It's not exactly news that Garfield is a commercial and critical bomb (and I thought Bill Murray was slumming when he did that elephant thing!) Apparently the film rights to Hi and Lois were too expensive. I can understand why a lot of terrible movies get made,...
Author: Scott Lemieux
A magnificent post by Belle Waring at Crooked Timber mocking the "ticking time bomb" scenario constantly used by torture/Bush Administration apologists. To state the obvious, 1)of course torture is morally.
With respect to my recent post on conservative vanity candidate Ralph Nader, some response to the many intelligent comments are in order. First, fine commentary from The Poor Man and Nathan Newman. In.
It's difficult to find an issue so clear-cut that The Nation and eventheliberal New Republic agree, but both have great reviews of Sam Huntington's new book, People Who Aren't White Christians Will Destroy America. My first temptation is to say that Huntington's argument is un-American, but that's not quite correct....
Should Bush look at the polls and dump Cheney, Gen. J.C. Christian proposes the logical replacement.
I'm surprised this quote from Bishop Deal W. Hudson that Josh Marshall IDed hasn't gotten more play. But it's an unusually candid admission about the nature of the jihad against pro-choice Catholic.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court held, 8-1, that defendants can make a sexual harassment claim against an employer when the environment was so hostile that the defendant was compelled to resign. The one dissenter against the new standard, who wanted to make it impossible for defendants to make...
David Neiwert points us to the cover story of Pat Buchanan's The American Conservative: a love-in between the man himself and self-appointed spokesman for pure progressive bodily fluids Ralph Nader. My first reaction is.
In a rare case of me being with the winning team, the winner of THE VICIOUS INSTAPUNDIT BLOGROLL CONTEST at MaxSpeak has been announced, and the winner is: InstaPundit. Let us first.
About the merits of Elk Grove v. Nedow, I would say briefly that 1)the standing analysis that allowed the Court to duck the issue isn't very convincing, but was probably politically prudent, 2)Thomas is clearly correct that the addition of "Under God" to the pledge is...
I saw Supersize Me, a very fine movie, last week. One of the film's most-praised segments involves an interview with a Reason editor (Jacob Sullum, I think) wondering when it would be socially acceptable.
Digby asks: "Can somebody explain to me why everyone is assuming that Bush is going to be defeated in the Supreme Court on the Guantanamo and Padilla cases?" And, granted, predicting.