Audiofile really stands out on the Internet. There aren't too many sites that offer a daily mp3 and none (that I've found) that have such an eclectic mix. Who else might offer folk music one day, Prince and Cornel West the next and French techno the following? You've got a great thing going Joan - Please reconsider!

A handy guide to those who voted "yes" and their home pages:

http://pruningshears.squarespace.com/pruning-shears/2007/8/5/house-fisa-yes-votes.html

Let's not forget there were dots waiting to be connected before 9/11. We didn't need new spying laws to get what we needed, just for the administration to treat the intelligence it had it with the importance it deserved. Why doesn't anyone respond to one of these power grabs by saying "you've always had all the tools you need to do the job"?

Did you see this at http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20070827&s=trb082707

----------------------

Kristol's good standing in the Washington establishment depends on the wink-and-nod awareness that he's too smart to believe his own agitprop.

----------------------

Seems as good a reason as any there's no consequence for being completely wrong all the time - it's really just a big charade! I seem to remember a similar tone towards Pat Buchanan when he challenged GHWB in 1988. Reporters didn't report how extreme he was because they all agreed he had such a terrific sense of humor in private and no one like that could REALLY be so bad.

We need to drag the right out of their hysteria.

http://pruningshears.squarespace.com/pruning-shears/2007/9/7/regaining-our-strength.html

Some of the earlier moves are here:

http://pruningshears.squarespace.com/pruning-shears/2007/9/16/this-week-in-tyranny.html

There's no reason for anyone to be immune from breaking the law just because the president says so.

I used to think this debate was in the "reasonable people can disagree" category but I'm starting to believe conservatives are literally anti-American. If they really mean this stuff then they don't believe in democracy or our system of government. They honestly in their heart of hearts would rather have a single-branch government headed by an all-powerful executive. I don't know where to even start to engage that mindset....

Thoughts on the Police State Telecoms:

http://pruningshears.squarespace.com/pruning-shears/att-the-new-enron.html

The headline registered as "Maoist". (The ladies don't like them no Red Chinese.)

When he was nominated you seemed to grudgingly support him:

http://salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/16/mukasey/

How do you still feel about "the impressive role he played in presiding over the Jose Padilla case in its earliest stages"? Do you still consider him "very smart and independent, not part of the Bush political circle"? Are you still heartened that he "displayed a willingness to defy the President and reject assertions of lawless and unconstitutional powers, and to refuse to be intimidated by exploitative claims of the Terrorist threat"? I'm glad you're now highlighting the troubling parts of his record. Why the change?

The first post says he's "close to the far right on the judicial spectrum" but still has "respect for the Constitution and the rule of law". Today you write about "how radical Mukasey is", "Mukasey's extremist views" and that "[w]hat Judge Mukasey believes is, without question, radical and disturbing." To me that's a very different tone.

I don't expect you to be locked in to every opinion you ever give, but if there's a change it would be nice to know what persuades you.

I think I've got whiplash from continuously nodding vigorously in agreement. Well done, Glenn.

Maybe he was influenced by what he saw when his father led the CIA, FBI and MI6.

Hi Glenn. Good post as usual. One thing that seems to be getting lost in the carping over Ron Paul's positions is this: It's probably best to base your support on the positions the candidate can actually do something about. Paul's position on abortion is functionally irrelevant becuase both parties support its legality. (Democrats openly, Republicans via hypocrisy - if they REALLY opposed abortion it would have been illegal before Reagan took office. The GOP is happy to mouth the right words to their base and endlessly sigh over their inability to do anything about it. Nice little political windfall if you can arrange it.) Paul could make lots of progress on reversing this administration's power grabs though. Electing a President dedicated to scaling back executive power could really make a difference right away. Folks may be highly critical of this position or that but in the end isn't it most reasonable to just consider those positions a candidate can/will act on?

(Couldn't find a way to post a screen shot.) I think the Heritage folks have figured it out for us - when midnight hits, reset the clock to 23 hours 59 minutes and start over again. We're safe!!

May I humbly suggest you create a Tom Grunick Award:

http://www.filmreference.com/Actors-and-Actresses-Hu-Ke/Hurt-William.html

And I nominate King for the inaugural winner.

Hi King. Maybe the Central would get more than "0.00000368 percent of the attention" if, I don't know, national publications like Salon weren't plugging the Yankees and Red Sox on the front page. The disparity in coverage isn't an act of God.

It's a tribute to your skills that such a short article is by turns hilarious ("You could lock Rush Limbaugh,..."), poignant ("most depressing thing about getting older...") and wise (the conclusion). I googled you after I finished to see who the heck you were and got back a lot of sex-related articles. If you feel drawn to write about that more than other subjects then go for it, but as someone who's turning 40 in October I enjoyed reading the thoughts of someone who's obviously reflected on how the accumulation of years changes us, those around us and our relationships. I hope you've got more writing like that in you.

And since my wife has a good sense of humor I plan to ask for noise-canceling headphones for Father's Day.