The penchant for the critics of the administration and its supporters (and de facto syncophants, such as those who let him invade Iraq and pooh pooh about the problems involved after the fact, but then vote for his $87B funding bill, only to let it be passed via voice vote so they aren't too public about it, and so forth) to lash back is understandable, but still somewhat troubling.

"Lies," Memory Holes, and Whitewashing touches upon this fact. For instance, I quote someone who specifies what exactly he means by "lies," which turns out to be broader than a common definition of the term might involve. This adds fuel to the other side, but it's not necessary, is it? The "lies" in many cases quite arguably are that; other times they are misleading enough to be wrong on that ground alone. Let's not fall into the trap of being as simplistic as we accuse those we criticize of being.

The same by the way, and I know politics is all about turning up the sound sometimes, in other battles. For instance, Justice Janice Rogers Brown is the latest controversial nominee to be opposed by the Democrats (came out of committee 10-9). Clearly, her tone, strong views (which she publicly promoted in speeches using language meant to excite), and strategic importance (selection to the DC Circuit, possible short list to Supreme Court) all give Democrats valid reasons to oppose her.

One needs not use hyperbole, such as railing on her guarded support of Lochner v. N.Y., a controversial early 20th Century ruling that honored economic rights, here the right of a bakery employee to work over ten hours or so. This line of cases also struck down minimum wage laws, union protection laws, and many more instances firmly supported these days. All the same, the ultimate core of the decision was honoring property rights via a higher standard of review. Quite arguably, property rights sometimes are slighted these days, and some of the controversial cases where Justice Brown honored property can be defended, and were not solo dissents. You can disagree without going the route of Senator Schumer and suggesting any support of Lochner was basically totally unreasonable for a judicial nominee.

'Places I Never Meant to Be' edited by Judy Blume is an excellent collection of "Original Stories by Censored Writers" for teenagers. It suggests not only is teenage fiction excellent as literature, but is not just for teenagers. Each writer had their work censored in some fashion and follow their stories with a little essay about censorship. On the Fringe edited by Donald R. Gallo is also another excellent collection of short stories concerning teenagers in crisis, this time not critical moments per se, but outcasts who each have their own story and burdens to bear. Both are a good way to take a taste of many writers and get some insights about teenagers in the process.

[Ironically, given the theme of the first book, two education majors who reviewed it on the Amazon.com site didn't like the second one because of the bad language in it! It makes you fear the future of education or wonder if they don't curse down in Mississipi.]