Is it possible that whatever is going in Fitzgerald's Grand Jury is being held under seal until after January 21, 2009?

It would be apropos given the general desire by any good prosecuter to be able to prosecute someone without the Executive Branch pardoning your defendants out from under you.

that if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all?

While the wit and wisdom of those bygone days seldom makes an appearance anymore, it would be nice, if just once in a while, you let others enjoy the prose before us and kept your diatribes and vile soliloquies to yourself.

The psychological aspects of this story line reminds me just a little too much of the TV show "The Profiler" and Sam and Jack. Jack knowing way too much about Sam and killing his way, serially, through the people in her life. The juxtaposition between Jack and Sam and Lucy and Pritchard being that Pritchard doesn't need to kill anyone to get into Lucy's head. She's inviting him in.

It's creepy, and thrilling, and imbibes the reader (this one at least) with dark fascination and morbid curiosity (complete with a soundtrack of sidewalk Koto music heard through a sewer grate).

I hate it. I love it. It worked.

Having recently watched NOVA on PBS, I'm not sure whether to be upset about this revelation. I'd rather we not burn either.

Screw "clean" fuels. Anything that releases greenhouse gases is the enemy ("clean" fuels still release greenhouse gases, just lower visible air pollutants, like soot).

The only true "clean" energy we have are those that don't release visible air pollutants and greenhouse gases. Sad to say, but ethanol is not the direction we should be going. Removing things that burn from the energy cycle is.

I think the MSM is already reporting the administrative "shakeup" as meaningless since the rotating door of cabinet members all look, talk and act the same.

I said that we should be eliminating the need to burn. "Carbon-neutral" does nothing to solve the problem of the greenhouse gases (GGs) that have already been released. Couple that with the lack of and continued reduction of cooling particulates (soot), and you still run the risk of runaway global warming based solely on the GGs already in the atmosphere.

"Clean" burning fuels solve nothing.

For more information, check out Nova on PBS:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sun/dimming.html

It wasn't about the meat and it wasn't about the neighbor (i'm talkin' to YOU Rob Anderson).

Coming from a culture where strangers are turned into family if they just happen by at the right time, I can certainly understand Mr. Anderson's point-of-view. But I can also understand the pressure of family. There are times when you can get away with rolling your eyes at the mouthy cousin and give away that plate of meat, and there are times when you do exactly what they say. I've been in the same position as Ms. Straight and, like her, I fell in line with the rest of the family.

In this case it's not about right or wrong. You just don't argue with family about these kinds of things. Yes, it was just a plate of meat. But what do you do? Argue and create stress and bad feelings on one of the few days a year when your close family gets together, or do you follow instructions? What's more important to you, your personal feelings about this particular plate of meat or your family?

Family. To some of us, it's the most important thing in the world. It makes us happy, it creates stress (the good kind), it creates stress (the bad kind), there's love, there's joy, there's sadness. There's the newest baby, there are the hundreds of birthdays and the milestone anniversaries and the singular accomplishments that are celebrated. True, the latest heartaches and embarassments are broadcast to the entire family (sometimes with great delight and relish, others with trepidation and sorrow), but it's the price we pay knowing that no matter the time, the place, the cost, they will be there.

It's not a liberal thing and it's not a conservative thing. (Any family that discusses politics with food in their mouth should be studied.) Families come in all shapes, sizes, ethnicities, cultures, classes, political ranges and it breaks through the stereotypes that I've seen people try to lay down in responding to this particular article.

Family and Love. Two things no one should be without.

It's a man.

/Austin Powers

Ann Coulter and her man-hands can suck it.

It's unfortunate that she's offered platforms to spew her vile rhetoric, but one hopes that people who see her, take a second look at her words and say to themselves, "What a strange woman."

I agree with the sentiment that Progressives need to make note of her commentary and have a ready, intelligent and accurate response.

I also think she needs to be taken to a lab in Siberia and studied.

/and yes, I'm fully cognizant of the leaps between an attempt at comedy and serious thought in the above commentary. But it's difficult to take anything that woman, er man(?), has to say seriously.

And couldn't she/he have done something about shaving down her Adam's Apple?

Or is it an "Eve's Peach"?