Damn, this is good.

President Bush:

“If you listen closely to some of the leaders of the Democratic Party,” the president said at another fundraiser Monday in Nevada, “it sounds like they think the best way to protect the American people is — wait until we’re attacked again.”

Is, at some point, any Democrat going to mention that the President is accusing Americans of treason?

Republicans keep saying, elect Dems and you'll get Speaker Pelosi:

Hastert gave a call to Nancy Pelosi in Washington today. Nancy Pelosi said no, that’s not good enough. We don’t want an overhaul of the page program. We need a more thorough investigation. That’s something that both Democratic and Republican aides that I’ve just spoken to agree on, that Pelosi refused. So Freeh, for the time being, will not be heading up, as other news organizations have been reporting, will not be heading up…a probe, or an overhaul…of the page program here in the House.

Works for me...

What kind of person takes on the role of apologist for pedophilia?

I'm actually heartened by the number of conservatives that are actually on the correct side of this issue. While they may just be seeing the writing on the wall before others, and want to limit the political damage, they, in calling for Denny's resignation, etc, have done the right thing.

Unfortunately, we're at a place in this country where the one issue that brings together most of the right and left is anti-pedophilia.

Perhaps it's a first step. At the least, I hope this incident serves to shatter the myth so many on the right share, that their leaders represent this country's values, and they are infallible.

We're all human, and neither side has a lock on infallability.

There have been a number of Discussion posts lately that just have not made it through. As a public service, here is some advice for posting, especially for those who are new here.

First, choose a Table!!! Unfortunately, the software here does not force you to choose a table, and if you don't, it's going to "disappear" even if the moderators vote to post it. PLEASE choose a table.

Next, from this post, here are some good, general guidelines to consider:

Good Things

*The new post's topic will be significant for more than a day or two -- i.e., it is not centered on The News Of The Day.

*The post itself is well argued, preferably with links to supporting material.

*The topic, as presented, will foster discussion.

*A specific Discussion Table is selected.

Bad Things

*Posts that reprint a Reader Blog entry

*Posts that simply report "breaking news"

*Posts that solicit traffic for someone’s personal blog

*Icky formatting

As undefined as it is right now, there is a "minimum standard" that moderators hold when voting on posts. There is currently discussion going on about what exactly that standard is, but, for the most part, following the above will get your post through.

There's no restiction on content, or length, or anything like that. Although reality- based commentary is preferred.

Links are important. They contribute to a sense of style (that is, good posts should "look like" good blog writing), as well as provide important citations for your facts.

Feel free to post any questions here...

As you know, Mark Foley, a Democrat from Florida, just resigned for seducing young boys (also he is an alcoholic). This sex scandal in Congress is just the tip of the iceberg. Democratic lobbyist Jack Abramoff has also been indicted on corruption charges. Bob Ney, Democrat from Ohio, has pled guilty to corruption charges. Scooter Libby -- one of the few Democrats in the Bush Administration's inner circle, is also indicted, for obstruction of justice. And finally, Duke Cunningham, Democratic Congressman from California, has pled guilty to bribery and was involved with a prostitution ring.

This behavior from the Democrats is sick. Moral depravity, whether it's sex or corruption, has no place in the halls of Congress. We must vote them out.

Because we all know which party stands for America's morals and values.

In November, this article by ABC political "wiz" Mark Halperin will come back to haunt him. Like many of his fellow analysts and pundits, those who cling way-too-long to preconceived notions of politics, who miss the boat on where things are, who rely on the logic of strawmen and unnamed names ("Some Democrats say...") to bolster their "arguments" -- the November elections will rewrite their narratives.

(Not that they won't claim they were right all along anyway...)

Here's some wisdom, beltway style, wherein one actually argues the Republicans in November will win:

For the Republicans, this brand of politics works because the United States in many ways remains a fundamentally conservative nation. Polls consistently indicate that there are more staunchly conservative Americans than liberal ones.

So, because polls show there are more on the extreme right than left, the country is "fundamentally conservative"?

If Democrats in Congress took a secret ballot, it is safe to say there would be overwhelming support for a variety of positions that, in theory, could rally the party’s base: a timely withdrawal of American troops from Iraq; a tax increase for the wealthy; universal health care; and increased rights for homosexuals. These are all positions in line with the activist wing of their party. And yet most Democrats will not openly espouse such policies,

Actually, aside from "homosexual rights," most Democrats do already espouse these policies. Democrats are united on a timeline for withdrawal, oppose Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, and support universal health care.

There is no "secret" agenda.

If you have any doubts about the confusion of the Democrats, just look at the party’s midterm strategy...the core of their enunciated message — both vowing to stop the president’s right-wing policies and blurring their differences with Republicans on highly charged issues — has in recent elections been a recipe for defeat.

Does that sound like the Dems' midterm strategy? Tester, Webb...is any candidate blurring the lines on the GOPs? We've seen more clear opposition -- certainly on Iraq -- than probably ever before.

For months, the president was in severe political peril, with approval ratings regularly hovering around 30 percent...the latest polls show the G.O.P. base is coming home — and just in time. Base support is headed toward 90 percent, just about where it was before the 2002 and 2004 elections.

But the GOPs need more than the base. And in key races, Democrats are running strong, certainly do to the number of independents in those states.

This is exactly what happened in the last two elections: Mr. Bush and Mr. Rove fired up the base on national security, taxes and social issues and found a way to win a majority of the electorate, even as they lost the allegiance of a majority of the country over all. The national security debate, the visibility of the Clintons and the momentum the Republicans gain from Mr. Bush’s rising poll numbers — all of these echo previous election cycles.

This last section is probably the most damning of all -- whatever happened in the last two elections, that's sure to happen here. Ignore all the polls, the trends, the mood of the country.

Like many pundits out there, someone moved Halperin's cheese.