Yeah, but that whole "Contract with America" thing was pre-9/11. That changed everything, remember? So anything they said prior to 9/11 doesn't count, and they don't have to be responsible for any of it now. Of course, everyone else still has to abide by the rules of personal accountability that we all know and love. See how it all works?

I agree with the characterization of this exchange from Keith Olberamann's show last night. They were saying that this is a fight that Clinton obviously picked, and that the White House took the bait, as her quick "Obviously I struck a nerve" reply showed. She is driving this thing right now--not them--and I like that. It's smart on her part, I think. I'll count myself as one who didn't have a favorable view of her, given her politics, but I'm coning around. Whether I like her politics or not though, her high unfavorable marks have never bothered me. Bush and Rove were able to turn negative polls into a strength long enough to get elected, why can't she?

If this turns into Guiliani vs. Clinton, I like that fight. The senator from New York vs. the former Mayor of New York. A mayor, fer chrissakes! Who are they gonna trot out instead, the former senior-class president?

Point taken--to some degree--about any false assumptions I made. My apologies. However, what's up with all the "I post under such-and-such-name for this topic, but usually anonymous for everything else"? What's that all about? How is any reasonable person supposed to assume anything other than that you have something to hide, and that your tactics just make it easier for you to obfuscate and shade the truth? Not to mention that it allows you the freedom to contradict yourself without ever being called out or noticed. Whatever, dude. Sorry I wasted my time. I won't again.

Yeah, but the thing is, it's not racism, or hate-speech, or bigotry if a whole group of people like the Muslims, are always, "asking for it," if you know what I mean. You know, like those uppity colored people always did, back before all this "PC" business made it unfashionable to drag an outnumbered guy behind a pick-up truck anymore. Boy, those were the days to be a privileged white guy, weren't they? Practically all the fun's been taken away now by those liberal bastards!

I haven't had time to follow and read every post in this online donnybrook, but has anyone pointed out to Golden Boy the irony of his hero's refusal to pay the slightest bit of attention to the threat posed by al Qaida prior to 9/11? That he, Condi, and the rest of that administration sat on their hands prior to 9/11, despite the previous administration's warnings and outright pleading? Incredibly ironic, if you ask me.

Or even the irony that he cares more about some College Republican group being accused of hate speach, as opposed to being upset that Bush really doesn't give a damn whether bin Laden is ever caught, or not. Really strange priorities. And Ironic. Hypocritical, even.

The temptation is mighty hard to resist, huh? Especially when tiberius throws a hanging curve as juicy as his "speak softly" comment. On what planet does the policy of completely ignoring repeated warnings of the threat posed by al Qaida constitute "speaking softly"? And then, compound that after 9/11 with "bring 'em on" and "dead or alive" which was then followed with a horribly misguided war plan. Sheesh! What's a guy to do?

I haven't had a stalker in years! And one who steals epithets from Rush Limbaugh t to boot! How.....creepy....

Yes, I am amused.

Carry on.

than what my father, a staunch conservative and life-long Republican believes. He's convinced that Al Qaida is intent on wiping the U.S. from the face of the earth via nuclar weapons (just like the Soviets were, back in the day, I presume). Therefore, the War on Terror is a race against time--with us trying to wipe them from the face of the earth before they can try do the same to us. In his mind, it's as simple as that. He's not one of those crazy people who thinks they want to take over our country, oh no. He just thinks they want to obliterate us, that's all.

I sure hope this doesn't mean he's going to be spending more time here in Austin. Hopefully he and his family are staying in DC with the rest of their ilk.

but I'd rather him leave now, at this late date, than still be there another day. Good riddance. Anyone with a shred of perceptiveness will understand Rove's legacy. As I wrote in a post last week concerning Barry Bonds, the only thing Americans hate more than a cheater is a loser. And Rove is no loser, that's for sure.

If someone has an ironclad perjury case against Gonzalez, I'd love to hear it.

But Bush would consider the simple fact that Gonzalez hasn't been charged yet as a "vote of confidence," so your characterization of the Democrats' "message" is your own interpretation, not necessarily everyones. The sort of accountability I happen to be looking for from this group of Republicans--in light of what they promised--would be for them to have replaced Gonzalez by now, just because of the "appearance" of impropriety alone. That is more than enough. Given what they promised.