In an unsigned editorial, they opine that candidates like Ron Paul and Mike Gravel ought not be in the debates, because they’re just “clutter:”

If you tuned in to the recent Republican and Democratic presidential debates, you may have had the same reaction as many viewers looking at the crowded stages: Who’s that? The Democratic debate in South Carolina featured eight candidates, while 10 crammed into the GOP debate in California last Thursday. Voters trying to sort out their presidential choices aren’t helped by debates cluttered with the likes of Mike Gravel (hint: he’s a former senator from Alaska) on the Democratic side and Ron Paul (hint: he’s a libertarian House member from Texas) among the Republicans.

Of course, they’re also the only candidates on either side with substantial divergence from their respective party lines. Reason delivers a well-earned spanking to the Post for this absurd and anti-democratic position:

[T]here were plenty of candidates on those stages who really were clutter: They don’t have a chance to win and their messages are indistinguishable from the people who do have a shot. But it’s telling that the Post didn’t single out, say, Chris Dodd or Jim Gilmore. It singled out the two most anti-war and anti-establishment figures in the race, two men who clearly are alternatives to the frontrunners. Unlike the clutter candidates, Gravel and Paul said things at the debates that actually generated some buzz afterwards, on talk radio and online if not in the Post or with the Sunday-morning dinosaurs. I don’t know if they won any votes, but they did more than anyone else to add ideas to the conversation.

Word.

He’s now claiming “not to know” if condoms help prevent HIV, presumably in accordance with the sayings of Chairman W.

We’re pretty sure we’ve run off any actual Republicans, but, seriously, who’s running for the GOP nod who doesn’t suck? All we see are nutbird fundies, authoritarian fascists, or craven powermongers like McCain, and we’re pretty sure the electorate isn’t going to swallow any of them. Maybe the electable candidates are sitting out, on the theory that running for ’08 gives the winner an excellent chance of winning the Dole Award (also known as the Mondale Award on the left side of the aisle).

From remarks made by the former Mayor, as transcribed by the NYT here:

We look upon authority too often and focus over and over again, for 30 or 40 or 50 years, as if there is something wrong with authority. We see only the oppressive side of authority. Maybe it comes out of our history and our background. What we don’t see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.

[ Interruption by someone in the audience. ]

You have free speech so I can be heard.

Um. (emph. added.)

The Bush administration is pushing for retroactive immnunity for all telcos in this whole illegal wiretapping thing. If you haven’t been keeping up, this means they’re saying (a) you can’t sue over this, because to do so will expose state secrets and now (b) and you can’t sue over this because the telcos are immune to such claims because they’re helping the government.

WTF?

Of the 10, only one (Rudy) doesn’t want Roe v. Wade overturned, none want to get out of Iraq, and three dismiss evolution.

The American public’s desires to keep Roe alive and to escape the quagmire in Iraq are well documented. Sadly, the candidates probably fared better than the general populace on the evolution question.

Bush maintains his contempt for laws in this backpedaling over FISA:

Senior Bush administration officials told Congress on Tuesday that they could not pledge that the administration would continue to seek warrants from a secret court for a domestic wiretapping program, as it agreed to do in January.

Rather, they argued that the president had the constitutional authority to decide for himself whether to conduct surveillance without warrants.

As a result of the January agreement, the administration said that the National Security Agency’s domestic spying program has been brought under the legal structure laid out in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires court-approved warrants for the wiretapping of American citizens and others inside the United States.

But on Tuesday, the senior officials, including Michael McConnell, the new director of national intelligence, said they believed that the president still had the authority under Article II of the Constitution to once again order the N.S.A. to conduct surveillance inside the country without warrants.

Needless to say, every non-hack non-idiot lawyer and judge in the country disagrees with Bush’s interpretation here. In fact, Bush has admitted ON TELEVISION that he’s a multiple felon, since every act of wiretapping without a FISA warrant is a crime. For some reason, his craven party is untroubled by this, and the Dems lack the cohesion of message to make the case publicly. This doesn’t change the facts, though: Bush is an admitted criminal, still sitting in the Oval Office, and still insisting he need not submit to any checks on executive power even when black letter law says otherwise.

They make it clear that all kooks aren’t Southern:

Utah County Republicans ended their convention on Saturday by debating Satan’s influence on illegal immigrants.

The group was unable to take official action because not enough members stuck around long enough to vote, despite the pleadings of party officials. The convention was held at Canyon View Junior High School.

Don Larsen, chairman of legislative District 65 for the Utah County Republican Party, had submitted a resolution warning that Satan’s minions want to eliminate national borders and do away with sovereignty.

In a speech at the convention, Larsen told those gathered that illegal immigrants “hate American people” and “are determined to destroy this country, and there is nothing they won’t do.”

Illegal aliens are in control of the media, and working in tandem with Democrats, are trying to “destroy Christian America” and replace it with “a godless new world order — and that is not extremism, that is fact,” Larsen said.

At the end of his speech, Larsen began to cry, saying illegal immigrants were trying to bring about the destruction of the U.S. “by self invasion.”

Republican officials then allowed speakers to defend and refute the resolution. One speaker, who was identified as “Joe,” said illegal immigrants were Marxist and under the influence of the devil. Another, who declined to give her name to the Daily Herald, said illegal immigrants should not be allowed because “they are not going to become Republicans and stop flying the flag upside down. … If they want to be Americans, they should learn to speak English and fly their flag like we do.”

There does, however, seem to be a definite Republican trend toward ‘batshit insane.’

(via Rob)

In an age in which we rightly fear being inaccurately quoted or misinterpreted, it would seem that Bill-O’s real anger and real fear rests in the dread that someone is quoting him correctly.

A Bush administration official in charge of AIDS policy — who’s been pushing the bullshit “abstinence and no condom” plan — has resigned for patronizing a DC brothel.

Take a look at this graph of the US Debt over the years, and note well who was driving during the most dramatic red-ink spending.

Prior to the Neo-Conservative take over of the Republican Party there was not much difference between the two parties debt philosophy, they both worked together to minimize it. However the debt has been on a steady incline ever since the Reagan Presidency. The only exception to the steep increase over the last 25 years was during the Clinton Presidency, where he brought spending under control and the debt growth down to almost zero.

Comparing the borrowing habits of the two parties since 1981, when the Neo-Conservative movement really took hold and government spending really has gone out of control, it is extremely obvious that the big spenders in Washington are Republican Presidents. Looking at the only Democratic President since 1981, Mr. Clinton, who raised the national debt an average of 4.3% per year; the Republican Presidents (Reagan, Bush, and Bush) raised the debt an average of 10.8% per year. That is, for every dollar a Democratic President has raised the national debt in the past 25 years Republican Presidents have raised the debt by $2.59. Any way you look at it Conservative Republican Presidents can not control government spending, yet as the graph above clearly shows, President Clinton did.