The behavior with TM suggests a resource problem, but if it’s only the FDL site, then I doubt it.

What happens when you ping http://www.firedoglake.com by goint to the cmd prompt and typing ping http://www.firedoglake.com and also as a workaround you can try using the IP address:

38.119.55.162

What happens when you type tracert http://www.firedoglake.com at the cmd prompt?
I don’t know what OS you’re using or if you’re even on a Windoz box. It sounds to me like this is happening due to a CPU/resource problem–and I don’t mean hdw since you have to use TM to end task. I’d try to minimize services running you don’t need by typing services.msc in run–XP or Vista default’s plenty of those, and try to minimize taskman processes you don’t need, as well as going to msconfig and end programs you don’t need runing at start. (just one of the places but not enough space here).

I’d also defrag often preferrably with someting competent like Perfect Disk, and run system file checker.

Perfect Disk
http://www.raxco.com

*Vista Services*

Part One

http://www.tweakvista.com/article38662.aspx

Part Two

http://www.tweakvista.com/article38664.aspx

Many of the services but not all in Vista are the same as in XP, so in that

context:

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/services.htm

Also see the extremely helpful site:

Black Viper’s Service List

http://www.dead-eye.net/WinXP Services.htm

Type sfc /scannow in the run box> or on Vista do it from an elevated cmd (type cmd in search>rt. click it and run as admin.

If I have a place to send, I have detailed instructions for maximizing CPU I use on the Vista groups that covers both I’d be happy to send you.

The computer will not work until you go to task manager and “end task”. This is the only way to get back to the Internet; and of course, I never get to read firedoglake blog.

Do other people have this problem?

On other computers, I can enter and read the site.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Jay Gould is certainly correct that Ginsberg and Breyer are by no means liberals, and while Ruthie may fondly remember being one of the ACLU’s litigators, she has long abandoned that path, dispite her small and merely symbolic protest of recent vintage, reading excerpts of two of her dissents out loud.

The best that the non hard core right-winged Supremes (and we are watching Kennedy evolve into one of the hard core right winged Supremes) can do is to muddy the waters, the way they certainly did in an opinion that established absolutely no direction whatsoever, an enigma enshrouded in a mystery, Rita v. U.S. (announced yesterday) that was supposed to help clarify, but did nothing whatsoever to clarify the U.S. sentencing guidelines’ application.

The practical application will be anti-defense bar, anti-defendant, and anti-Sixth amendment, and as Justice Souter’s lone dissent said:

“This would open the door to undermining Apprendi itself, and this is what has happened today.
Without a powerful reason to risk reversal on the sen-tence, a district judge faced with evidence supporting a high subrange Guidelines sentence will do the appropriate factfinding in disparagement of the jury right and will sentence within the high subrange.”

This case is but one of many examples of opinions during this term that have foreclosed the rights of the individual, and it is going to be a rocky 35-40 years as Alito and Roberts serve out their long terms, and potentially worse if Bush can ram through two more appointments by a one of the most passive Senate Judiciary commitees in U.S. history.

Christy writes:

The nation needs a more balanced approach to the law — and to its political implications — than what we have now, and the only way to obtain this is for new justices to be appointed by a liberal President whose appointees will provide an intellectual counterbalance and counterargument to those currently serving on the court.

A lot of us agree, but watch any Congressional or Senate hearing these days, for example the egregious witchery and impudence of Lorita Doan (she of the “hortatory subjunctive–when could you need I.V. phenergan more than to watch this imbecile)last week who knows she shattered the Hatch Act and has been recommended to be fired by the counsel who investigated her.

What you get at every one of these hearings are Republicans clucking “why are we here–this is all innoquous!”

My point is that with the recalcitant Republicans who even refused to vote “No Confidence” in Gonzales last week, you are going to have to have significantly more of a majority and a Democratic win among Gore, Clinton or Obama–I don’t think Edwards will win enough of the “Super Tusnami Tuesdays”

I am afraid Christy’s admirable and correct idealism is never going to see the light of day in this contentious Congress that is polarized against a backdrop of the most apathetic era of Americans in our history.

There is an old platitude that goes “You get the degree of democracy that you deserve.” We are sure getting the pseudo-fascism of the Bush-Cheney administration and the unitary executive rammed down our throats right now–with two nit wits who claim they are exempt from every law and they can upend any law passed with a mere signing statement.

Right now, approximately 5 Americans are being blown up without available IED (and more penetrating) bomb deterrance per day and about 100 Iraqis per week.

80% of American forces die now from road side bombs–and the inept bureaucracy and Congress have done nothing to provide deterrant jammers and vehicles to prevent them although they exist.

There are two million Iraqui refugees and many of them are women who are putting food in their mouths and their children’s mouths by working as prostitutes in places like Syria.

The American answer to this is to shop for more and larger SUVs and more Manolo Blahniks.

I have wondered every day what it will take to jar Americans out of their complacancy and their bumper sticker war effort (at best) and short of a draft I think nothing will.

I think the Supreme Court of the U.S. has been irreversibly now evolved into one of Dante’s rings of hell and will stay that way for the next 50 years at least.

It is also rarely pointed out, so I will, that if you examine the backgrounds of the 1250 or so current trial and appellate judges, a very significant percentage of them who are not from the ranks of the U.S. attorneys or AUSAs have never litigated for a second in a federal court room. If you examine all 12 appellate courts, you will find this paradoxical fact to be true.

We also have an environment right now where the upper echelon of the DOJ closely resembles the back room of the Bada Bing on the Sopranos where ridiculously no one testifying can recall who dressed them that morning, and of course Rove, Cheney, and the White House Counsel fired U.S. Attorneys in the middle of a number of investigations and pending indictments.

The Stanford Law review reported a statistical study recently that revealed Democrats prosecuted over Republicans at a ratio of 4:1.

The Supreme Court has headed into a horrible context as to fairness, and one that I believe is totally irreversible.

The D.C. Circuit took a big whiz onto civil liberties when it denied habeas in Randolph’s and his law clerk’s opinion in Hamden v. Rumsfeld and the Supreme Court denied cert. twice. to review detainee habeas.

So who’s left? No one with any power or ability to change anything. It’s all about the dollar. Frankly, I think the best thing would be to campaign for “none of the above” and convince people not to endorse your leaders. In the UK, the government is considering making voting compulsory (which is hideously undemocratic) because so many people refuse to elect anyone who’s on offer. In the UK, just like in the US, the winner takes all. Whoever is empowered gets to do whatever they want and everyone else gets to whine about it.

Of course Roberts and Alito were lying. Why the surprise? (As was Thomas lying during his conformation hearing). Need to pray for the nonretirement and health of Justices Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter, and Breyer through January 20, 2009.

Is it just possible Mr Scalia is showing signs of dementia, as evidenced by his preference of Jack Bauer over international law as a source of judicial wisdom? Wise me up, o legal scholars, is there any precedent for removing justices who go dingy on the bench or do we have to wait till they actually do something blatantly unequivocally criminal?

Do you have a sense of how good Breyer and Ginsburg have been on issues besides choice? Because I have the vague (and unsupported impression) that they’re kind of lousy on things like privacy and the 4th Amendment and worker’s rights, and so on. (Lousy compared to progressive goals — the same way Clinton himself was pretty lousy based on those goals.)

I can see Obama maybe picking progressive jurists, but have trouble seeing Clinton or Edwards doing so.

That said, of course, I’d still take 9 mediocre centrists like Ginsburg or Breyer over shitbag radicals like Roberts/Thomas/Scalia/Alito.