Technical Assistance
 

So someone just sent me a photo that this board would probably find amusing (everyone -- not just righties or lefties). My question: it wasn't an internet "properties" picture, but it was sent by Microsoft Photo Editor or something. Anyway, if I save it to my computer and then post it here, could some unscrupulous person (not that there are any such people here, of course) find out where I am by looking at the source or whatever? (My computer-speak is woeful.)

Technical Assistance
 

Send it to me and I can post it onto our server.

replacedtexan at hotmail dot com

Technical Assistance
 

Unlikely. There may be hypertext that tells you something about where the file was created, but it is unlikely that your office's system would add anything to an image file that would indicate where you are.

Technical Assistance
 

Done.

Technical Assistance
 

Anything's possible, of course, but of course you realize that this little statement has raised expectations to an almost unattainable level. If it doesn't contain JFK or THK doing something anatomically improbable, expect Hank, Slave et al to give it the big razzberry.

In other news, I note an interesting article from Slate making the argument that the Supremes won't be deciding the election this year, largely because the Supes are scared shitless of having to deal with the issue again, and because political mechanisms do exist to resolve problems. Those mechanisms usually inure to the benefit of Republicans, so there's hope in Bushland.

Technical Assistance
 

I'm really hoping for a blowout, either way. We really don't need another court-decided election here.

Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways
 

Did you watch the same show? The unfunny Stewart hijacked their show with his pathetic whines and sounded like a pedantic schmuck.

What accusations? That a decades-old show [that the ratings will show, no one watches anymore] has ruined the political discourse in this country? Why would anyone bother answering it - it's a ludicrous statement. Especially coming from someone who's makes a bundle on mocking the political process.

Actually, if you think that all three of them somehow aren't in the same business, then you're the one who is being stupid.

Funny that Stewart chose not to personally attack Begala, wasn't it?

Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways
 

My guess is the bow tie sent him over the edge.

Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways
 

Begala (I never watch the show -- maybe he's a dick too) wasn't the one attacking Stewart and saying how little fun it was going to be to have dinner with him (or something like that).

Also, after the show, Tucker Carlson himself admitted that he was a dick a lot of the time.

Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways
 

I've only watched that once, but isn't the whole point of the show that they become partisan dicks and thrash surface stuff out?

Woodward Says Kerry's Ducking
 

Unbelievable.

Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways
 

Kinda like here.

Except for this little part.

OK Everyone -- Prepare Yourself for HILARITY GALORE!
 

Here's the photo:

http://www.lawtalkers.com/monica.bmp

Technical Assistance
 

Not sure I buy the logic here. There are several small statements I disagree with (for example, that the Court was surprised at the blowback over their Bush v. Gore decision, and that the Court utterly eviscerated the precedential value of Bush v. Gore). They all add up, though, to a very different view of these justices. I don't think they are at all frightened of wading into electoral controversy, and I think many view the controversy over Bush v. Gore as relative minor in comparison to many other controversies. The Florida elections are not the same minefield as abortion, for example.

But, here's a different thought -- given the way the votes came out last time, would there be a bias this time in the court toward Kerry? After all, it is a very different thing to decide the election twice in four years for the same person than to decide the election twice while promulgating consistent rules in a non-partisan fashion. If they decide for Kerry, it would cut a lot of the criticism from last time around that it was a results driven decision (of course, it would do so by being results driven...)

OK Everyone -- Prepare Yourself for HILARITY GALORE!
 

I thought it was established that she didn't swallow.