You're just so darn polite, Garrison. Bush is much more than merely an incompetent and incurious little man. He's an evil little man.

Today we see that the Bushistas propose taking away the tiny $255 Social Security death benefit and other meager survivor benefits so that Bush's wealthy political benefactors might keep their obscene tax cuts which have inflicted crippling deficits upon the national budget.

How do you characterize a plan to prop up the aristocracy on the backs of poor widows and orphans? Sounds pretty evil to me. Yet Bush has no shame in proposing it. That's because he's an evil little man.

How do you characterize the notion that we should support the killing and maiming of endlessly more young men and women in order to "honor" the sacrifices of those young men and women who have already been killed or maimed? Sounds pretty evil to me. Yet Bush has no shame in proposing it. That's because he's an evil little man.

I truly love reading your articles, Garrison; you write so beautifully. But you're just too darn polite sometimes.

The House impeaches, the Senate conducts the trial. Therefore, tell your congressperson to impeach and tell your senators to convict. Don't forget to write your congressperson! Use email.

I applaud Garrison for writing this article. Say it again!

I agree with the comment that removing Bush and Cheney would leave us with Hastert (or someone equally untrustworthy) and therefore we must wait until after the midterm election when, hopefully, the Democrats take back Congress.

I have to admit, though, that it's a real gamble whether the Democrats will stiffen their spines in time.

In my religion, the name of which is unimportant, and which the First Amendment guarantees us the right to practice without government interference, human life begins at the time of birth. According to my religion, human life begins at the moment of birth when the soul takes possession of the body. From that point forward, we have a person with natural and legal rights of their own.

Also according to my religion, prior to birth and the soul taking possession of the new body, the fetus is a biological organism under the exclusive control of the woman carrying it. What she does with it prior to birth is entirely up to her and between her and God. Again, this is religion. There is no science that can refute this belief and no law that can constitutionally interfere with it.

Some people have the religious view that human life begins at conception. That's fine. They are free to believe that as an article of faith and to live according to that faith and there is no science that can refute such and no law that can constitutionally interefer with it. Pepople of this belief system are most likely to find abortion morally wrong, and I can see where for them it would be.

The First Amendment enjoins the government from interfering with the practice of either of these belief systems or from making laws based on any system of religious belief.

Therefore, neither the federal government nor any state can constitutionally make a law requiring, for example, that a doctor tell a woman that life begins at conception (or any other time) because that is a religious position and the First Amendment prohibits the enacting of laws based on religion. (You'd think this point would be obvious to the legal scholars out there.)

In closing, I offer a little prayer of liberation:

Lord, deliver us from the overbearing among us who, well intentioned as they may see themselves, would in violation of the law of the land seek to impose their religious stricture upon those of differing belief. Spare us, Oh Lord, from such iniquity, we beseech you in the name of all that is right and good and just. Amen.

It seems like these people are saying, "We beat our children because we're Christians and we want our kids to be Godly." Sounds pretty sick to me.

If parents want to both follow Jesus and raise nice kids, they might first try their savior's own advice to "Love one another". I don't recall where Jesus said to hit the kids - or anyone else.

What about what Jesus said and did? Why do so many so-called "Christians" ignore and even contravene the teachings and example of Jesus, whom they claim to follow? Why should the mean and hateful exhortations of some preachifyin' human of questionable intent carry more weight than the words and example of Jesus himself?

Oh ye of little faith.