I might understand Lieberman's ignorance if he were under 30, but he's old enough that the memory of the lessons of the Nazi terror should have taught him always to oppose the very things he has been supporting.
As I understand it, we've been holding people for a lot longer than a month, in pretty horrible conditions, if they get caught.
Illegal immigrants are creating economic problems for low-income Americans, but it's their illegality, not their presence, or their numbers, that is causing the problem - that is, it's the fact that they're afraid of getting caught that allows illegal employers to abuse them and drive wages down. We'd actually be better off if it was legal for them to come into the country without visas. Which, in fact, used to be case.
Are you suggesting that who Kos is represents some sort of secret? That you can't figure out who Kos is?
The thing about reading blogs on the Internet is that if you're doing that, you're in a position to Google. That is, assuming the blog itself doesn't tell you what it's doing, which it almost certainly does. I don't have to know who Atrios "is" to know who he is - he's obviously not a conservative, and he obviously wants the conservatives out of power. I have my name at the top of my blog. Even people who don't use their real names maintain a consistent identity.
No one is stopping the public from knowing what Kos is up to. Congress isn't trying to change that, they're trying to change whether it is feasible for Kos to do it.
I don't think I've ever heard so many theories about "why they won" floated as I have in the last year. And not one single one of them has panned out. Doesn't anyone wonder why?
First it was the "values" vote, then it was the "exurban" vote. All rubbish. And yet no one asks the question: If none of the reasons for Bush winning are true, did Bush win?
They're all "explanations" for something that everyone knows should not have happened. All those people who voted for Bush in 2000 but have openly changed their minds - some switching to Dem votes, some opting out or voting for third parties. Turns out that the percentage of people who say they voted on "values" who voted Republican in 2004 was lower than it was in preceding years. Even the exit pollster's own "explanation" for why "the exit polls were wrong" doesn't make sense.
Well, what if the exit polls just weren't wrong?
Sooner or later people are going to have to seriously entertain that question, or none of the prognostications and electoral vote-counting and hopes for the future will make a damned bit of difference. They can cheat. We know they have cheated in numerous ways in the last six years, and deliberately installed a voting system that makes cheating easier and impossible to audit. They've broken every damn law we have, violated damn-near every Constitutional restriction, right, requirement.
Can you really, seriously believe they won't steal the next election when they've worked so hard to make sure that they can?
Those "barbaric" late-term abortions are there to save women's lives, they aren't just something you do because you like barbarity.
Surgery is generally pretty disgusting, you could make anything sound "barbaric" if you just describe it. (Want me to gross you out with descriptions of my eye surgery? I usually short-hand it as, "I got my eye gouged out.")
What we need is to articulate what all of our beliefs are about and not let the right-wingers shape the discussion. We have to explain why being pro-choice is the only pro-life position, that no one is saying we should require your church to marry gays, that people who work for a living deserve job safety and a living wage and the knowledge that when they are no longer hardy enough to work they can retire in peace.
Unfortunately, Kerry explained nothing in his campaign, and that made all the difference.