But I have no use for that man anymore, or for any rage that his words inspire in me.  He's a clown, a buffoon whose words should be mocked rather than seriously contemplated or debated.

Of course, there's also this response ad, which misses the point entirely, given that Fox was NOT commenting on the proposed Amendment.  He was targeting Jim Talent and his voting record specifically.  So, the question is now burning in my head ... the question that, if the roles were reversed, every talking head on TV would be pounding down McCaskill's throat if, oh say, Michael Moore had pulled a similar stunt.

THE QUESTION:  Does Jim Talent stand by the comments of Rush Limbaugh, or will he publicly denounce such hateful rhetoric?  Is he a Rush Limbaugh Republican?

The blog entry amounts to a giddy slap at the Justices inspired by another one of Justice Scalia's immature outbursts at his colleagues - Scalia Dismisses 'Living Constitution'" See, the Justice apparently called half of his fellow Justices "idiots," and of course the Right Wing giggles in delight at the chance to slur some of the most accomplishes jurists in the country. After reading the article through, I recalled a statement made by the President ... and I wondered what Scalia would make of Bush's argument that FISA no longer applies for him because it's outdated ...

More on the flip

Clinton, February 9, 1995: "The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order"

...

Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: "Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order."

Oh, gee, I guess Democrats are just as bad, huh?  Okay, so the picture isn't PRETTY, but it's still the "same ol', same ol'" you've come to know and love from Drudgey ...

ISTANBUL, Sept. 28 -- A group of Turkish female activists confronted Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes Wednesday with heated complaints about the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, turning a session designed to highlight the empowering of women into a raw display of the anger at U.S. policy in the region.

"This war is really, really bringing your positive efforts to the level of zero," said Hidayet Sefkatli Tuksal, an activist with the Capital City Women's Forum. She said it was difficult to talk about cooperation between women in the United States and Turkey as long as Iraq was under occupation.

It gets "better" (that is to say, worse) ...

President George W. Bush thinks he's found just the right person to run the investigation into what went wrong with the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina - himself.

With all due respect, that's like appointing Donald Rumsfeld to investigate what went wrong with the Iraq War or Bill Clinton to investigate the Whitewater scandal. There's a certain degree of independence that could be lacking.

It's a fine enough read, though maybe not worth a whole diary page - it is, after all, just another editorial from a generally leftist paper from a basically Democratic city.  But having grown up in St. Louis, I took away certian impressions of the city that the Post-Dispatch has been reliable about reaffirming ... until I read that editorial.

I'll explain with a little anecdote after the bump ...

I'll let it speak for itself ...

Why aren't there enough troops in New Orleans?  Because they're all in Iraq!

When I clicked on it, I found out the thread had been pulled (wonder why), so I'm quoting the headline from memory.  In its place on the site was the following ...

Hey everyone.  First time blogger, long time surfer.  I was just reading an blog entry by The Peking Duck on Maglalang, and I came across this sentence from The Rude Pundit:

Maybe if she donated $100,000 to the Republican National Committee, he'd find some more time.

That got the wheels in my head a'turning, and now I'm thinking out loud (or at least online) ...