Right here at home, also.

That aside, where would the benevolent, secular Iraqis come from? And how gracefully would they exit when their time came?

He is thinking "outside the box", and in a crazy way, I like the idea of it. The "coalition" government has only served to cast the ethno-religious divisions into sharper relief.

I have long been skeptical of the immediate withdrawal scheme that has become such a rallying cry for the left - We broke it, we bought it. America needs to act like the leader it would like to be perceived as. How that is acheived...I don't know.

Maybe we should take over the oil, leave enough troops to protect the fields and refineries, and put our money (and the oil money) into the things that the young Iraqi journalist suggests - Public works and housing - And make the curret regime...er...government...irrelevant. It's like what he is saying, but from an economic perspective.

Disclaimer: I haven't really thought this through, and there clearly are no great solutions. Bush has "delibereately) dug us a hole so deep that we will ahve to stand on many bodies just to see daylight.

One downside of Dean's 50 State Strategy in the last election was that it inevitably recruits "Democrats" (Largely from the midwest) who are not necessarily in agreement with some of the more traditional Democratic ideals. Like privacy and freedom.

I really haven't looked to see if it is these newcomers who generally support this amnesty, But I would bet it is them, in higher proportions, than more traditional Democrats.

I'm not excusing this. I'm not supporting it. But it may represent the first steps, where we lose the battle but win the war.

Glenn, or anyone - Has anyone looked at where New vs. Old Democrat fall on this issue?

He'll probably be ok.

I used to live in Massachusetts - Barney Frank is great, and a great representative of his constituants.

I remember the whole Gobie deal (See link in Glenn's post). It's a thin line between prostitute and girlfriend. Frank got Gobie all kinds of baubles and perks.

If Spitzer had given Kristin a diamond ring in lieu of cash, I guess that would have been ok.

McCain was boiking his current wife before he left his former one - I wonder how he paid...err...I mean...what he gave her.

Bush didn't do nearly so well with his baseball investment, though he did manage to bilk the Texas taxpayers plenty

Their relative value is not really the point - He must have bought her SOMETHING.

Maybe there is a better example, though...Newt, Maybe?

Regarding trades of sex for money.

I think this is the point that we who have "joked" about the trading of sex for marriage...The government should not be in the business of passing judgements on what the "true" meaning of these trades are. I think the Frank example illustrates how thin the line is between love, sex and money. Not for you, I can tell. But for some.

In breaking news, Sadaam, from the grave, responded "I did not have sex with that terrorist"

Regardless of the presmis of this guys book, The Pope, in my opinion, does not fall into the same class as some of the others mentioned. Clinton is a hyper-political force of nature. bin Laden, also, in some ways. THe pope? Mere figurehead with waning political power.

And say La-la-la all you want, but this is an important issue.

I do not advocate killing kids with Downs, or who are retarded. But kids do come out all fucked up sometimes, and keeping them alive is a mere exercise in futility. THis idea that all kids must be kept alive is a relatively new concept. Kids like this girl, or even more functional than this girl, would have been allowed to die. Still are, in many places.

Ultimately, this should be the parents decision. And in making this decision, they should accept the consequences - ie, they need to take full responsibility, finacial and otherwise, for keeping the kid alive.

THis view gets complicated - What happens to people brain damaged in car accidents, etc. - I don't know. But our science has outstripped our ability to get our collective head around the consequenses of that science, and not just in this area. Life is precious. But not every life.

Also, as others have opined, the term "pillow angel" is really, really creepy. It's like she IS dead to them.

I can appreciate the emotion surrounding this issue - you and I clearly dissagree.

AS I said before, I think it should be the parents decision, not societies, and although I doubt this makes any difference in your eyes, it certainly differentiates me from the nazis - I resent the implication.

Also, as I pointed out before, euthaniztion was fairly common, until science made it possible to keep these kids alive, and suddenly unless we use this science, we are nazis? No.

How do you feel about laws that allow relatives to pull the plug? What if yau are pulling the plug on a young child that was seriously injured in a car accident? What differentiates killing a kid before birth (Abortion) from killing it after?Perhaps you are against abortion...I'm curious.

...Are like little love notes.

Send in the twins. Oh, wait! They're drinking for democracy. No blood for beer!

Why not cut off her arms and legs - SHe's not using them anyway....

And regarding "Pillow Angel"...THat's like calling a kid with a limp "Gimpy". It's not like "Pumpkin" - See the difference?

Did Bush, or anyone from the administration show up for that one?