Getting people to "abide by the rules of war" when those people are just fine with murdering an opponent's entire family before his eyes seems a bit of a stretch. Other than that, there is some rationality in supporting whichever side is losing at any given time.

For some time now, the GOP has been promoting to driver people who should have been kicked off the bus. When nothing changes, nothing will change.

The redefinition of "mentally unstable" should be child's play for people who call terrorist acts "man-caused disasters" and who've classified Nidal Hasan's massacre at Fort Hood as "workplace violence".

The CLEC! I love it! The Pink Elephant initiative during the 2008 campaign said it all: This attempt to get Republican women to host neighborhood teas during which the party line would be promulgated featured as its mascot a jogging elephant togged out in pink sweatshirt and sneakers, wearing a brave smile and with sweat droplets spewing from her fevered brow. I suggested at the time that whomever decided to project an image of Republican women as fat, sweaty frumps should be kicked off the bus at the next stop, but in hindsight it appears that this person was instead promoted to driver.

I agree, but I think we already have "rule by bureaucracy". Most if not all bills are written through the combined efforts of congressional staffers, career bureaucrats and lobbyists, a situation underscored by Pelosi's cheery comment that "we'll have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it!" Members are presented with bills so cumbersome that they cannot possibly read them in the time allotted prior to voting on them. (Rand Paul has introduced a bill to remedy this last, but I don't know what's become of it.) I don't see how imposing term limits at this late date would change all of this.

Many members of the grass-roots conservative organizations that have sprouted over the past few years are politically naive. This has left them prey not only to leftist saboteurs but also to the entrenched Republican party interests who have no intention of relinquishing their influence. Scottie's words should be shouted from the rooftops.

Talk about muddying the waters! Women and men are entitled to defend themselves against attacks any way they see fit, and the Consitution--currently--permits us to use a gun if we have to. Many years ago, I was working at an inner-city D.C. hospital and living in a women's dormitory there. When I had night call, I'd have to traverse a long and poorly lit tunnel to get to the hospital proper, and my father had given me a .22 to use for emergencies. I was refused a permit to carry it, which didn't deter me from packing it when going through that tunnel. I'd already thought of the bodily fluids/seizure trick way back then, but I felt a whole lot more secure having a gun than I did having a period.

in the political science classrooms.

The trick is to hold accountable only those who are perceived to have standards in the first place. Those perceived to be without them are given a free pass, on the theory that one can't hold people to standards that they don't possess. Menendez will survive, if only to host his own reality show.

To listen to the collectivists tell it, the only reason their cherished systems haven't worked before is because the systems were run by morally inferior beings. Never mind that it was the very thought of running a system that denied individual rights that made them morally inferior, not the other way around.

You make a good point.