Dick Cheney finally dragged into the light of day (via Libby's trial) to either incriminate himself directly or indirectly in this entire Plame scandal? Three words: Bring it on.

Cretins with microphones.

Surgical removal of the foreskin for "hygiene" is analagous to surgically removing the eyelids so that you can keep your eyeballs "clean." The foreskin, as so many readers have pointed out, is a perfectly positioned, entirely normal and necessary body part that serves the male for good reproductive health and sexual pleasure-- two functions, by the way, that have been preferentially selected across millenia towards the continued evolution of the human species. New bumper sticker: Darwin had a foreskin!

...clearly you missed the boat.

When I said that "surgical removal of the foreskin for "hygiene" is analagous to surgically removing the eyelids so that you can keep your eyeballs "clean" I was drawing an analogy, hence the word "analagous" with an outlandish example (the eyelids) precisely to indicate how absurd, in my view, the removal of the foreskin is. Analagous.

A dictionary. It's a wonderful thing.

...a knowing wink (an homage?) to the first presidential debate when the hapless, heaving, smirking, sighing, glob-of-spit-in-the-corner-of-his-mouth Bush, yet again at a loss for a coherent answer, sputtered, "See, (long pause, hands pressed to his chest) I know how the world works!...".

Well done!

...the thoughfulness and well-made arguments of the first few posters. I add a second to Less Hopeful's last line. The core problem of elected Democratic "leaders" has been and remains defensively allowing themselves, the issues, and "the game" to be defined by the repugnant fringe of the opposition party (including the occupants and drones in the White House). One question is why aren't Democrats learning from their many mistakes and some of their not insignificant triumphs at standing up and fighting back (Social Security "reform" comes to mind).

A sly and subtle piece of socio-political commentary, Mr. Keillor. Too subtle for some, I guess. *cough*Ironclad*cough*

I too absolutely agree that the timing of this "bin Laden tape" couldn't be more advantageous to pResident Criminal and his Band of Sh*t-nosed Criminals.

Who would have thought Osama bin Laden was George Bush's best friend? I hope Smirky sends him a basket of fruit once in a while.

Ordinarily, I love Colbert and his witty, insightful, off-handed, back-handed, and slight-of-handed humor, but I just didn't find his treatment of Pascrell funny, and for that matter, any of his other interviews with Democratic Congresspeople. I mean, why put Dems into that mock-interview-- cleverly edited towards maximum humiliation as it is? Isn't his whole show a great big ironic answer against right-wing idealogues and cable circus clowns who do this in earnest in the first place?

Now, I hope I don't get slammed for this but if there's some crucial element I'm missing, then elighten me.

There is an element of the scold in your announcement that asks us to sign our name to posts, with the unhappy impression something akin to "Teacher will now only give out little red stars to obedient boys and girls who mind." Certainly, by all means disallow abusive posts that are antithetical to the spirit of commeraderie and intellectual exchange. But we all know that wishing to remain anonymous, using a handle, or inventing an actual-sounding "name," is liberating to some people and not incompatible with thoughtful posts that one could claim in the light of day.

This seems very un-Salon of you.

The first true words spoken by the Bush Administration--

"The president didn't mean what he said in SOTU"

Dear Congressman Young,

The shame is that the outrage you expressed at your wife's being asked to leave the State of the Union address (a shameful act indeed) doesn't include the handcuffed and jailed Mrs. Cindy Sheehan.

The shame, since you "disagree with everything she stands for" is that you must also be against the freedom of speech accorded to everyone under our great Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Further, let us not forget that Mrs. Sheehan has never once disrespected our troops; indeed, she has always held our men and women in uniform in the highest regard, beginning with her own beloved and lost son Casey and extending to each of his fellows in arms. She simply doesn't want any more of them to die.

Finally I challenge the dubious claim that Mrs. Sheehan's message "2245 Dead. How Many More?" was "political." Even a partisan supporter of the Iraq war such as yourself cannot hope to politicize "2245 Dead." This number, sir, is merely reality. A grim tally. An indisputable fact. A number, sadly, that today, is already out of date.

Sincerely,

(real name)

You both get a red star from me. I'm in the same boat-- the sinking ship of Democracy-as-we've-known-it, fuming and cursing the Republican iceberg we keep striking up against and calling out to the Democrats for help while most of them take another waltz turn on the ballroom dance floor. Don't get me wrong, I do what I can do (phone calls, emails, letters, cash donations to groups I support, keeping well informed), but beyond that, it's our elected Democratic leaders who are in the best position to do what might actually help. They've got the elected office, the ability to cast or withhold votes, the access to certain media with integrity, the microphones. And, oh no, Paul Hackett just got into one of the last lifeboats.

...that after the shooting, "the vice president fixed himself a cocktail back at the house." So very Noel Coward-like, no?

More like, Dick immediately threw back two or three finger's worth of the hardest thing he could get his hands on.

Thank you, Cary, for your timely reminder for colorectal screening and useful links for more information. One always hopes that increased awareness and knowledge will help the many who are otherwise reluctant to think about or act upon the necessity of this particular kind of prevention.

And to LW, I offer my best wishes for a full recovery.