Paul was doing his solo bit and enjoying the applause when Peter and Mary ran on. They kind of cut off the audience and were talking to him very excitedly. Peter motioned the audience quiet and stepped up to the mic to say, "Lyndon Johnson has just announced that he will not run again."

Everyone enjoyed the joke and laughed. He had to repeat it. And then Mary leaned in to say "It's true!" She was bouncing up and down and so excited that people finally believed. The whole place roared and erupted in a spontaneous, jubilant version of "This Land Is Your Land." It was a great night in a tough year.

"How could we possibly support Britain and France, if in doing so we lose the whole Arab world?

It isn't clear from the above post when these statements were made. Are they current or when were they made?

Thanks.

As a '60s occasional not-quite-radical, this is an "in" I could join with tempered enthusiasm and nostalgia. Not from a lack of fire, you understand, but because too much excitement may undermine the effort and lead only to a "Toss and Turn In".

I blinked. Is there a Special Prosecutor yet or should I get started?

But, by virtue of the money they handed over to AIG, they are the ones who entered into this maelstrom to begin with. They as well as AIG are flying by the seat of their pants. Resorting to old legalities in a new situation (we can't do anything because there are "contracts") smacks of hesitancy, and the markets are watching.

This is high stakes poker, and Obama just flinched.

What matters now is who takes charge of the plane. At this point it looks like AIG has.

It will be interesting to see if Obama and his financial team have it in them to take over.

My mother-in-law has one of the best Pasta Fagiole recipes out there, but it uses Campbells Pork and Beans so purists may complain. Here it is:

Pasta Fagiole (takes about 2 hours and serves four)

In a 3 or 4 quart sauce pan

4 strips of bacon -- dice and fry until brown and crisp; drain fat from pan

1 can (8 oz.) tomato sauce -- stir in, then add and stir in one can water

1 can (6 oz.) tomato paste -- stir in, then add and stir in 2 1/2 cans water

1/2 teas. garlic powder or to taste

1 teas. sugar or to taste

Bring to a boil then reduce heat and simmer gently for 2 hours.

1 can Campbells Pork and Beans -- (do not drain) add to sauce about 10 minutes before it is done.

3 cups uncooked elbows (ditalini is the preferred pasta but not always available) -- cook and add to sauce and beans just before serving.

Serve with grated cheese and Italian bread on the side.

The idea drifted off after that -- no more excellent reporting by anyone, MSM or otherwise, perhaps? Whatever.

I propose we revive the award and grant it to Jon Stewart, the newest recipient . . . TA DA . . . of the TPM Eddie. (Named, of course, after, the great Edward R.)

Go Comedy Central! I am convinced Mr. Murrow would be pleased.

By demanding fealty and sucking the air out of any up and coming party members, leaders like Bush et al deprive members of the next generation of a chance to establish themselves. Without thoughtful new leadership, the party is left with a vacuum that loud extremists can all to easily fill until someone with spine does step up. It is interesting that Newt Gingrich, who was out of office during the Bush years, has made some attempts to assert leadership.

Bush had little intra-party opposition when he was in the White House and it was beneficial for him in the short run but disastrous for the party and the country in the long run.

It will be interesting to see what kind of party Obama leaves behind.

Proves once again that all you need to know about life, you can learn from "Casablanca."

If the software is open source, does that make it easier for someone to tamper with? I don't know this and am asking the computer savvy. Doesn't open source make the process less secure?

The Constitution calls for recounts under certain conditions. If there are no paper ballots, what can be recounted? Therefore, is paperless voting unconstitutional? Seems like it should be to me. Anyone want to launch a court case?

Sununu, TARP, and Bank of New York

- An Unharmonious ConvergEX?

- A Mellon of an Idea?

If I may add a thought here about your approach, I think you -- for valid reasons -- tried to shorten the process. My guess is these need more email time so more of the real person emerges.

Or maybe more of the fraud evolves? Just expressing motherly concern. Good luck.

Even Murdoch - especially Murdoch - understands the bottom line.

I WANT A LIST . . . please.

And thank you.

If something serious doesn't happen as a result of this kind of cartoon, we will surely see a lot more in ever more respectable media.

So, someone out there, who are the advertisers whose products I can stop purchasing? In these times, they - the advertisers - should complain based on the propriety of it, but it certainly will help motivate them if they are aware of the financial ramifications as well.

Come on -- if you're going to give her a compliment, then shouldn't you give HER a compliment?

And if they play true to form, they will. Watch them pontificate from the floor while news anchors are reporting the latest job numbers. It would be just what they deserve.

I have been watching old Barney Miller reruns recently and have been struck by how supportive of the law but at the same time humane the story lines are. People watched that show ('75-'82) because they could believe that then. I don't think they would watch now, September 11 did them in.

What matters in all this is that we need to hear voices -- strong ones -- saying that torture does not work and also that it is wrong. It was wrong when anyone did it in the past and it is wrong when we do it now. (The story of the Allies' interrogation of German physicists just after WW II would be very instructive here.) Those voices have not been heard nearly enough. People value success and if the military knows torture does not work, they should be shouting it loud and clear so the word gets out and Jack Bauer starts to look like the unsupportable crutch fantasy that it is.

Brig. Gen. Irvine deserves great credit for his post, but where are the others and why have they been silent for so long? Or have they been out there all along? In which case, VERY BIG "WHY" have the media not gotten the word out more vigorously?

If nothing can be done, what does this suggest about future actions of the DOJ? Is it destined to be tilted rightward for a long time as a result of illegal actions and there is no way to fix that? Will there be some misguided left-leaning administrator who will attempt to correct the balance? [Not suggesting this, just supposing.] Will the Republicans permit that to happen without protest?

HOW can this kind of thing be prevented in the future if it was so easy to do and to slip below the radar this time?

It seems to me that everything that went wrong under Bush happened because the government stopped doing the oversight things it needed to in order for it to work properly. How in the world can that be prevented in the future if another administration -- from either side -- decides to play fast and loose with the rules?

Maybe he is just fulfilling a promise to be inclusive, which means that if you come to the table willing to bring your views but still work with others to accomplish something in this democracy then that should be a major improvement over the past eight years of the "with us or against us" approach. I cannot imagine that the Christian right was happy about Sutley's nomination.

Warren does seem to be working through some issues rather than declaring his beliefs as if they were the only gospel out there. Did any other Christian church ask Obama to address its congregation? I cannot remember one that did.

If an incumbent president wanted to stay in power against a challenger for a third term, how do you think the FCC could be used? (And when? No reason to wait until the year before election #3, you start that process on Jan. 20 of the first year in office.) Will it be any different from the recent purging of DOJ attorneys who would not look for vote fraud hard enough? Did the national media go after that or was it really just TPM doing the heavy lifting on that one? And that one example just scratches the surface. Think about the IRS during the Nixon presidency (or FEC appointments). Did anyone actually state early on, we are going after people to keep them from giving serious financial or other support to the opposition? Everything was so much clearer in hindsight. What good did that do McGovern? Or America?

The power of the presidency, the media, and various government entities can be so much more focused now with proper direction (K. Rove comes to mind but there are plenty of others) that an incumbent could use it like a bludgeon to remain in office. Two terms and out at least gives the option for new blood. And if the current administration is working out okay, then by all means elect its VP into office as we did with G.H.W. Bush.

FDR was a pretty good guy and the times were truly not "ordinary," as E. Roosevelt put it in 1940. But that obscures the harm that could occur -- harm that G. Washington, who had a much more direct experience with bad but seemingly permanent government, acted against when he established the two term tradition -- if a president is able to structure a long stay in power. You really have to be careful what you wish for here.