NATIONAL & WORLD DIGEST March 20, 2007

**IF YOU CAN'T ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE, CONTACT US AT rays.list@comcast.net and we'll be happy to send the full article.

=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070308/8cohen_print.htm

Rice's Hiring of Neocon Leaves Observers Puzzled
By Thomas Omestad
Posted 3/8/07

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's hiring this month of the prominent andprolific neoconservative analyst Eliot Cohen has Washington foreign policywatchers puzzling more than usual over what it may signal.

Cohen, named as counselor to the State Department, was an ardent advocate ofgoing to war with Saddam Hussein as part of a wider war on terrorism andmilitant Islam-what he has argued constitutes "World War IV." In December2001, he wrote in the Wall Street Journal: "After Afghanistan, what? Iraq isthe big prize." He was a founding member of the Project for the New AmericanCentury-a group that helped lay the intellectual groundwork for the attackon Iraq as well as efforts to weaken Yasser Arafat as head of thePalestinian Authority. He has urged regime change in Iran. Yet Cohen hasalso criticized the administration for what he has called "incompetentexecution and insufficient resources" in dealing with post-invasion Iraq-acomplaint he has leveled with some emotion as he is the father of a youngArmy officer who served in Iraq. Last December, he castigated the bipartisanIraq Study Group-which recommended a diplomatic opening to Iran and Syria-asa "fatuous process" in an op-ed in the Journal.

Deciphering personnel moves, particularly in an administration staffed fromacross the widely differing hues of the conservative political spectrum, canbe very difficult. Rice-it's no secret-has not emerged as a favorite ofneoconservatives. Since her arrival at the State Department from her post asthe president's national security adviser, Rice's moves to soften previouslyhard-line negotiating stands on the nuclear programs of Iran and North Koreahave stirred unhappiness and worry among many of those who have stood byPresident Bush in his approach to the war on terrorism. Indeed, under Rice,the center of gravity on both issues has shifted toward negotiations-thatis, easing policy enough to permit practical bargaining (in the case ofNorth Korea) or at least a plausible offer to begin talks (in the case ofIran).

And the advisers Rice has tapped to take leading roles in policy on NorthKorea and Iran- Christopher Hill, assistant secretary of state for East Asiaand Pacific affairs, and Nicholas Burns, under secretary of state forpolitical affairs-are widely seen as diplomatic pragmatists more interestedin cutting satisfactory deals than promoting regime change. As such, theyare in disfavor with many neoconservatives as well. As Rice has executedthis unspoken shift, key bearers of the conservative foreign policy torchthat shaped Bush's first term-including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, and Robert Joseph, State Department undersecretary for arms control and international security-have been leaving theadministration.

So Rice's selection of Cohen to become a key adviser seems to cut againstthe direction of events at Foggy Bottom-and has prompted considerablespeculation about her motives. In the new position, says State Departmentspokesman Sean McCormack, Cohen will provide "an intellectual soundingboard" for Rice. Cohen, a military historian and professor at Washington'sJohns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, is expected, atleast initially, to focus on Iraq and Afghanistan.



=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/16/AR2007031601923_pf.html

White House Opposes D.C. Vote
Constitutional Concerns Put Bill in Jeopardy

By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 17, 2007; A01

The White House declared its opposition yesterday to a bill that would givethe District its first full seat in the House of Representatives, saying itis unconstitutional, and a key Senate supporter said such concerns couldkill the measure.

"The Constitution specifies that only 'the people of the several states'elect representatives to the House," said White House spokesman Alex Conant."And D.C. is not a state."

He declined to say whether President Bush would veto the bill, but the WhiteHouse appeared to be sending a message to Congress just as momentum for themeasure was building. It cleared two House committees this week, and theDemocratic leadership has vowed to pass it on the House floor next week.

The bill seeks to increase the House permanently to 437 seats, from 435. Ina bipartisan compromise, one seat would go to the overwhelmingly DemocraticDistrict, which has a nonvoting delegate in the House. The other would go tothe next state in line to pick up a seat based on the 2000 Census: Utah,which leans Republican.

Several Republican House members assailed the bill this week, noting thatthe Constitution reserves representation for residents of states, notdistricts. Supporters countered with a section of the Constitution known asthe "District Clause," which gives Congress sweeping powers over the city.Legal scholars have disagreed over who is right.




=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.enn.com/net_PF.html?id=1863

Are Politicians Avoiding the Real Reasons for Climate Change?

March 14, 2007 - By World Land Trust

Suffolk, UK - On Earth Day this year (March 20th) no doubt there will beconsiderable focus on climate change, and its effects on the environment.But are we all missing the point? According to John Burton, of the WorldLand Trust, politicians and environmentalists alike are not confronting thereal reasons for climate change. According to John Burton "While the use offossil fuels and the release of CO2 is clearly driving climate change,reducing our individual consumption on its own will not make a shred ofdifference to the future of the planet." He went on to explain, "It is onlywhen we confront the real issue that is driving the whole energy issue thatwe can hope to prevent the total chaos that is likely to result over thenext few decades. And that is far too many people exist on this planet."

The real issue is the exploding human population bomb. That population, withits ever increasing demands on the world's resources, is totallyunsustainable. The developed world is only able to sustain its own standardsof living and use of resources by exploiting fossil fuels and the esources,including labour, of the less developed parts of the world. And as countriessuch as China, India and other parts of Asia catch up, more and moreresources will be consumed, particularly energy and water. Intensificationof farming in the developed world has temporarily alleviated food shortages,but simultaneously devastated wildlife, with millions of acres noweffectively barren of wild animals and plants. And as this intensificationspreads worldwide so even migrant birds suffer.

Asked what hope there was, John Burton admitted to being very pessimisticabout the future of the world, "However, since the World Land Trust wascreated in 1989, more and more organisations are seeing the importance ofpreserving what little is left. We have helped save over 350,000 acres, andour American partners, more than a million. It's not a huge amount, but bytargeting key areas, perhaps something will survive for future generationwhen human populations are brought under control."


=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/121886

Netanyahu Issues Call to World From Jerusalem Conference

by Hillel Fendel


(IsraelNN.com) Binyamin Netanyahu, speaking at the 4th Annual JerusalemConference Monday morning, repeated his call for the world to prove that nowis not like the 1930s and that the world knows how to respond this time.

"Historic tragedies occur when leaders do not foresee dangers - and theopposite is true: Great things happened when leaders foresaw and tookadvantage of opportunities," the former Prime Minister and present head ofthe Knesset opposition said. "Today we have both. The great threat of thespread of militant Islam around the world, and the opportunity ofglobalization, which can bring a great blessing to mankind and especially tosmall countries like us - if we are smart enough to take advantage of thisopportunity.

"First, the dangers: For years, I have been warning about the dangers ofIslam. Ten years ago, after I was elected PM and I went to speak before bothhouses of Congress. I recently looked up my speech and I saw that I said thesame things - the dangers of Iran arming with nuclear power and its becominga menace to humanity. I can't say I was successful in convincing manypeople: I tried to convince Clinton and Yeltsin and the President of China,but they just didn't see the dangers.


=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/16/AR2007031601923_pf.html

White House Opposes D.C. Vote
Constitutional Concerns Put Bill in Jeopardy

By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 17, 2007; A01

The White House declared its opposition yesterday to a bill that would givethe District its first full seat in the House of Representatives, saying itis unconstitutional, and a key Senate supporter said such concerns couldkill the measure.

"The Constitution specifies that only 'the people of the several states'elect representatives to the House," said White House spokesman Alex Conant."And D.C. is not a state."

He declined to say whether President Bush would veto the bill, but the WhiteHouse appeared to be sending a message to Congress just as momentum for themeasure was building. It cleared two House committees this week, and theDemocratic leadership has vowed to pass it on the House floor next week.

The bill seeks to increase the House permanently to 437 seats, from 435. Ina bipartisan compromise, one seat would go to the overwhelmingly DemocraticDistrict, which has a nonvoting delegate in the House. The other would go tothe next state in line to pick up a seat based on the 2000 Census: Utah,which leans Republican.

Several Republican House members assailed the bill this week, noting thatthe Constitution reserves representation for residents of states, notdistricts. Supporters countered with a section of the Constitution known asthe "District Clause," which gives Congress sweeping powers over the city.Legal scholars have disagreed over who is right.



=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070319.wisrael0319/BNStory/International/home

Most Israelis advocate Palestinian contacts: poll

AMY TEIBEL
Associated Press

JERUSALEM - More than half of all Israelis disagree with their government'sdecision to boycott the Palestinians' new governing alliance, which doesn'texplicitly recognize the Jewish state's right to exist, a poll showed onMonday.

Thirty-nine per cent of the 517 people surveyed by the Dahaf ResearchInstitute said Israel should talk with the new Palestinian government, madeup of the militant Islamic Hamas and the more moderate Fatah. An additional17 per cent said their government should engage only Fatah cabinetministers. The poll had a margin of error of 4.3 percentage points.

Past polls have also shown the broader Israeli public to be more flexiblethan its government on various issues related to peacemaking.

On Sunday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said peace talks with the Palestiniancoalition government would be impossible as long as it refused to renounceviolence and recognize Israel's right to exist.

"We can't have contact with members of a government that justifiesresistance, or, in other words, terror," Mr. Olmert told his cabinet. Thecabinet endorsed the Prime Minister's hard line, and urged the West tomaintain harsh economic sanctions imposed after Hamas, which killed hundredsof Israelis in suicide bombings, swept parliamentary elections last year.



=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/SendMail.aspx?print=print&type=0&item=121886

Netanyahu Issues Call to World From Jerusalem Conference

1 Nisan 5767, 20 March 07 05:27by Hillel Fendel(IsraelNN.com)

Binyamin Netanyahu, speaking at the 4th Annual Jerusalem Conference Mondaymorning,
repeated his call for the world to prove that now is not like the 1930s andthat the world knows how to respond this time.

"Historic tragedies occur when leaders do not foresee dangers - and theopposite is true: Great things happened when leaders foresaw and tookadvantage of opportunities," the former Prime Minister and present head ofthe Knesset opposition said. "Today we have both. The great threat of thespread of militant Islam around the world, and the opportunity ofglobalization, which can bring a great blessing to mankind and especially tosmall countries like us - if we are smart enough to take advantage of thisopportunity.

"First, the dangers: For years, I have been warning about the dangers ofIslam. Ten years ago, after I was elected PM and I went to speak before bothhouses of Congress. I recently looked up my speech and I saw that I said thesame things - the dangers of Iran arming with nuclear power and its becominga menace to humanity. I can't say I was successful in convincing manypeople: I tried to convince Clinton and Yeltsin and the President of China,but they just didn't see the dangers.

"A few months ago, I said that it is now 1938 and Iran is Germany. I wastold that things are different now, and that the world now has a differentapproach.
So I say: 'Great, if it's different, let's see how it'sdifferent!'

The difference is not that then it was a 'race superiority' issue and nowit's a 'religious superiority' issue - that's not the point. The onlydifference is that Hitler first tried to conquer the world and onlyafterwards was going to try for atomic power, while now, Ahmadinajad istrying first for nuclear power and only then will he try to conquer theworld! That's the whole difference! This is a tidal wave that threatens toengulf first Israel, and then the rest of the world. They are talking openlyabout a new Reich - except that they call it a Khalifate; that's what theywant to establish in the world. But for this to happen, they need acataclysmic event to bring it on - and they are working on that.

"The question is what have we learned from 1939? If, as everyone says, wedidn't act in time to stop Hitler - so let's see if they act in time now!The way to do this is first by exerting economic pressure on Iran, to whichit is very vulnerable. They have 20% unemployment, and we can take advantageof this in order to cause a destabilization of the government. Of course, wemust also enact sanctions against the 400 companies that do business withIran, among them some very big ones such as the French oil company Total. Weneed a world coalition against genocide! This is what I tell the world: Ifwe're not in the 30s now, then let's prove it! Sanctions against Iran are agood idea for a few months or a year - let's see if they work - but notlonger than that! Iran must not be allowed to obtain nuclear power!



=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.tompaine.com/print/dems_go_lukewarm_on_global_warming.php

Dems Go Lukewarm on Global Warming
Bill Scher
March 19, 2007

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is lowering expectations regarding planned globalwarming legislation, the Wall Street Journal's Washington Wire blog reportedFriday. Pelosi, D-Calif., prompted concerns last week when an aide said aclimate-change and energy-independence bill might not be ready by Pelosi'sJune 1 deadline.

Pelosi later explained: "We have two years in this Congress; we do notexpect to achieve complete solutions . by June 1."

To push for a "complete" solution would mean enacting a long-overdue,urgently needed cap on greenhouse gas emissions. But that's sure to bevetoed by President Bush or filibustered by Senate conservatives. So itwould appear Pelosi is angling for a baby step with no cap, which won't domuch to reverse global warming but has a shot of being signed into law.

The strategic question is, what would build more momentum for necessaryreforms? A law that takes us a baby step forward? Or a veto ofwidely-supported legislation, jolting the public and sparking the removal ofpolitical obstacles occupying Congress and the White House in 2008?

As Pelosi indicates, it's not quite an either-or. She can push tougherlegislation after an baby step bill is passed. But, at miminum, the newselect committee on global warming that Pelosi created must show theway-articulate the comprehensive reforms that are urgently needed and buildpublic demand for them. And a baby step bill cannot be portrayed as morethan it is, confusing the public and dampening momentum for necessaryaction.



=

Forwarded from Victoria Lavin
Daily Queer News
dailyqueernews@yahoo.com

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/4641987.html

March 18, 2007, 11:43PM
U.S. objects to key points at climate change meeting, German official says

Associated Press

BERLIN - The United States objected to key parts of a discussion on climatechange at a meeting between G-8 environmental officials and representativesfrom five influential developing nations, Germany's environment ministersaid.

The conference ended with consensus on several points, including a generalacceptance of the scientific explanation for the causes of global warmingand that industrialized nations need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions morethan mandated by current agreements, said German Environment Minister SigmarGabriel, who hosted the meeting Saturday.

Officials also agreed that industrialized countries have been responsiblefor most greenhouse gas emissions in the past and for the need to helpdeveloping countries control their emissions today, Gabriel said.

But the U.S. spoke out against a global carbon emissions trading plan andrecognizing reforestation programs in developing nations as part of thefight against global warming, he said.

"We find that very regrettable," he said.



=

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/world/europe/20iran.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

March 20, 2007

Russia Gives Iran Ultimatum on Enrichment
By ELAINE SCIOLINO

PARIS, March 19 - Russia has informed Iran that it will withhold nuclearfuel for Iran's nearly completed Bushehr power plant unless Iran suspendsits uranium enrichment as demanded by the United Nations Security Council,European, American and Iranian officials say.

The ultimatum was delivered in Moscow last week by Igor S. Ivanov, thesecretary of the Russian National Security Council, to Ali Hosseini Tash,Iran's deputy chief nuclear negotiator, said the officials, who spoke oncondition of anonymity because a confidential diplomatic exchange betweentwo governments was involved.

For years, President Bush has been pressing President Vladimir V. Putin ofRussia to cut off help to Iran on the nuclear power plant that Russia isbuilding at Bushehr, in southern Iran. But Mr. Putin has resisted. Theproject is Tehran's first serious effort to produce nuclear energy and hasbeen very profitable for Russia.

Recently, however, Moscow and Tehran have been engaged in a public argumentabout whether Iran has paid its bills, which may explain Russia's apparentshift. But the ultimatum may also reflect an increasing displeasure andfrustration on Moscow's part with Iran over its refusal to stop enrichinguranium at its vast facility at Natanz.

"We're not sure what mix of commercial and political motives are at playhere," one senior Bush administration official said in Washington. "Butclearly the Russians and the Iranians are getting on each other's nerves -and that's not all bad."



=

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/world/middleeast/20iraq.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

March 20, 2007

Hussein's Former Vice President Is Hanged
By ALISSA J. RUBIN

BAGHDAD, March 20 - The former vice president of Iraq, Taha Yassin Ramadan,was hanged shortly before dawn today, the prime minister's office said.

He was the highest-ranking person from Saddam Hussein's government to beexecuted, after the former president himself.

Mr. Ramadan was executed at 3:05 a.m. Baghdad time (10:05 p.m. MondayEastern time) for his role in the killing of 148 Iraqi Shiites in 1982.

Witnesses to the execution included representatives of the Justice Ministry,the Interior Ministry and the prime minister's office. Also in attendancewas a judge from the Iraqi High Tribunal, the prosecutor in his case and Mr.Ramadan's lawyer.

Mr. Ramadan was upset and fearful as he was led to the gallows, said BassamRidha, an adviser to the current Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.



=

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/opinion/20tue1.html?pagewanted=print

March 20, 2007
Editorial

Students' Right to Free Speech

The Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in a case that has attractedattention mainly because of its eccentric story line: An Alaska student wassuspended from high school in 2002 after he unfurled a banner reading "BongHits 4 Jesus" while the Olympic torch passed by. But the case raisesimportant issues of freedom of expression and student censorship that go farbeyond the words on that banner. The court should affirm the appeals court'swell-reasoned decision that when the school punished the student it violatedhis First Amendment rights.

Joseph Frederick and his fellow students were allowed to leave the groundsof Juneau-Douglas High School so they could watch the Olympic torch passnearby. When the cameras began to roll, he unfurled his banner, which hesays was meant to be funny and get him on television. The principal took itfrom him, and suspended him for 10 days.

Mr. Frederick says the suspension violated his rights. The school boardinsists the principal had the right to confiscate the banner and punish thestudent because the language undermined its teachings about the dangers ofillegal drugs. The San Francisco-based United States Court of Appeals forthe Ninth Circuit ruled for Mr. Frederick, citing the 1969 case Tinker v.Des Moines Independent Community School District, which held that studentshave the right to free speech, which can be suppressed only when the speechdisrupts school activities.

The Bush administration joined the school district in arguing that schoolshave broad authority to limit talk about drugs because of the importance ofkeeping drugs away from young people. But if schools can limit speech on anysubject deemed to be important, students could soon be punished for talkingabout the war on terror or the war in Iraq because the government alsoconsiders those subjects important.

Some school administrators would no doubt use their power to clamp down onconservative speech while others would clamp down on liberal speech. Aschool that values diversity could punish students who criticize affirmativeaction, while a more conservative school could ban students from takingoutspoken positions about global warming. Religious groups have joined civillibertarians in backing Mr. Frederick because they fear schools will punishstudents who talk about their religious beliefs.



=

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/opinion/20tue3.html?pagewanted=print

March 20, 2007
Editorial

The Disastrous Mr. Mugabe

Zimbabwe's president, Robert Mugabe, has spent much of his 26-plus years inpower suppressing all opposition, persecuting defenseless minorities anddestroying a once-promising economy. He has shamelessly tried to deflect allblame for the disastrous consequences - including a man-made famine and acatastrophically mishandled H.I.V./AIDS epidemic - onto internationalscapegoats, chiefly Britain and the United States.

Now, the 83-year-old Mr. Mugabe seems to have descended into totalpower-madness. He has barred opponents from leaving the country, ordered histhugs to literally crack the skulls of opposition leaders, accused his ownparty's youth group of plotting against him, and told Western critics to "gohang." Last week, he threatened to run again in 2008 for another six-yearterm.

With hyperinflation making its currency almost worthless, Zimbabwe isrunning short of basic commodities like milk, cooking oil and gasoline.Fewer than one in four Zimbabweans have jobs, and life expectancy, nearly 60in 1990, has plunged into the 30s.

Will no one rescue Zimbabwe? The United States and Europe have limitedinfluence, and risk playing into Mr. Mugabe's racist rhetoric when they tryto use it. But President Thabo Mbeki of neighboring South Africa - theregion's most prestigious political leader - has enormous leverage, and heshould be using it. South Africa is Zimbabwe's main trade partner, a biginvestor and the source of more than 40 percent of its electricity.

Unfortunately Mr. Mbeki has done nothing, apparently out of a misplacedsense of liberation-struggle solidarity. Zimbabwe is struggling to liberateitself from Mr. Mugabe's deadly misrule. Its people desperately need allZimbabweans, and the influential Mr. Mbeki, to show real-life solidaritywith them - and not with their rampaging dictator.



=

The New York Times

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/opinion/20kristof.html

March 20, 2007
Op-Ed Columnist
Iran's Operative in the White House
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

If an 18-year-old American soldier were caught slipping obscure militarypaperwork to Iranian spies, he would be arrested, pilloried in the newsmedia and tossed into prison for years.

But in fact there's an American who has provided services of incalculablygreater value to Iran in recent years. So you have to wonder: Is Dick Cheneyan Iranian mole?

Consider that the Bush administration's first major military interventionwas to overthrow Afghanistan's Taliban regime, Iran's bitter foe to theeast. Then the administration toppled Iran's even worse enemy to the west,the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq.

You really think that's just a coincidence? That of all 193 nations in theworld, we just happen to topple the two neighboring regimes that Irandespises?

Moreover, consider how our invasion of Iraq went down. The U.S. dismantledIraq's army, broke the Baath Party and helped install a pro-Iraniangovernment in Baghdad. If Iran's ayatollahs had written the script, theycouldn't have done better - so maybe they did write the script ...

We fought Iraq, and Iran won. And that's just another coincidence?



=

The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031901636_pf.html

Morning in America

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007; A19

To understand how much the Iraq war has transformed the way most Americansthink about foreign policy, consider what passed for shrewd analysis fouryears ago.

The words on the "in" list included "unilateral," "bold," "robust,""transformative" and "sole remaining superpower." The words on the "out"list included "multilateral," "nuance," "patience," "diplomacy," "allies,""history" and "prudence."

Today, the "in" and "out" lists would be almost exactly reversed. The new"out" list includes such additions as "reckless," "arrogant" and"incompetent."

With so many establishmentarians now running away from the war, many wouldprefer to forget the political mood at 10:15 p.m. on March 19, 2003, whenPresident Bush announced that "at this hour American and coalition forcesare in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free itspeople and to defend the world from grave danger."

Politics did not stop at the water's edge. The edition of The Post in whichBush's speech was reported also included this headline: "GOP to HammerDemocratic War Critics." The report began: "Congressional Republicans areimplicitly challenging the patriotism of some Democrats who have criticizedPresident Bush's war plans, a sign that the divisive politics marking the108th Congress are unlikely to cease during wartime."



=

The Washinton Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031901637_pf.html

Tortured Credibility

By Anne Applebaum
Tuesday, March 20, 2007; A19

Back in 2003, when U.S. forces first took custody of the notorious al-Qaedamastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed, there was much speculation about what hiscapture might signify. Some thought he might possess information about otherplanned operations, some predicted his loss would fatally damage al-Qaeda,some guessed his arrest would lead to additional arrests. Others, among themHarvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, used his capture to float interestingtheories about torture: when and how it might legitimately be used, forexample, given a candidate who might seem so clearly deserving of it.

Here is one thing nobody predicted back in 2003: that when the notoriousMohammed eventually stood before a Guantanamo Bay military tribunal and tookresponsibility not only for the Sept. 11 attacks, the deadliest crime evercarried out on American soil, but also for the horrific death of thejournalist Daniel Pearl and some two dozen other operations, the world wouldgreet the confessions with skepticism and indifference.

The Daily Telegraph, normally the most pro-American newspaper in Britain,wrote that it hardly mattered whether Mohammed was guilty, since whateverconclusion is drawn by the military tribunal that will try him, "the worldwill condemn the procedures by which the verdicts were reached." Germany'sFrankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung concluded that "the Bush administration hasnobody but itself to blame for the fact that the actions and motives of theperpetrator are now playing second fiddle to the practices used by theAmericans in fighting terrorism." In many places, the confessions, whichtook place nearly a week ago, still have hardly attracted attention.

A small part of this international indifference perhaps derives from thetranscript of the confessions, which seem boastful and exaggerated. (Whatelse will he confess to? The murder of JFK?) Most of it, though, surelycomes from the widespread, indeed practically universal, assumption thatMohammed was tortured, not in theory but in practice.



=

The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031901608_pf.html

No Time for Patience in Iraq

By Eugene Robinson
Special to washingtonpost.com
Tuesday, March 20, 2007; 12:00 AM

It wasn't what you'd call a very happy anniversary.

Four years into the war in Iraq, which was supposed to be a "cakewalk," tosay that expectations have been lowered would be as much an understatementas, well, noting that "mistakes were made."

In his brief address yesterday, George W. Bush said that "the fight isdifficult, but it can be won." Dwell on that for a moment. The "missionaccomplished" president, once so full of certainty and swagger, isn'ttelling Americans that victory is proximate or even inevitable, just that itis still possible.

When I heard those words, I thought that either the president had decided"can be won" is now the outer limit of public credulity, or -- foolish me --that maybe he had finally begun to see Iraq as it is, not as he would likeit to be. But then he reverted to form, raising the specter of the Sept. 11attacks, and the speech sounded like just another attempt at spin controlrather than the product of any sort of presidential epiphany.

Sigh. The White House remains an epiphany-free zone.



=

The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031901634_pf.html

Wasted Lives

By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, March 20, 2007; A19



Back when I was in the National Guard and fearing a call-up for the war inVietnam, I went to England on vacation. So it may be only natural, Isuppose, that the thing I most starkly recall from that trip was England'smajestic cathedrals -- not for the Gothic wonder of them all, but for thetombs of fallen soldiers. They died -- always valiantly -- often inconflicts of little account and no memory. The word "wasted" came to mind.

That word has made something of a comeback. It was used by both Sens. JohnMcCain and Barack Obama -- and the context was the present war in Iraq.McCain used the "W" word when he announced on the David Letterman show thathe would run for president. "Americans are very frustrated, and they haveevery right to be," he said. "We've wasted a lot of our most precioustreasure, which is American lives." Precisely so.

The Democratic National Committee, ever poised for the cheap shot, accusedMcCain of "insulting our brave troops" and demanded an apology. Othersjoined in, and McCain obliged, saying he should have used the word"sacrificed." Among the sacrifices being made, of course, is McCain'sintegrity.

Earlier, Obama had also been caught uttering the truth. Soon after heannounced for the presidency, the senator concluded a criticism of the warwith the "W" word -- "over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americanswasted." Obama quickly apologized, confessing to a "slip of the tongue." Hethen reformulated his statement using the word "sacrifices." For somereason, the Democratic National Committee held its tongue.

It is painfully hard to say -- and even harder to write -- that the liveslost in Iraq were wasted. It sounds like a judgment on the dead when it ismeant, of course, as an indictment of the living: America's politicalleadership. But some sort of finger has to be pointed at the president andsome sort of reminder offered that it is not just a policy that has failedbut that people have been killed or wounded. This is the real cost of a warthat need not have been fought.



=

The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/18/AR2007031801367_pf.html

A weekly roundup of the buzz from the Sunday talk shows

Monday, March 19, 2007; A02

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) said he willseek to subpoena senior White House officials, including chief politicalstrategist Karl Rove and former presidential counsel Harriet E. Miers, ifthey do not agree to testify in the probe into the firings of eight U.S.attorneys.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said that D. Kyle Sampson, who quit aschief of staff to Attorney General Albert R. Gonzales amid the controversy,will probably agree to testify.

The comments set up a potential clash between the White House andcongressional Democrats over allegations that the Bush administrationorchestrated the firings of federal prosecutors for political reasons. TheWhite House may declare executive privilege and refuse to let seniorofficials testify.

Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, heldout for another option, saying on "Fox News Sunday": "Maybe the White Housewill come back and say, 'We'll permit them to be interviewed and we'll givethem all the records.' " Leahy, though, said on ABC's "This Week" that onlytestimony under oath will be acceptable. "I do not believe in this 'We'llhave a private briefing for you where we'll tell you everything' and theydon't."

Hadley's Plea: On ABC, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley toldDemocrats not to waste their time trying to pass a bill to acceleratewithdrawal from Iraq, saying President Bush would veto such legislation.



=

Boston.com

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/20/as_immigration_raids_rise_human_toll_decried?mode=PF

As immigration raids rise, human toll decried
Arrests across US break up families
By Yvonne Abraham, Globe Staff | March 20, 2007

When Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raided a meatpacking plantin Marshalltown, Iowa, on Dec. 16, arresting 99 workers who could not provethey were in the country legally, then-governor Tom Vilsack was livid.

Immigration officials "chose to pursue a solitary path that limited theoperation's effectiveness, created undue hardship for many not at fault, andled to resentment and further mistrust of government," Vilsack wrote in aletter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.

The ICE raid was part of the agency's largest-ever enforcement operation,hitting Swift & Co. slaughterhouses in six states and resulting in thearrests of 1,297 workers. As of March 1, 649 of those workers had beendeported.

Like the March 6 raid on the Michael Bianco Inc. leather goods factory inNew Bedford, in which more than 300 workers were arrested, the Swiftoperation left some children stranded for hours, and many others in the careof friends and relatives. ICE flew many detainees to an out-of-state federaldetention facility before immigrants' advocates had a chance to speak withthem about their children. Some detainees were not initially honest with ICEinvestigators about whether they had children, fearing they, too, would betaken into custody even though some of those children were US citizens.

And like the New Bedford raid, the Swift raids drew harsh criticism from thegovernor, who criticized ICE's limited cooperation with state officials,including its refusal to release information in a timely fashion on who wasdetained and where.



=

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/us/20episcopal.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

March 20, 2007

Money Looms in Episcopalian Rift With Anglicans
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN and NEELA BANERJEE

As leaders of the Anglican Communion hold meeting after meeting to debatesevering ties with the Episcopal Church in the United States forconsecrating an openly gay bishop, one of the unspoken complications is justwho has been paying the bills.

The truth is, the Episcopal Church bankrolls much of the Communion'soperations. And a cutoff of that money, while unlikely at this time, coulddeal the Communion a devastating blow.

The Episcopal Church's 2.3 million members make up a small fraction of the77 million members in the Anglican Communion, the world's third-largestaffiliation of Christian churches. Nevertheless, the Episcopal Churchfinances at least a third of the Communion's annual operations.

Episcopalians give tens of millions more each year to support aid anddevelopment programs in the Communion's poorer provinces in Africa, Asia andLatin America. At least $18 million annually flows from Episcopal Churchheadquarters in New York, and millions more are sent directly from Americandioceses and parishes that support Anglican churches, schools, clinics andmissionaries abroad.

Bishops in some foreign provinces that benefit from Episcopal money are nowleading the charge to punish the Episcopal Church or even evict it from theCommunion. Some have declared that they will reject money from the EpiscopalChurch because of its stand on homosexuality.



=

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/us/20episcopal.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

March 20, 2007
Money Looms in Episcopalian Rift With Anglicans
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN and NEELA BANERJEE

As leaders of the Anglican Communion hold meeting after meeting to debatesevering ties with the Episcopal Church in the United States forconsecrating an openly gay bishop, one of the unspoken complications is justwho has been paying the bills.

The truth is, the Episcopal Church bankrolls much of the Communion'soperations. And a cutoff of that money, while unlikely at this time, coulddeal the Communion a devastating blow.

The Episcopal Church's 2.3 million members make up a small fraction of the77 million members in the Anglican Communion, the world's third-largestaffiliation of Christian churches. Nevertheless, the Episcopal Churchfinances at least a third of the Communion's annual operations.

Episcopalians give tens of millions more each year to support aid anddevelopment programs in the Communion's poorer provinces in Africa, Asia andLatin America. At least $18 million annually flows from Episcopal Churchheadquarters in New York, and millions more are sent directly from Americandioceses and parishes that support Anglican churches, schools, clinics andmissionaries abroad.

Bishops in some foreign provinces that benefit from Episcopal money are nowleading the charge to punish the Episcopal Church or even evict it from theCommunion. Some have declared that they will reject money from the EpiscopalChurch because of its stand on homosexuality.



=

The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/world/europe/20hicks.html?pagewanted=print

March 20, 2007
Detainee Says He Was Abused While in U.S. Custody
By RAYMOND BONNER

LONDON, March 19 - David Hicks, the first detainee to be formally chargedunder the new military tribunal rules at Guantánamo Bay, has alleged in acourt document filed here that during more than five years in Americancustody he was beaten several times during interrogations and witnessed theabuse of other prisoners.

In an affidavit supporting his request for British citizenship, Mr. Hickscontends that before he arrived at Guantánamo, his American captors threwhim and other detainees on the ground, walked on them, stripped him naked,shaved all his body hair and inserted a plastic object in his rectum.

The abuse, Mr. Hicks asserts, began during interrogations in Afghanistan,where he was captured in late 2001. It then continued while he was shuttledbetween American naval ships, aircraft, unknown buildings and Kandaharbefore he was taken to the military detention center at Guantánamo Bay,Cuba, in early 2002, according to the affidavit.

While Mr. Hicks did not claim that he was tortured at Guantánamo, he said hewas given regular, mysterious injections that "would make my head feelstrange." He also said he witnessed or heard about mistreatment of othersthere.

A detainee with only one leg was "set upon" by a special military team andits dogs, he said. The man was dragged out of his cell, and there was bloodon his face and the cell floor. "It put me in such fear that I just knew Iwould 'cooperate' in any way with the U.S."



=

The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/20/AR2007032000086_pf.html

Activist Obama Church Enters Spotlight

By MICHAEL TARM
The Associated Press
Tuesday, March 20, 2007; 2:22 AM

CHICAGO -- A then 26-year-old Barack Obama walked down the aisle ofChicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, knelt beneath a cross suspendedfrom its rafters and, as he later explained it, committed himself to Godafter years as a religious skeptic.

In those early days at the self-described "unashamedly black" church, thefuture Democratic presidential candidate was moved to tears by a sermon fromits activist pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., whom he has portrayed ashis spiritual mentor.

Two decades later, Obama himself would be Wright's topic of the day _ butnot for reasons either man would have hoped.

At a recent Sunday service, following media coverage of Obama's last-minutedecision not to have Wright speak at the senator's presidential announcementlast month, Wright warned his flock not to believe any reports of a riftbetween him and the church's best-known member.

"Barack and I are fine," Wright, 65, on an out-of-state trip, said in arecorded message played to about 2,000 attendees. "The press is not to betrusted. ... Don't let somebody outside our camp divide us."



=

The Sun-Sentinel

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/ats-ap_top12mar20,0,3731425,print.story?coll=sns-newsnation-headlines

Saddam Hussein's Former Deputy Is Hanged


=

By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA
Associated Press Writer

March 20, 2007, 10:29 AM EDT

BAGHDAD -- Saddam Hussein's former deputy, hanged before dawn in what wasonce Iraq's military intelligence headquarters, was buried Tuesday near theousted dictator who died on the same gallows less than three months ago.

Taha Yassin Ramadan, who was Saddam's vice president, went to the gallows onthe fourth anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq for the deaths of 148Shiites in the town of Dujail.

Bassam al-Hassani, an adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, said theexecution went smoothly, although Ramadan appeared frightened and recitedthe two shahadahs -- a declaration of faith repeated by Muslims -- "There isno God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet."

Al-Hassani said precautions were taken to prevent a repeat of what happenedto Saddam's half brother and co-defendant Barzan Ibrahim, who wasinadvertently decapitated on the gallows during his January execution.

Ramadan, who was nearly 70, was weighed before the hanging and the rope waschosen accordingly, al-Hassani said.



=

St. Petersburg Times

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/03/20/news_pf/Opinion/GOP_bill_guts_No_Chil.shtml

GOP bill guts No Child Left Behind
By WASHINGTON POST
Published March 20, 2007

Imagine your child is having trouble passing an exam in school. Would youwant the school to (a) offer extra help and ask for a better effort or (b)tell your kid to just forget about the exam? If you favor (b), then you'llapprove of the recent retreat from the No Child Left Behind Act by someinfluential Republicans in Congress.

Legislation backed by more than 50 Republicans in the House and Senate would essentially gut No Child Left Behind, which was designed to bring someaccountability to elementary and secondary education. The proposal would letstates choose whether to meet federal testing mandates - and, incredibly,allow them to tap into millions of dollars of federal education moneywithout ever having to show any results.

Contrary to the claims of its critics, No Child Left Behind is having, inits fifth year of operation, a positive impact on American education. Beforeit was implemented, school districts could use the performance ofhigh-achieving students to hide the fact that they were failing studentsfrom families with low incomes, minority students, English-learners andstudents with disabilities. These students had been made invisible, and as aresult little attention was paid to improving their performance. No Childdemanded that districts show progress for these subgroups as well asoverall; as a result, there are encouraging gains in student learning on theelementary level.

Challenges still exist, particularly in middle and high schools. No ChildLeft Behind certainly needs tweaking. For one, rather than a diluting ofstandards, there should be a strengthening of the assessments states use inmeasuring progress. The use of watered-down high school tests onlycamouflages the failure to prepare students for work and college. Americansare entitled to know how well their children are reading and doing math.

Then, too, many schools lack the resources and expertise to raiseachievement. Help, not punishment, is needed. Provisions in No Child LeftBehind for school improvement grants and raising teacher quality were neverimplemented. Those are the kinds of useful changes Congress should beconsidering, instead of signing excuses for failure.



=

The LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-stemcell20mar20,1,6032055,print.story?coll=la-news-politics-national

Embryonic stem cell research gets surprise support
NIH director backs the lifting of federal restrictions. His commentsenergize advocates of pending legislation.
By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Karen Kaplan
Times Staff Writers

March 20, 2007

WASHINGTON - In a high-profile dissent from Bush administration policy, thenation's top medical research official told senators Monday that he backs anend to restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

"From my standpoint, it is clear today that American science will bebetter-served, and the nation will be better-served, if we let ourscientists have access to more stem cell lines," Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni,director of the National Institutes of Health, told the Senate healthappropriations subcommittee, which oversees the agency's nearly $29-billionbudget.

"We cannot, I would think, be second-best in this area," Zerhouni said. "Ithink it is important for us not to fight with one hand tied behind our backhere, and NIH is key to that."

Although Zerhouni had been seen as a tacit supporter of embryonic stem cellresearch, his unequivocal public endorsement came as a surprise. Hiscomments in response to questions from Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), thesubcommittee chairman, energized backers of stem cell research, who havebeen waging an uphill struggle on the only issue to draw a veto fromPresident Bush during his six years in office.

"I think it will certainly mobilize opinion up on [Capitol] Hill," saidJerome Zack, an embryonic stem cell researcher at the David Geffen School ofMedicine at UCLA. With stem cell legislation moving again, Zack said, he wasanticipating another Bush veto. But he hoped that it could be overridden.



=

The Miami Herald

http://www.miamiherald.com/299/v-print/story/45866.html

Posted on Tue, Mar. 20, 2007

5 things you didn't know about getting older

1Mounting health risk: Alzheimer's disease now surpasses diabetes, influenzaand pneumonia as a cause of death for people age 65 and over, according tothe Federal Interagency Forum on Aging-Related Statistics. Being in poorphysical shape may increase the risk for dementia and Alzheimer's disease,researchers at the Group Health Center for Health Studies in Seattlerecently found.

2But we're living longer: The average life span of Americans is now 77.6years -- and the life expectancy of men is drawing closer to that of women,according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Our life expectancyhas increased by nearly four months from 2002.

3Eat less and live longer: A low-calorie diet, even in people who aren'tobese, can lead to changes in metabolism and body chemistry that have beenlinked to better health and longer life. Findings in a recent study supportthe theory that eating less -- long known to prolong life in rats andmice -- may do the same for humans. Most participants in the study by thePennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University reducedcalories by 25 percent, but some cut back more and ate only 890 calories aday for several months.

4It's expensive: Over the past decade, average prescription drug costs havetripled from $542 in 1992 to $1,740 in 2002 for people 65 and up on Medicarewho are not institutionalized, says the National Center for HealthStatistics.

5How long will you live? Get an idea from the Life Expectancy Calculatordeveloped by Dr. Thomas T. Perls, author of Living to 100, atwww.livingto100.com. The calculator asks 40 questions related to your healthand family history, and takes about 10 minutes to complete. In addition topredicting your longevity, it gives advice about changes you can make tolive longer.



=

The Los Angeles Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldberg20mar20,0,4969678,print.column?coll=la-home-commentary

JONAH GOLDBERG
Betraying their base -- the Democrats can do it too
Jonah Goldberg

March 20, 2007

IT'S IRONIC. Republicans by most accounts got trounced in the last electionbecause they "lost their way." The latest cover of Time magazine even has apicture of Ronald Reagan crying like that American Indian from the oldanti-pollution ads of the 1970s. Instead of a bunch of roadside litter, theGipper is supposedly looking at the GOP's mess.

How did Republicans lose their way? The cliches runneth over. They grewcomfortable in power. They forgot why they were sent to Washington. Theybecame addicted to spending. They lost touch with their constituents, theirprinciples, their souls.

Just because such statements are cliches doesn't mean they're not true.Indeed, you hear these complaints from the conservative base more than fromanywhere else. The GOP grew sweaty and bloated like a fat man at anall-you-can-eat pasta bar, and the voters were right to pry the Republicans'white-knuckled grip from the hot table's sneeze guard.

So here's the ironic part. Suddenly, it looks as if the Democrats are theRepublicans on fast-forward. It's early yet, and the Democrats did finishtheir mini-Contract with America - the so-called first 100 hours - withmixed success on the substance but great fanfare in the media. Yet itemslike upping the minimum wage and shafting oil companies, although certainlynot insubstantial, were primarily symbolic.

The most important issue in the November elections, as every singlepolitical observer with a pulse will tell you, was the war in Iraq. Theweasel words and euphemisms - "strategic redeployment," "course change,"whatever - couldn't conceal the simple fact that the Democrats were electedin large part to end the war. That was certainly how the party's liberalbase saw it, then and now.



=

Chron.com

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/4644535.html

March 19, 2007, 8:31PM
Fox News in talks to show debates

Fox News could be back in the debate business.

Just days after Democrats canceled a Nevada debate co-sponsored by the cablenews network, Fox is negotiating with the Congressional Black CaucusPolitical Education and Leadership Institute to broadcast up to twoface-offs by presidential candidates.

News Corp., Fox News' parent company, and the institute said discussionsover co-hosting a Republican and a Democratic debate were still under wayMonday.



=

The Washinton Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031901657_pf.html

The 'Pay-Go' Test
Senate Democrats get the chance to practice the fiscal discipline they'vebeen preaching.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007; A18



DEMOCRATS IN control of the Senate face a critical first test this week oftheir professions of fealty to fiscal discipline. Senators are to vote onthe fiscal 2008 budget resolution, which sets the parameters for spendingand taxes for coming years and, as important, for how budgets will be votedon. Specifically, when lawmakers want to lower certain taxes or increaseprograms, will they be required to come up with offsetting tax increases orspending cuts?

This issue -- known in shorthand as 'pay-go' -- is central because ofpressure to increase spending on farm programs and children's healthinsurance; to alleviate the impact of the alternative minimum tax; and toextend at least some of the Bush tax cuts beyond their scheduled expirationin 2010. A key question on the floor this week is whether senators wantingbudgetary leeway to accomplish these goals will adopt a real pay-go rule,like that contained in the resolution approved by the Senate BudgetCommittee last week -- or whether they will succumb to the temptation toappear concerned with fiscal discipline while quietly permitting a spendingspree. No one should be fooled by a pay-go rule that purports to requireoffsets but exempts some wish-list item, just as no one should accept onethat squeezes spending but not tax cuts.

The Senate debate on the budget resolution will offer ample opportunity forpolitical preening as well as legislative mischief. Democrats will patthemselves on the back for boosting funding for children's health insurance,for instance, but provide few specifics about how the proposed $50 billionexpansion would be paid for. It's true that budget resolutions aren'tdesigned to provide such specificity, but it's also true that lawmakers, ifthey do bind themselves with a true pay-go rule, will have some toughchoices to make later.

For their part, Republicans will attack the Democratic proposal asenvisioning a huge tax increase, without acknowledging that having the taxcuts expire in 2010 was the deal they agreed to -- and without explaininghow, if they want all the tax cuts extended, they plan to avoid digging thedeficit deeper. They will also criticize Democrats, with more justification,for failing to take on entitlement spending. President Bush's budget callsfor $52 billion in entitlement cuts over five years; the Senate Democrats'budget resolution envisions no net cut (it talks about trimming $15 billion,but that's already devoted to children's health care).


=

The Seattle Times

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?document_id=2003625951&zsection_id=268883724&slug=goldberg19&date=20070319

John Edwards' hair-raising battle with "evil" Fox News

By Jonah Goldberg
Syndicated Columnist

"I want to wait and hear what John Edwards has to say, he's kind ofgood-looking." That's how a sarcastic Barack Obama imagined Iowacaucus-goers might anticipate a talk by John Edwards.

Obama and I are on the same page. Edwards always struck me as the sort ofoleaginous trial lawyer who can cry out of either eye on cue. And yet thesupposed Breck girl of the Democratic Party did something very shrewd thismonth when he pulled out of a debate co-sponsored by the Nevada DemocraticParty and Fox News. But the decision is also an ominous, or at leastsignificant, portent about the direction of American politics.

Here's what happened. Edwards announced that he would pull out of aDemocratic debate in Reno in August because Fox News was co-sponsoring theevent. If you know anything about the left-wing, activist-blogger base ofthe Democratic Party, you know that Fox is a wee bit unpopular with thatcrowd.

Remember the scene in "Time Bandits" when Evil incarnate is blown tosmithereens and God tells his cronies cleaning up the mess, "Do be careful!... That's concentrated evil. One drop of that could turn you all intohermit crabs," and the little boy screams to his parents, "Mom! Dad! It'sevil! Don't touch it!" but they touch it anyway and immediately explode?

Well, that's how they feel about Fox News on a good day.


=

[Send your comments about articles to Rays.List@Comcast.net]

#####