caption, please
 

caption, please
 

" . . . and that's why I banned legal pads from the Oval Office back in oh-three. Now, go write me up some histry!"

Time to take a stand.
 

10 years from now, do you want to have to say that "when they came for the Pakistani lawyers, I did nothing"?

It's time for a Spanish Civil War-style intervention: led by private citizens of conscience, since our government has clearly shed any pretense of supporting democracy and the rule of law overseas.

Since Lincoln was a Republican I don't think it's entirely appropriate to use his name again this time, but "The Kunstler Brigade" has a nice ring to it. Maybe B'n'B will let us use her plane to get over there.

Democrats owning prosperity?
 

From Jonathan Rauch:

• Not many polling questions have been asked continuously for more than five decades, and fewer still remain as revealing today as they ever were. One such rarity is this question, which the Gallup Organization has asked in most (not all) years since 1951:
  
  "Looking ahead for the next few years, which political party do you think will do a better job of keeping the country prosperous?"
  
  This is the granddaddy of political polling questions not just because it is venerable but because it has earned its keep. If you had to pick only one political indicator as the most fundamental of all, this would be a good choice—because, to a first approximation, the party of prosperity is the default majority party.

Here's the chart.

http://www.reason.com/UserFiles/Imag...1026_rauch.gif

And AEI, Heritage, and the Club for Growth (and Spanky) wept.

Gattigap

Time to take a stand.
 

We're all right behind you.

"Paulmentum."
 

Its just a dog and pony show until Hillary gets sworn in and then dissapoints all the Democrats by keeping us in the war.

"Paulmentum."
 

Not all of us.

S_A_M

"Paulmentum."
 

There's a difference between ongoing rational engagement and this strange war that we have going on now. Basically, Bush is trying to find something he can win, while continuing to refuse to dirty himself with M.E. politics.

Right now, Turkey believes it has carte blanche and Bush won't move in to stop it, and Iran is pretty sure that Bush is a paper tiger who will not engage it militarily or politically. As a result, the two of them are going to have a nice change to screw up what's left of Iraq while Bush spends his time trying to sugar coat what he's gotten us into.

caption, please
 

Shit, fellas, just pretend I'm saying something worth writing down - the cameras are rolling.

Townsend has my Proxy
 

Meet the New Boss...

"Paulmentum."
 

Translation: Hillary will keep us in the war, but I'll be able to stand it more because she'll explain why a lot better. Oh, and I like her.

Even though she's bought and paid for by the same people who own the GOP, except in re: health care and oil interests.

I could see myself voting for Hllary given the pack of shitheads running right now. Why?

1. We're going to get national health care one way or another, and it isn't going to impact me radically, so why not just get it over with? If it helps some people, why not?

2. She'll be a fiscal moderate like her husband.

3. The markets will react positively.

4. Rudy's beginning to give me the creeps.

5. Her victory would force the GOP to regroup and probably drop the childish fundamentalist crap it has stuffed into its platform.

Either way, this election should be a plus. We get rid of an idiot and elect someone hailing from the Northeast for once.

Time to take a stand.
 

It's making me a bit uncomfortable, actually. Can you take a couple of steps back? Thanks.

But seriously, no one else finds the story of an independent Supreme Court asserting its constitutional powers in the face of an executive bent on subverting the law, with the members of the bar protesting non-violently in the streets in support the least bit compelling? To me it seems like a fascinating sort of alternative reality.

Time to take a stand.
 

People who believe if you kill non-believers you get 60 virgins are about to get a nuclear bomb, so that may color some people's feeling.

Have you studied Paki constitutional law? Are there any differences between it and our's WRT powers of the several branches? What law school did you go to?

Time to take a stand.
 

Of course it's compelling. But any assertion of judicial power is necessarily a power-grab by the intelligensia over the popular will, which is a good thing in Pakistan, but hits a little too close to home every time I read the 9th Circuit advance sheets.

"Paulmentum."
 

You keep saying this, but the Democrats are doing nothing in the public eye but shooting themselves in the foot.

See today's impeachment resolution by Dennis "UFO" Kucinich as Exhibit A.