There’s reality:

The White House announced on Tuesday that the federal budget deficit was expected to rise this year to $427 billion, a figure that includes a new request from President Bush to help pay for the war in Iraq.
The White House’s announcement makes it the fourth straight year in which the budget deficit was expected to grow; as recently as last July the administration had predicted that the deficit, which was $412 billion last year, would fall this year to $331 billion.

And then there’s fantasy:

In a briefing for reporters on Tuesday, senior administration officials insisted they were still on track to fulfill Mr. Bush’s campaign promise of reducing the federal budget deficit by half by 2009.

Perhaps this stems from my background in the humanities, rather than math, but how are four years of growing budget deficits putting us on a path of halving the red ink within five years? If you were to plot that on a graph, it would require an awful bizarre equation.
The entire article highlights how the White House claims are even more laughable when you factor in the costs of upcoming expenses: entitlement increases, permanent military bases in Iraq, and, of course, permanent tax cuts for millionaires. We’re at war, after all.

Steve Gilliard is correct in pointing out that there’s not much common ground available between abortion rights and anti-abortion interest groups. And to the extent that there is any, Senator Hillary Clinton certainly isn’t the one who will find it.

Now American “fertility tourists” are seeking cheaper eggs and sperm abroad. Where will it end?

Freedom on the march:

As Iraq’s campaign season winds into its final week, voters will have to make their choices in a fog of limited information.
Because of the constant violence and death threats against them, candidates will not hold rallies. Instead, they are relying on religious and tribal networks and Islamic holiday feasts to spread their message.
Laconic posters and television ads round out the campaign. As a result, people’s perceptions of the candidates, and their understanding of the election, are as vague as the candidates’ platforms.

The neat thing about this election is that it’s irrelevant whether or not Iraqis are making an informed, meaningful decision. The really important outcome of this election will be in producing video footage of Iraqis voting, which will be used by certain US politicians offering meaningless grand pronouncements on “liberty” and “freedom.”

Don’t you love the smell of a fresh Congressional term in the morning? When our elected representatives set out to tackle the most pressing issues facing our country?

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) wasted little time before introducing two bills that would require the Ten Commandments to be posted in both the Capitol and the Senate and House chambers.
Stearns introduced the bill Jan. 4, the first day of the 109th Congress. He first introduced a similar resolution in the 105th Congress and subsequent versions in the 106th and 108th.
“Posting the Ten Commandments in places like the House and Capitol would merely serve to remind members that we have the responsibility as lawmakers to be as fair and just as possible,” Stearns said.

That’s for sure. I can’t imagine how many times a Congressperson, in the midst of a floor debate on a transportation bill, has had to send a page out to check on the wording of the third commandment. It really would be better if they could just glance up on the wall.
And why stop there? Wouldn’t lawmakers be more inclined to be “fair” if there was a prominent cross erected at the rostrum? And how about some hymnals distributed around the floor? Representatives could sing hymns during roll calls to remind them of justice.
Seriously, as long as Congress in the posting mode, how about adding the Bill of Rights? I recall something there about Congress not passing laws establishing religion. But I don’t have the Constitution posted on the wall in my blogging chamber to remind me, so I could be wrong.