darn straight, weatherunderground - I think the catch-phrase they used was the "moneyed interests" . . .
Edwards starts to get into that kind of language a little bit -
I want to point out for discussion, though - something like 80% of the land in Utah is owned by the federal government, and even more of Nevada. I'm not convinced that's necessary (and tons of folks out West aren't, either) - but all Bush will do is sell it to his friends in the moneyed class and they'll strip-mine the shit out of it . . .
I wonder which crossword it is? The Monday NYT? Hope it's not giving him too much trouble.
Chris, I hope you won't throw me off the site, but I don't see a filibuster happening unless Lawyer John loses it and says something like "yeah, I said the right to privacy is bad law, and I still think so. And by the way, screw you."
The real questions that ought to be asked are something like "If Roe v. Wade were overturned, would the states still have the power under the Constitution to pass state laws allowing abortion?" (or would Congress itself?)
"balance the freakin budget and pay off the national debt" is the easiest formulation (doesn't that speak pretty strongly to what working people strive to do every day) -
I'm sure there are some economics-professor arguments (e.g. government bonds are the lowest-risk investment option, so maybe we want to have a small amount of debt to have t-bonds on the market) - but we need to counter the trickle-down lunacy that's been around since Reagan -
what was the big news before this started to break? The Downing Street memos?
As bad as it was to deliberately blow Plame's cover (oh - excuse me - Karl "didn't even know her name" - that would be "Mrs. Wilson") - isn't the President's deliberate falsification and exagerration of intelligence to get us to war even worse?
I think you're right - Rove's jumping to the wolves to protect W from the DSM . . .