it is because of the failed war, the corruption scandals, and the economy. Given that many Democrat congresssional leaders voted for and continue to support the war, it will be difficult to use the war as a wedge issue. The corruption scandal issue will be partially negated by William Jefferson. Leaving only the economy to bludgen the Republicans with (not an easy one to explain to the largely uneducated working class).

This is going to be a tougher election than you think.

More multi-family housing starts mean that developers are betting on more renters and condo buyers, and proportionally fewer home buyers. This is consistant with the theory that higher interest rates are depressing home buyer's spending power, the precondition to a bubble bursting.

"more boys are going to college and more boys are getting bachelor's degrees. Sounds like a crisis to me!"

The sarcasm here relies on a highly slanted view of the statistics.

There are more people in the US now than there were in 1971. Simultaneously, there has been an increase in college marticulation rate. Therefore, one would expect to see an increase in the number of boys in college, reguardless of whether or not there is a "crisis." You will also see an equally meaningless increase in the number of girls, hispanics, asians, and transexuals.

A relavant statistic would have been a measure of the ratio (that's percentage to the statically challenged). When we look at that, we find that 57% of college graduates in 2001 were girls according to the study being quoted. That means that only 43% of college graduates are boys. In 1970, the numbers were 42% women, and 58% men. Therefore, the population of boys in college has dropped from 58% to 43%, and that huge drop has happened in just one generation.

Sounds like a crisis to me.

All of the top-10-ranked seniors at Fremont are girls.

"At a school like this, guys get pressured to do a lot of things … gangs, drugs... Girls don't have that kind of pressure," she says.

Obviously, this shows the need for more girls only educational programs and funding. Let's start a special girls only program at Harvard to bring more women into the hard sciences.

You are blaently sexist in your statements, and I, for one, am offended by your attitude toward these poor boys.

"hit the damn books" has been used repetedly by jim crow era whites (and modern racists) to describe the lack of black school acheivement. Non racists see that there are systematic issues that keep blacks back, and as a result, we have a number of programs specifically targeted at helping blacks. You are using the same Klan-like logic to sully the reputation of these poor hispanic boys by calling them stubborn.

The logic of this is simple. People start out essentialy the same, and a difference in outcome is the result of a difference in treatment (treatment in school and by the larger society society). If it were 10 boys on top, and no girls, there would be howls from the chorus here on Broadsheet (see Larry Summers). You dont get to belittle these boys just because you don't want to put the resources and effort into boys that we put into girls in our public educational system.