...it being, that the voters were doing what they had finally given up on Congress doing: putting the brakes on GWB's atrocious agenda.

Given their preferences, most voters probably prefer to vote for a person, rather than a party, and more would likely have done so this time, but the stakes were too high.

So, out went, for example, Lincoln Chafee, and others, not because anyone was particularly unhappy with the often admirable Chafee, but because the voters knew that only a change in the power dynamic in Washington-- i.e., Democrats as committee chairs with investigatory and subpoena powers-- would finally make it possible to ensure some accountability and oversight.

The pundits (including some prominent pols) are just upset because they aren't used to the voters playing "inside baseball," preferring to preserve that realm for themselves. No more. The internet has leveled the playing ground, and enough of the rest of us intend to play, too.

I really figured we had the votes for a 30+ gain in the House, AND to re-take the Senate; however, I was concerned about getting those votes counted. Eventually, it occurred to me that it's probably a lot more difficult to tamper with the electronic votes in so many races, as opposed to a presidential race with only two names. Of course, there was still a lot of effort at voter suppression, but there was a much better organized ground game this time to counteract it.

And, whatever Bush might like to say about the individual congressional races being "close," enough of them had wide enough margins (e.g., here in PA) to make the message loud and clear: "Start doing your jobs... or out you go, too!" That "thumpin'" was not just a cumulative effect. It was intentional. Period.

Dean hasn't received nearly enough credit or kudos for his 50-state strategy.

No way could the Democratic Party have been prepared to take advantage of this opportunity without all of the groundwork he and his organizers have laid since 2005.

It really gripes me to see some of the party's so-called "leaders" trying to take more than their share of credit for Tuesday's election, after they basically dissed Dean for daring to think outside their narrow frame of reference.

Who was the real leader? And who is now climbing on the bandwagon?

...was leaving out some important details.

I read the sentence ending with "but I'm too tired to be young," and knew this article was meant for me.

After the drama and excitement of my 20s and 30s, my 40s were a real letdown, downright restrictive. I'm still feeling some of the effects at 53, but this decade is definitely better. [...once I got over getting that first letter, and the others, from AARP!!! How do they do it?!] For one thing, the health benefits of dark chocolate have now been documented.

I can only imagine what it must be like to have two small children at 47... Mostly likely, you'll feel less fatigued once your kids are older. Small children are so physically draining-- older ones psychically, but by then you're sort of attached to them.

Getting enough rest cannot be emphasized too much. If I could go back and change only one thing, I would have taken more naps, and I would have relished sleep more, instead of trying to avoid it. I worried too much about missing out on things... yet I was really missing out on one of the best curatives.

but we still won't let you be priests! (If we know.)

I used to like Carville for his entertaining and irreverent style.

But no more... there is no excuse for exhibiting such poor sportsmanship after a major win in which someone with whom you disagree (but is on the same team) did more than you did to create a winning environment.

It takes a lot for someone to be a worse winner than loser, and it's pretty unappetizing, as well.

We all just have to keep on speaking up and saying that he does not reflect the sensibilities of the majority of us who votes were being counted.

Freedom Airlines? Hah!!! USAirways might want to re-think their bid to buy Delta (the official airline of Walt Disney World-- that explains a lot!).

A tidbit from wikipedia:

In 2000, Delta adopted the slogan: "Fly___", in which the blank was filled in according to the context of the slogan's usage. For example, on the airline's cocktail napkins, the slogan was "Fly refreshed."

How about... "Fly Hungry!"

With two near-bankrupt airlines trying to merge, which could result in higher consumer air fares... you'd think they'd want to keep their current passengers happy, rather than eject them because one of them is-- discreetly-- feeding a new passenger. Of course, the airlines aren't really interested in feeding any of their passengers, including babies.

Boob-hating? How about baby-hating?

Otherwise, all of this ridiculous focus on lactating boobs in public would just evaporate, given our public concern for babies' welfare. But it hasn't, has it?

I think it came from the sister magazine of the Washington Times... the idea that Rove knows too much, and the last thing Bush wants is another Tell-All book being published while he's in the White House.

I wouldn't mind seeing him go, either, but one does have to wonder where he could go, and still not do irreparable harm. Perhaps he really can do less at the WH, at least for now...

...would be if they can have more humanly realistic BMIs and still be successful in Real Estate. And perhaps the new supermodel's archetype will adjust accordingly.

(I know, but I'm trying to see the bright side...)