"...Bloody Mary made with aquavit is fantastic."

It's the only way to drink them.

That you managed to get the exact opposite of what I meant out of my letter is simply another indictment of my "off the cuff" writing, which I know is not so good. (Actually, after reading Timberman's letters I know just how bad it is, and resolve to do better, if I have to have my wife- a born editor- looking over my shoulder when I post.

Since you don't seem intoxicated, I can only beg you to read it again, and see if the meaning could be extracted. I am, in fact, agreeing with you, and even surpassing you in agreement.

The fault is my own, and I beg you to indulge me, if you wish.

I am most certainly not, not,not puking out that "If I've done nothing wrong, what do I worry about it if they listen?" canard. Just the opposite.

I am saying that as far as I can see, under the new system, they don't even have to bother to eavesdrop on me to call me a terrorist, all they have to do is say it, and there is no way to gainsay it!

I apologise for my lack of clarity.

Thanks! I'm a Bloody Mary fan, but have grown bored with the vodka-Mary. I will have a bottle of Acquavit

I too apologize if I didnt read carefully enough. I know that when writing, sarcasm can be difficult to discern.

Did you know the FBI has announced that they've discovered a correlation between getting arrested for misdemeanors and being part of al Qaeda?

Oh Jesus! I might as well head right over to the Navy brig. Save them the gas to pick me up!

BTW, I lied about seeing you in the Navy brig. They use those funny goggles there so I won't be able to see you.

Missed you, too, ondelette. Welcome back to The Danger Zone!

Try reading my posts out loud, in a voice approximating a hysterical James Brown being imitated by a drunken Hasidic rabbi at a high-class bris, and I'm sure the meaning will be much clearer.

"rufus11

lettersproblems@salon.com is who you e-mail. Be my guest. I'm sure the Editors will be impressed. I look forward to my banning. It'll give me time for a drink. This weeks Seattle Review tells me that a Bloody Mary made with aquavit is fantastic.

What's your poison?

-- Derbig Mooser "

Keep it there please. please leave out your whining on this board. Your hogging the thread with complaints. :)

keep it to the letters. complain to them. This blog is for growth and those fighting for democracy. Or to comment on mr greenwald's post. Please keep your whining and banning others to yourself and the ediotrs. I'm sure mrs walsh would love to be a sympathetic ear for you to cry on. this thread is not.

May all Shooter's defenders be just like you!

:)

Peace. just want to keep my freedom, and that for others. :)

have one for me. I'll be there shortly

As far as I can tell, you're already there, or maybe even past it.

Oh well, maybe I'll go kick a puppy (thanks, bystander). They're much harder to hit.

The FISA Law permits invasions of private conversations on the authority of the president. If such were the state of the law during the Watergate era, Nixon's reelection committee could have tapped the phones of the Democratic Party and then simply claimed it was a national security issue. At the time, nobody believed such nonsense, so Nixon found it necessary to mount a campaign in immunize his operatives (who had done many CIA spy jobs). FISA is an unconstitutional law. Anybody, ANYBODY, who fancies himself a strict constructionist constitutional judge, must rule this law as being in direct, unequivocal violation of the Fourth Amendment. Let them put their opinions where their mouths speak or forever lose their credibility. Scalia, are you there?

As I've noted here before, I've come across quite a few of them at DailyKos, and found their drivel to be both silly and sad, displaying elements of cultist "thinking" that was supposed to be the exclusive province of the far right and true far left (which the progressive movement is not--far left means true radicals, and progressives are not radicals). Perhaps some of them are from the far left and only hanging out at DKos, and probably some are RW plants trying to stir up trouble. But quite a few of them are long-time DKos members who had never particularly struck me as either in the past. So I'm guessing that the bulk of them are well-meaning people who have gotten so caught up in Obamania, and so desperate for a Democrat to win the presidency, that they have put all other thought out of mind, and view even the mildest dissent of their candidate as threatening to his chances and to be squelched immediately. Which, in my view, makes them essentially no different from the Dems of '02-'06, who trembled in fear of RW attacks on their patriotism, and caved to their demands again and again in order to innoculate themselves from such attacks, and demanded that all Dems do the same. That didn't work out too well (Dems lost in '02-'04 anyway, and won in '06 for totally different reasons), and neither will these Obamots' demands for lockstep support of their imagined messiah. If you oppose all dissent, then you are not helping your supposed cause and candidate. Period.

Hey Kovie, wanta know a secret? I'm voting for Obama, as many times as I can, for only one reason, and one reason only: Cause he's not white! (I would have voted for Hillary, had she been nominated, frankly, only cause she's a woman) Does my vote count any less? Can anyone make me vote for him for any other reason? A vote's a vote. I'm not saying there aren't lots of other reasons to vote for either of them, but those are mine, if you want to know the truth.

Or should such a shallow voter as me vote for McCain?