You equate the lawyer/client relationship to a doctor/patient one. I think the relationship is very similar, and I can see why you would make it, but I'm not sure that they really equate. I do think your point about medication has merit, and like you I question prescription laws.

I form a relationship with a lawyer over one legal matter and when that matter is done the relationship ends. I form a relationship with a doctor that lasts through many issues. I trust him to evaluate what is wrong with me when I cannot determine it for myself. A doctor who is treating me for strokes, for example, may discover that I have Parkinson's Disease and begin early treatment which will save me much difficulty over waiting until I had noticed the symptoms myself when they became worse.

Does a lawyer take an oath that starts "First do no harm."? Does a lawyer have the client's permission to treat a client while the client is unconcious?

There is the point that if I make a bad decision in my own behalf on a legal matter I may go to jail, may even be subjected to the death penalty. If I choose a bad medication choice I may live in horrible pain for years.

Prescription laws for new medications are accompanied by side-effect reporting requirements, and those make very good sense to me. Accurate side-effect tracking without a national prescription basis would be impossible.

Re: "And this is immensely worse than Watergate."

I could not agree more. Of all the things coming out of these hearings, for me this was the shocker.

If Israel acted with the consistent arrogance that the US does they would have ceased to exist long ago. We are protected by a couple of oceans, large population and huge wealth from our own stupidity, but that may not last forever.

Far from questioning why you continue this exchange, I hope you continue it until Col. Boylan's head explodes. I can see the veins standing upt, and he is beginning to sputter. Go, Glenn, Go.

Again, I hope that Glenn will pursue this matter until the Colonel's head explodes. The blast will be somewhat insignificant in the environs of Baghdad, but still...

As has been pointed out many times, the repeated question of "Are you not alarmed about the intrusion into a military computer?" goes uncommented in Boylan's responses. Three different people have asked him to address that issue, and he has not even acknowledged that the question has been asked.

If you publish a discussion of geology that presumes the Earth is round (a globe actually), in order to be balanced you must find and include quotes from those who still believe the Earth is Flat. Otherwise you are espousing only one side of the issue and you are automatically "unserious."

Um, getting the country wrong is a "minor error"? I know you had your tongue firmly in your cheek at that point Glenn,

That is one of my issues with the Bush Administration. To them that is a minor error. That is how, when caught in a major red-handed lie, they brush it off. They toss out some cockamamy nonsense that explains nothing and expect us to sit down. And the media, like little puppy dogs, does prcisely that.

Voters say they dislike those tactics, but they still continue to dictate election outcomes, largely because the tactics are deployed in such a one-sided manner, and are therefore highly effective.

And the right will continue to use those tactics as long as they can achieve success by doing so. To deny them that success, "equal application" is one method and probably the one most likely to work.

Alter claims that since last August we’ve been operating in an unconstitutional environment, in clear violation of the Fourth Amendment,

My blog post this morning was on the same subject. I referred to you, Glenn, sure that you would be on top of it and you did not disappoint. My signature links to my post on the topic today.

I am glad we have you on this.

In what world is it journalism to invite someone to be interviewed and then not allow him to answer the questions you ask? Each time Gibbs opened his mouth to answer a question Hannity shouted him down with invective directed at Obama. He never allowed Gibbs to speak at all other than to speak over Hannity's screed. Whatever that it, journalism it is not.

Keep filling me in on the antics at Faux Noise, Glenn, because I won't know about it otherwise. My temperament cannot handle watching that kind of filth. I read you and I'll help you spread the word.

about the author of a book on Nancy Pelosi who was giving a talk on his book. He celebrated, celebrated, that Pelosi was appointed to her House seat by her predecessor on her death bed. This woman, dying, said that she knew who she wanted to succeed her and named Nancy Pelosi who, at the time, was a housewife to a wealthy San Francisco businessman. Pelosi, summoned, "could not refuse." The author then went on to talk about Pelosi as a House member, and said nothing whatever about the electoral process.

Here in San Diego, Duncan Hunter was just elected to his first term in the House. That's right, I said "first term." His father has just sort of quietly retired. I wonder how many in the polling booth thought they were voting for the father.

This is how oligarchies are made.

This objection ("why are you complaining about Israel but not the rebels in Sri Lanka?")..."

Well, one answer to that is, "Because the topic of this article is Israel, not the rebels in Sri Lanka."