Read the exploits of 6 year old Monica Lewinsky as she valiantly struggles to keep the Soviet Union from collapsing under the onslaught of Reagan's domestic military spending.

Failing at that, she moves to America on a special mission to bring down a popular Communist-loving American President in an effort to revive her beloved Communist Soviet Union.

Watch all three episodes this fall on the FOX Network, where history is always fairly ballast!

Monica Lewinsky was a Soviet spy.

Good joke.

From the comment of a self-described "centrist liberal" on the Mises blog:

"I recently had a discussion with a group of friends that are much more to the left than I, and all of us had the same feeling about him. I believe that he is honest, that he actually believes in the message that he is saying. You know exactly where he stands on an issue because he tells you where he stands. How refreshing. Granted I don't agree with him on pretty much everything but if by some miracle he were elected president I would be comforted by knowing that I would never be lied to again." (as seen on the rockwell blog)

In this country, since we don't have actual Socialists (other than corporatists receiving welfare and possibly Bernie Sanders, although I'm not too sure about the latter), that would have been Repub's and the media.

Mmm... Coalition parties do have one disadvantage, I suppose, particularly when the struggles within them cause them to evolve into their opposites over time, and that is that their members, and the body politic in general, can get terribly confused about what -- if anything -- they stand for. All one has to do is to look at the expressed party allegiances -- or at least sympathies -- of the commenters here, whose actual political ideologies are more or less all over the map.

For myself, I think it might be better to keep the struggle within the two umbrella parties, rather than inflict it on our legislature, which is confused enough already, or dissipate it in a plethora of ideologically pure minority parties whose ideologies prevent them from ever forming an effective governing coalition.

In the seventies and eighties, almost everyone decried the destruction of the Democratic Party by interest group and identity politics. I'm not so sure that the consensus was correct. I prefer to think that the Democratic Party was ahead of its time in airing the very real changes in public opinion which the power mongers of both parties preferred for their own reasons to obscure, or to suppress. It's to our credit, I think, and the country's that we endured it regardless of what it cost us as a party.

Be that as it may, I wonder if the country would have been better served if that struggle had taken place within the government itself. Possibly so, but it certainly would have been messy, given that a genuine agreement on many of these issues is still pending after thirty years.

It is good to see Howard Kurtz weighing in with thoughts that are at least within range of the known universe, so far as being reality-based is concerned.

Perhpas what might highlight what he's missing is the well-known meme of "Bush Derangement Syndrome," which conservatives incessently promulgated--and not a few Versailles pundits picked up on--to avoid even acknowledging the existence of (much less listening to) very sober, reality-based objections to his policies.

Now it seems that Bush Derangement Syndrome is real after all. It's to be found amongst the ranks of conservatives who've finally realized that us liberals were right all along--but can't for the life of themselves possibly admit it.

A good deal of their ferocity, methinks, derives precisely from that secret knowledge: Bush went so far, so fast that he let the cat out of the bag for all to see, and now everyone knows (even if no one will say) that us DFHs were right all along.

The War in Iraq--

As of yesterday, the Washington Post reports the death toll of U.S. forces in Iraq was 3,494. Remember the entire Middle East too who have been slaughtered, okay.

I do thank the Washington Post (Doonesbury too, the other day) for posting a list with faces of the fatalities. The photo and real name, helps realize how criminal the Bush-Co really is....

...A list of fatalities to date is available at www.wasington post.com/nation.

I ain't gonna pay a (personal) outstanding probation fee, either! I'd rather grieve (and I will), or give/donate a donation to: Iraq Veterans Against the war or a real journalist in lieu WASTING money and tossing mullah at of the criminal Doj shysters-gang!

On Tuesday June 5th, Chris Floyd, 'spoke' to me. I'd rather buy ice cream, double dip, ice cream cones with pointy cones, for all the Salon readers than pay a penny to a criminal syndicate DOJ. I do not respect the FALSE Bushido's reign.

I thank journalist Chris Floyd and other's for some good 'ole true gospel/synagogue/temple, inspiration...good press reporting...Yes-sum.

Sincerely,

Art James

Prunes... By all indications, he is more conservative than you. He, for instance, believes the Constitution is worth keeping around.

No one really was going to tear it up. Some are in favor of changing it by the processes available to do so. See Sandy Levinson's:

Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (And How We the People Can Correct It).

http://www.amazon.com/Our-Undemocratic-Constitution-People-Correct/dp/0195307518

He believes much of the current fiasco could have been prevented by some minor changes in the constitution.

Our constitution is quite explicit on some things and open to interpretation on others because it is vague and ambiguous (for a legal document) in many critical areas. It was probably constructed that way by design.

Reagan appointed Sandra Day O'Connor. Conservatives today were glad to see her go. If you put enough crazed loon wingnuts on the court to interpret it in a "unpleasant manner," you might want to tear the constitution up, too. Yes, Bucky1. I'm referring to the nutbars that Ron Paul would appoint to the SCOTUS. Give it up. Na Ga Ha Pa.