... (With the kind assistance of Tim Russert, whose demise is bound to generate at least a couple of days of sloppy, saccharine, thoroughly disgusting media coverage -- see the NYT front page already.)

Yeah, I was just going to say the same thing.

I figured LWM would make a clever joke in an effort to dodge the question. LWM needs to get back to feeding LWM's addiction, even if it means not listening to or respecting the requests of the blog owner.

LWM likes URLs. Here is a URL:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/disrespect

dis·re·spect (dsr-spkt)

n.

Lack of respect, esteem, or courteous regard.

Or, in LWM's language:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respect

When you respect another, you factor in and weigh others' thoughts and desires into your planning and balance it into your decision making.

These little trivialities obviously do not apply to the self-proclaimed King of UT, LWM, when it comes to making decisions such as whether or not to honor GG's requests and hold off on constantly attacking Ron Paul and falsely trying to associate everything evil with the man in all sorts of baseless, unrelated and/or OT flames.

It seems that either the 'enemy combatant' idea was just a rhetorical ruse to circumvent the Geneva Conventions governing the treatment of POWs or since the Bushites' war against terrah had no precedent, they just had to make it up as they went along. Oh yeah, what do we do about prisoners? kinda afterthoughts. One more piece of evidence of the extremely poor planning in the invasion of Iraq and the resultant dire consequences of their supreme and idiotic shortsightedness.

This war has wrought so many wrongs on so many levels. At least their petards are finally getting a little hoisting, even if it's just a drop-- a significant drop nonetheless-- in the bucket of the damages left to be undone.

Why do you continue to let LWM, aka "Ron Pauliac", continue to do what you have asked LWM many times not to do? Since it is clear that LWM is not going to answer my question, maybe you can.

Is it because you know that it is obvious that LWM does not plan on showing you any respect or honoring your request, so why bother? Is it because it is completely obvious that LWM doesn't give a shit about your multiple requests to stop fanning the Ron Paul flames?

The guy posts under a handle named "Ron Pauliac" ffs, and continues to do so. I mean, WTF do you expect?

The NYT had an interesting bit in its habeas coverage today that punched a bit of a hole in the enemy combatants definition:

Again rejecting the Bush administration’s position, the court held in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts that two civilian United States citizens being held in American military custody in Iraq were entitled to file habeas corpus petitions.

Proceeding to the merits of the petitions, the court then ruled against the two men, Mohammad Munaf and Shawqi Ahmad Omar, who are facing criminal charges under Iraqi law. Their release through habeas corpus “would interfere with the sovereign authority of Iraq to punish offenses against its laws committed within its borders,” Chief Justice Roberts said.

The administration had argued in the case, Munaf v. Geren, No. 06-1666, that because the men were technically held by the 26-nation multinational force in Iraq, federal courts did not have jurisdiction to hear their habeas corpus petitions. Chief Justice Roberts said that, to the contrary, what mattered was that the men were held by “American soldiers subject to a United States chain of command.”

Munaf, at least, was a naturalized US citizen who travelled to Iraq, according to an earlier NYT piece, he:

Mr. Munaf, an Iraqi native who became a citizen of the United States in 2000, traveled to Iraq in March 2005 to act as translator and guide for three Romanian journalists. The journalists were kidnapped by Iraqis and held for 55 days, as was Mr. Munaf.

The Romanians were freed by American forces on May 23, 2005, but Mr. Munaf was held on suspicion of having been an accomplice in the kidnapping.

The NYT had an interesting bit in its habeas coverage today that punched a bit of a hole in the enemy combatants definition:

Again rejecting the Bush administration’s position, the court held in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts that two civilian United States citizens being held in American military custody in Iraq were entitled to file habeas corpus petitions.

Proceeding to the merits of the petitions, the court then ruled against the two men, Mohammad Munaf and Shawqi Ahmad Omar, who are facing criminal charges under Iraqi law. Their release through habeas corpus “would interfere with the sovereign authority of Iraq to punish offenses against its laws committed within its borders,” Chief Justice Roberts said.

The administration had argued in the case, Munaf v. Geren, No. 06-1666, that because the men were technically held by the 26-nation multinational force in Iraq, federal courts did not have jurisdiction to hear their habeas corpus petitions. Chief Justice Roberts said that, to the contrary, what mattered was that the men were held by “American soldiers subject to a United States chain of command.”

Munaf, at least, was a naturalized US citizen who travelled to Iraq, according to an earlier NYT piece, he:

Mr. Munaf, an Iraqi native who became a citizen of the United States in 2000, traveled to Iraq in March 2005 to act as translator and guide for three Romanian journalists. The journalists were kidnapped by Iraqis and held for 55 days, as was Mr. Munaf.

The Romanians were freed by American forces on May 23, 2005, but Mr. Munaf was held on suspicion of having been an accomplice in the kidnapping.

Damn you tags!!!

This might be a good time for the Executive Branch misfeasors to launch that attack on Iran, because the posthumous Russert media glurge will divert US public attention.

In my ongoing fascination with the dicta of blog censors, I expect sites like Huffington Post to enforce the sententious piety about Not Speaking Ill of the Dead. They'll either delete or close comments to avoid "unseemly" and "disrespectful" observations about Mr. Russert's timely-- er, premature-- demise. At least banning comments completely avoids the predictable chiding from conventional folks: "Hey, c'mon guys! The man dropped dead, for God's sake! Whatever you may think of his character or work, show a little respect and class..."

Here, we are fortunate to have a broad-minded and thoughtful host who does not feel obliged to subscribe to a Miss Manners standard of "niceness" and enforce it with censorious and puerile deletions.

Still, I'll close with as positive a remark as I can make about the deceased: Mr. Russert, sir-- I only wish it had been Rush Limbaugh. Or Bill O'Reilly. Or even Barbara Walters. Or Katie Couric! I really do.