I have no doubt that the latest "reports" (it is Page Six) about Coulter's infirmity might be nothing but a marketing scheme.  It would be not out of bounds for Coulter to use sensationalism and shock-stories about painful situations to sell a few more books.  As a development up to the publication of her latest book, Guilty, the press and pundits seemed to have become universally tired of her antics.  What better way to get some PR, than by the creation of a mysterious, personal misery,  although no one seems to be throwing any amount of sympathy her way. 

     I am sure she could find no refrain to blame it on some liberal insurgency.  As a violent response to the "truth" she prophets, an evolutionary inquisition led by a feminista, underground homo-henchgroup from the Democratic Party Harpy Headquaters directed from their Cuban outpost.  Her story of this leftist conspiracy putsch, as her press release might surmise, would start with her kidnapping from the Reagan Library while she was reading, within covenant, the Constitution.  The lily-livered, and up-market twisted persecution continued with the forcing of a sack made from the Tibetan flag over her head and being ferried to some island refuge off of the San Franciscan coast in a Chinese Junk Boat.  Later to be tortured and interrogated to who she insists sounded exactly like Cindy Sheehan.  It wasn't until after confusing and boring her captors with pretensiousness, by reciting the FISA Act and the Book of Revelations, was she able to escape.  Braving the caustic effects of the unpolluted waters of Monterey Bay and the general repulsion from the Left Coast, her belief in the supremacy of the perfected Jew and her little black dress fueled her deliverance to a Texas off-shore oil platform and Republican salvation.  It was, in fact, the cowardly Hollywood faction of the left, that Whore of Babylon, that wired her mouth shut (a plastic surgeon by affirmative action no doubt), knowing that was the only way to keep her from patriotically preaching the truth from the right.  And so ends her coups count.

     In spite of an immediate feeling of karmic retribution I was guilty of feeling, I am trying to remind myself that her ailment is in no way payback for her certain ways and words - the fact that she is making a living off of her work is payback enough. 

Blurring the law solely for self preservation is a questionable ploy when the Renzi defense, and the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, call on the Constitution for protection.  It is disrespectful to the Constitution and the individuals it protects when it is desperately misinterpreted, especially by those in a privileged, enumerated position.  The "Speech or Debate Clause" the defense team raises does not universally prohibit review of legislative work as they seem to suggest, it prohibits interference of such work.  If they want the evidence suppressed, they should rely on judiciary ruling that it was improperly attained, etc. - which has already been the role of the SCOTUS.  It seems like they know this strategy will fail and are irresponsibly cherry picking their next move.
This blanket defense of entitled immunity smells awfully like the President's office claim of Executive Privilege when trying to act in virtual secrecy and invisibility.  Outside of the obvious security and privacy needs, neither the President or Congresspersons are immune to review.  This is not for their protection against each other, but for our protection against them.  Demanding protection against review or investigation because of their title or position, greater than that of any private citizen, is a privilege of the aristocracy.  I think we dealt with this already.  People ferrying their name with this privileged claim should see that superiority via intellectualization still carries a representative, democratic offense.  It is not quite, "Do you know who I am?!" but it reads that same. 

I think I understand how asset backed securities of the banks prop up the issued credit card accounts and how the later fuels the economy.  I question the plan to help loosen the pool of consumer credit when in general, everyone is too reliant on/fancy free with credit spending leading to the overall instability of individuals' economic health.  Promoting the one faction of our economy (which is abused/misused) that often starts the domino effect of account defaults, right down to those asset based liabilities often the only security of individuals, seems to be a short-sighted "fix."  Just throwing more money around.  I would rather see efforts placed on easing up credit which adds to ones long-term assets or employment advancements.  Let the Banks continue to assume the high risks of consumer credit cards - separating them institutionally from more "healthy" (not necessarily profitable) assets through forced restructuring as a step to receive more fed-backing.  Is this not possible?