The christianists are losing their insane, hate-filled grip on the Republican party. If the Republicans marginalize those nutballs and the other extremists infecting the fringe of their party, they may yet become respectable again.

Let's celebrate! In all seriousness though, do these people care about ANYTHING other then other people's sex lives? Does the fact that NOTHING we were told about Iraq turned out to be true register with them at all? This might be a good reason why they've lost a lot of clout in recent years.

what the Porn Champion trophy looks like.

both of these atheist, socialist, pedophile loving democrats were easily confirmed. just look at the senators who are in the senate, they are largely a group of freaks. the majority are lawyers, which automatically makes them crooks and they have no morals or ethics, so what do you expect?

the next radical-left criminal to join the administration is van jones who, if you looked closely at his criminal accomplishments, belongs in jail for the rest of his life.

i am hopeful that someone goes through all of barack's appointees and analyzes just how many of them hate truth, justice and the American way. America is headed for a wild ride, but unfortunately it is straight downhill into barack insane obama's debauchery.

... truth, justice and the American way

Is this one of those "Pick any two of the above" things?

Seriously, you folks should really get some help for your obsession with other peoples' sins. Maybe you should read the bible again. I think there's some stuff you missed, such as the bit about removing the beam from your own eye before you try to remove the mote from your neighbor's.

to look at the senators who *aren't* in the Senate?

If the Republicans marginalize those nutballs and the other extremists infecting the fringe of their party, they may yet become respectable again.

You mean, the 100 people who remain.

I hear these christian preachers spouting out doom and gloom and endtimes a comin'.

Shouldn't these good conservative christians be getting their own souls in shape for Jesus instead of worrying about someone who worked for the ACLU and an attorney whose client was vindicated by Terry Schaivo's autopsy?

It's amazing, they would prefer confirmation of some corrupt corporate hack who believes in torture, circumventing the Constitution and the rule of law over a "liberal sinner".

just look at the senators who are in the senate, they are largely a group of freaks.

And if you think they're bad, wait til you see the senators that aren't in the senate!!! Wooo wee!!!

the majority are lawyers, which automatically makes them crooks and they have no morals or ethics, so what do you expect?

I steer clear of absolute blanket statements like this one, so as not to appear like an idiot. You are not so limited, I understand that. Be that as it may, the majority have always been lawyers. However, I didn't see you crying "the sky is falling" until Obama got in. What changed?

i am hopeful that someone goes through all of barack's appointees and analyzes just how many of them hate truth, justice and the American way.

Yeah, that would be good, simply to remove that particular strawman from your lexicon. But, I wonder how they would determine that someone hates truth, justice and the American way. I suppose if you looked at their actions, and those actions were 100% consistent, moving in the exact opposite direction as the framers of our country clearly intended, and worked to nullify the constitution at every turn. I guess that would be a pretty good measure, wouldn't it?

Let's see...who fits that description... OH! I KNOW ONE GUY WHO FITS THAT DESCRIPTION:

http://www.topnews.in/usa/files/Dick-Cheney-Heart-Ailment.jpg

This article reads: "Also controversial was one case during his stint at the American Civil Liberties Union in which he conviction for receiving and possessing child pornography should be overturned on constitutional grounds."

Is it "his conviction for receiving and possessing..." or "the conviction for receiving and possessing..." or "he argued that the conviction for receiving and possessing..." or what?

Please clarify.

I took it mean this:

in which he argued that the conviction for receiving and possessing...

Sorry, that was my mistake during editing. The sentence should read:

"Also controversial was one case during his stint at the American Civil Liberties Union in which he argued that a conviction for receiving and possessing child pornography should be overturned on constitutional grounds."

It's been fixed. Thanks for pointing it out.

That is, driven by whatever is 180 degrees opposed to the last administration. Why is this a bad thing? Because it erects ideology above results. Everything becomes a symbol in its own right regardless of whether he manages to accomplish measurable success.

Now I can go back to peddling those bestiality and torture/snuff videos to grade schoolers.

Hmm, let's see, Chairman Maobama has appointed the architects of the economic collapse to run the Treasury, is cooperating with the Taliban, put an anti-gun extremist at the "Justice" department, and now backs that idiot up with a perv who thinks anti-kiddie porn laws are unconstitutional. Meanwhile, Dear Leader wants to keep on tapping our phones without warrants thus no progress on prosecuting the Bush administration or NSA criminals.

I personally know Ogden's work and I can say that the Republicans who fell in line to support the conservative campaign to oppose Ogden on moral grounds is not only baseless, but shameful.

Remember him, the guy who is reputed to have screamed at a subordinate during the summer of '01 that "I do not want to hear any more about terrorism!" because he was focusing his attention on the much more important issue of porn?

Admittedly, in hindsight I grudgingly have to admit that although Ashcroft was a slightly deranged about religion, he was something of a mensch in that he stood up to Alberto Gonzales & co. even when he was in the hospital, and in a lot of pain from surgery, when they tried to get him to sign off on something too sleazy for his liking. However, he was still a disastrously bad attorney general.