in embassies, legations, etc. are generally expelled.

constitutionally ARROGANT!

This creates the kind of stigma a public figure can't escape from easily.
With charges made against him, with wronged parties seeking redress against his policies, Bush will have to negotiate either through these difficulties or around them.
I suspect that through would be much easier than around.

Yeah.
The French tried that in 1789. It didn't work.
The thought of the guillotine for this corrupt international elite does not displease me at all.

your first and biggest mistake in this crisis.
The elite looks after its own.

O'Reilly is shamefully obtuse.

getting everything she wants when she wants it.
A real entitlement mentality there, and likely a conservative.

as professional competence.
I must say that here, the Supt. called herself out into the limelight. Her remark shows an unreasonable approach to her subordinates and objectives.
And it is not unreasonable, ergo, to assume that the Supt. might be incompetent.

We should have ceased to support Mubarak's regime in 1983 or so.
Instead we helped this "president" to turn into a long-term dictator.
As usual, the U.S. is on the wrong side in the context of a criminal regime, and has been for a long time. When does the corrupt and criminally stupid elite that runs the U.S. get their own come uppance?

that would punish you?
I'd think again about that if I were you.
If you, for instance, worked for a mainstream media organization, and you decided to do a story on the linkage between Islamic doctrine, FGM and the treatment of women in the Ummah and even in Muslim areas of American society (cases in point, the honor killing in AZ, the beheading in NY), you would not keep your job for long. It is also entirely likely that your piece, regardless of the rigor of your research, would be quashed.
This nation might love freedom of expression and truth, but believe me, in the end, most people in the media, academia, high finance and government will choose not to offend this easily offended aggregate of American and world society.
I hate to say it, but the violence seems to be speaking more loudly than principle. For the moment.
I seem to remember calls, time and time again, saying we should not slander this beautiful religion.

the terms of discussion, you've given meaning to your value judgment.
So are you saying that non-Muslim cultures are superior to Muslim cultures?
In terms of multiculturalism, that is not a very appropriate thing to say. Is it?
And there are many institutions here in the U.S. and even nations in supposedly Western Europe that would punish you for such thoughts and expressions.
There is a woman on trial right now in Austria for expressing opinions that are the same as yours, and she has the authority of much study and expreience behind what she says.

There is a vast gulf between Islam and the West.
It was not imagined, it is not a social construction.
It is part of a macrohistorical pattern that dates back at least 4,000 years.
To say that Western culture is "better" or "superior" is indeed bigoted.
Better or superior in terms of what?
If you can't set any terms, then you should not make a value judgment.

My point is that the issue is not which is better.
It is, rather, the historical and present-day truth that cultures can be in conflict, and in the case of Islam and the West, they truly are in conflict.

If they knew even an iota of American history, they would understand that it was the Republican Party that fought against SocSec tooth and nail!
To trust the Republicans to preserve any New Deal or Progressive program is sheer stupidity.

In an economic and social sense, the power, the power to influence and the power to get things done, is commensurate with money.
The decisions of the rich and near-rich do much to direct the economy.
By no means are the poor responsible for the loss of jobs, gains in productivity or the presence of poverty.
The rich and institutions decide what gets done and what is done.
The poor have no such power in their hands and you know it.

It seems we are giving institutions more and more license and individuals fewer rights.
The undermining of bankruptcy for the individual person in the last 10 years has been a social and economic disaster.
The powerlessness of the poor will be the paralysis of this economy for the long-term.