Hmmm. Trick or treat is a two-sided coin. The kiddies are really emulating the national security state. Gives us control of your natural resources or we’ll bomb you back to the Stone Age.

Testing

Halloween (and Dia de los muertos) are my favorite holidays. If the occasion makes the wingnuts crazy, it only adds to my enjoyment.

WRT the Rosenbaum column; what is “By the way, t’s not the Edwards rumor, it’s something else” supposed to mean? Anyone have any idea?

Well, I guess the Edward’s rumor is the Coulter “gay” meme. Which could mean it IS Edward’s but a different tale (this would be the way that Rosenberger thinks that he is being very wily and getting folks of the trail). Or it could be someone else entirely.

Petrocelli @ 52

Sadly, the War on Hallowe’en has seen its second year in Toronto. Many Catholic friends refused to partake and those who did dressed their kinds in cute costumes (no Ghosts or goblins) and only went to a few houses of people they know.

Let’s just say that my kids were very … um … scary this Hallowe’en !

This is so weird. Growing up as a Catholic and attending Catholic school, we learned that Halloween was based on the concept of All Soul’s day, the day before all Saint’s Day. I believe this, in turned, was based on some heathen custom or another, as most Church traditions are.

Why do I think that, like that whole anti-immigration effort in California, that this will backfire on these Republicans. Kids (and young adults) are gonna hate that the Right Wing is trying to terminate their Halloween fun.

While Coulter, Hannity, O’Reilley and others attack “others” these people will tolerate them. But when they start to attack something that impacts vast numbers those that are ostensibly “potential Republicans” it is bound to blow-up. It makes them look like the Taliban.

Personally I hope that these idiots continue their campaign and up the vitriol and rhetoric. They are actually shaping an anti-Conservative public opinion base that will be hard to shift for decades.

Eli @ 6

This is the Rosenbaum column.

Someone persistantly thinks that the LA Times would NEVER place on “hold” a sex-scandal story against a Republican.

That person seems to forget that the LA Times haven’t been owned by a Democratic-leaning publisher in quite some time. The tale actually sounds as if the Reporters found something, but the now-conservative Publisher or his appointed Editors…have blocked the story using the “ethical” argument.

If a reporter wanted to use a story it would be the publisher or the Editorial Board that would block it. Those have been consistantly pro-Republican over the last several years.

Another possibility (if the rumor deals with a Democratic candidate) is that the ethical issues derives from the way the LA Times obtained the “source” material. Perhaps the information was leaked from illegally obtained records…either hospital, phone, or internet surveillance.

The Times opens up a whole problematical set of issues if they reveal illegally obtained (without a warrant) personal information. Who is doing widespread data crunching of domestic data sources nowadays? The Bush Administration. Who are some of the most egregious leakers of information to the Washington press corps? The White House.

Where have we heard this same sort of “it’s widely known amongst the cocktail circuit” in Washington before? And the line “I’ve heard a rumor, but don’t attribute it to me…just look into it.”

That’s the “ethical dilemma”…what if, in the course of discovering that the US Government was obtaining vast amounts of personal data on political figures (perhaps of both parties), one of the major bits of information related to a candidates sexual indiscretions.

So do you use that in the story to demonstrate just how heinous and evil this activity can be, thus doing precisely what you say is evil and heinous about these programs…or do you conceal that information, and allow the illegal domestic spying to continue?

Partly due to the fact that I’m not super-enamored of any of them, I would be willing to give up a *primary* candidate to expose the depth of the administration’s corruption, and the bogusness of its alleged need for nigh-unlimited wiretapping authority.

The LAT may feel differently, however.

This is the Rosenbaum column.

Someone persistantly thinks that the LA Times would NEVER place on “hold” a sex-scandal story against a Republican.

That person seems to forget that the LA Times haven’t been owned by a Democratic-leaning publisher in quite some time. The tale actually sounds as if the Reporters found something, but the now-conservative Publisher or his appointed Editors…have blocked the story using the “ethical” argument.

If a reporter wanted to use a story it would be the publisher or the Editorial Board that would block it. Those have been consistantly pro-Republican over the last several years.

Another possibility (if the rumor deals with a Democratic candidate) is that the ethical issues derives from the way the LA Times obtained the “source” material. Perhaps the information was leaked from illegally obtained records…either hospital, phone, or internet surveillance.

The Times opens up a whole problematical set of issues if they reveal illegally obtained (without a warrant) personal information. Who is doing widespread data crunching of domestic data sources nowadays? The Bush Administration. Who are some of the most egregious leakers of information to the Washington press corps? The White House.

Where have we heard this same sort of “it’s widely known amongst the cocktail circuit” in Washington before? And the line “I’ve heard a rumor, but don’t attribute it to me…just look into it.”

That’s the “ethical dilemma”…what if, in the course of discovering that the US Government was obtaining vast amounts of personal data on political figures (perhaps of both parties), one of the major bits of information related to a candidates sexual indiscretions.

So do you use that in the story to demonstrate just how heinous and evil this activity can be, thus doing precisely what you say is evil and heinous about these programs…or do you conceal that information, and allow the illegal domestic spying to continue?

TexBetsy @ 89

I believe that today was the last filing day for New Hampshire. Al’s officially out.

Nope, if he declares later on, his supporters can petition as a write in candidate, or so I’ve been told …

Hope this is accurate – makes my day.

ReElect Pres. Al Gore & VP John Edwards 2008!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…..0529.shtml