I have been a huge backer of Al Gore ever since 2000 and view myself as having been traumatized by the ascension of W Bush into what we all knew would be the most catastrophic presidency in our nation's history.

The discussion about what would have been, had Gore won the presidency in 2000, is well-explored on DKos. I have strong feelings about that too.

Many suspect -- as I did until recently -- that Al Gore is staging the most astoundingly astute political come-back in political history. But maybe he's not. Maybe Al Gore really doesn't want to become president?

[Owllwoman scolds me below for posting this on a Monday morning -- I'M SORRY! Didn't think about that. But she does make me think about this:]

Can you imagine Martin Luther King as president?? Awesome.

So maybe Gore will run as a "transcendent [Democratic] candidate"!!

...

Okay okay how could a man-nanny playing actor who starred in Happy Days with Henry Winkler and who dates all of Hollywood's most beautiful famed women... how does he turn out Republican? And what does that have to do with Election 2008?

Follow past this delicious photo... if you can... mmmmmm...

Constitutional Law experts and SCOTUS historians...

HOW will the SCOTUS swing on this? Clearly the framers intended oversight of each branch. Bush is arguing that nobody has a right to OVERSEE the White House.

Can we attempt to find the basic arguments of all sides here? The Constitution and case history should frame this pretty well for us. How will Scalia and Thomas justify their decision?

Could SCOTUS actually tell Congress that their only remedy is IMPEACHMENT?

Let's look at this stuff... Calling all experts...

[This was an outta control comment on the AP Title thread that I thought warranted its own diary in my book.]

Yesterday I wanted Scotch to watch the Bowl with. But I couldn't. It seems some fascist element has penetrated the government and forbids liquor sales on Sunday here. It's like some Taliban law -- here -- in the "land of the free."  Well maybe we're not as free as we think. How does this relate to Edwards yesterday?

It has to do with spine & vision, with throwing down a new gauntlet, with the imperative that we find someone for '08 to lead a revolution -- not just a way out of war. More...

Basically it seemed Friedman and Brooks were talking logically and agreeing on formerly very partisan (republican lies), with the fog lifted, and were really calling out this failed administration and its failed war, with dire warnings about them not facing reality. Brooks said the "Republican elite" in Washington will not allow the president to "destroy their party over this war." They "do not want to face another election ['08] like this last one again." That's an understatement.

Brooks admitted he wasn't "facing reality" a "year or two ago" when he also was "blaming the media" for biased coverage of Iraq - in direct contradiction to the White House defense and first lady's ridiculous interview this week. More...

Soooo... The MSM is now saying Bush "mislead" reporters last week when he said he intended to keep Rumsfeld through the end of his term....  because (drum roll)... he didn't want the decision to affect the election or appear political. HUH? Uh.... NO.

From MSNBC/WP:

"Bush was already thinking about sacking Rumsfeld when he met with news service reporters on Nov. 1, but, by his own account, he decided to mislead them to preserve the secret. One reporter asked Bush if he wanted Cheney and Rumsfeld to remain through the end of his term, on Jan. 20, 2009. The president answered yes."

Bush and Rove threw the Republican House under the bus for Bush's own political gain. More on the flip.

Sorry for the short diary, but this is happening right now -- Republicans are in full scale this morning on cable news trying to equate Clinton's affair with Lewinsky with the behavior of Mark Foley. THIS CANNOT STAND.

Obviously, Clinton's affair was with an intern -- of legal age, a full adult, and it was consenting. It may have been unseemly, but it was consenting between adults.

Mark Foley was preying on PAGES, which are CHILDREN from high school. They are CHILDREN. And Foley's advances were NOT welcome, nothing was consensual. Foley's actions may be sex crimes against children. There is NO comparison between the very sick Mark Foley and Clinton's adult consentual affair. Hit the media now. The FBI had received complaints months in advance. This needs to be HAMMERED in Dem talking points. Don't let Rethugs get away with neutralizing this by invoking Clinton. WE NEED TO STOP THIS *NOW*. More...

I don't see this diaried elsewhere, but CNN just announced as breaking that Bush is going to do a 9pm ET Oval Office televised address on Monday, 9-11 on its 5th anniversary.

Will he fit this in during or around ABC's Path to 9-11?

Will he once again talk about Clinton's failures that led to 9-11 like he did in yesterday's speech and like ABC does in its "docudrama"?

I bet Republicans told him his 3 speeches didn't "get the job done yet," so they added the last card they could play that day. It's already announced that Bush will go to ALL THREE crash sites on the day of 9-11.

What was that about fascism?

UPDATE: Tony Snow says: "the speech will reflect 'what September 11 has meant for our country and where we've been since September 11 and how we move together. It will not be a political speech.'" Uh huh.

Dems need to get out in front of all this bullshit from the White House about Dems "walking away" from the WOT. I would start a whispering campaign about the suspicious timing of White House remarks about Democrats and the arrests.

But there is NO excuse for every leading Dem not to GET OUT IN FRONT NOW with the FACTS and point out that this is ANOTHER sign of BUSH'S FAILED WAR HANDLING that has made us MORE in danger than we were before he abandoned "breaking the back of Al Qaida" and went on his personal mission in Iraq.

IRAQ IS A FAILURE AND CONTRIBUTED TO THE PLOT DISRUPTED BY THE BRITISH. We have failed to devote resources to the REAL War On Terror, we have made a powder keg of the Middle East and N Korea, and created a world that hates us more than ever, more terrorist spin-offs than before, this is a disaster - an absolute catastrophe of unmeasurable proportions -- no, not the plane plot, but BUSH FOREIGN POLICY.

C'mon Dems -- do NOT go into hiding. See more please...

In graduate school, my colleagues and I were literally graded on the frequency (not too much, not too little) and quality of our comments in class discussions. That's the lens through which I read DKos. Lately I've been wanting to give a lot more 2's and 1's to people, but have not wanted to hurt feelings or cause backlash against me. But I think the time has come to take that risk, and I'd like a little feedback before I do it.

Bonddad - Or whomever has knowledge on this --

Since our economy is being financed by mostly Asian nations -- principally China and Japan -- at I think $2 billion each and every day, it's clear that a country like China is building up a massive, no, way beyond massive, debt from the United States (we owe them big and bigger every day). So on the one hand, we're paying handsomely on our outstanding debt (which is really just a negative tax rate to the rich who buy U.S. debt bonds).

But the principal is getting to be ever more at issue. So my question is this: Could the U.S. conduct a "planned default" to drop a bomb on China's economy?

Where the hell has all the "War on Terror" money gone in the past 4 years?

Houston traffic, in anticipation of Hurricane Rita and made all-the-more anxious by recent coverage of Hurricane Katrina -- is at a deadly stand-still. The mayor of Houston perhaps said it best this morning when he said that the highway parking lots would be "death traps" if Rita were a direct hit.

How the hell can this happen over 4 years after 9/11? More flipped...

In the Wall St Journal today, more lunacy upon lunacy with the article, "Multinational Companies Unite to Fight Bribery." One should be suspicious of any headline that makes multinationals sound like super-heros.

At issue is a NEW (yet again) pact not to accept bribes in foreign operations.

The death toll from the Sumatran quake and tsunami is now estimated at over 75,000 dead.

The president is right about one thing: that number is beyond comprehension.

But so is his response.

My Dearest Nephew Berkeley -

I can't say how, kid, but I've come into some knowledge that your parents are going to have a little dinner with my sister and her husband for the purpose of discussing politics.

From a small email group: Michael Watkins, a former Harvard Professor of Diplomacy recently sent Ted Cruz's National Review piece Calling All Conservatives to Rabbi David Aaron, a leading scholar of religion and ancient texts at Hebrew Union College. He asked Rabbi Aaron what he thought of the good vs. evil rhetoric, the use of Proverbs, religionious fundamentalism and democracy. From Prof. Watkins: There are *many* other good nutshells.