The recent political trials in Iran and Burma have raised several questions on the motives of these trials. There could be several levels of analysis, and similarities and differences could be drawn between the trials of political prisoners in Iran and the political prisoners in Burma.

Mr. Hannity: The September 11 attack was "an attempt to decapitate our government." (p. 131)

Mr. Hannity: "Monarchism, National Socialism, fascism, communism--all these forms of authoritarianism are illegitimate and inherently unjust." (pp. 10-11)

My response: I agree that National Socialism (Nazism) and communism are not legitimate forms of government because of their innate injustice. In different ways, both ideologies degrade the humanity of a people--Nazism through the elevation of society to godlike status, communism through the reduction of persons to mere cogs in the machinery of state. By eliminating socially "inferior" citizens, including Jews, Catholics, the mentally ill, and the handicapped, the racist and eugenicist Nazis worked to create a "master race" hoping to restore Germany's past glory. Communism is a collectivist system of government in which the state controls and regulates all the details of the ordinary lives of its citizens. While attempting to ensure the material security of all the citizens, it strips the individual person of his freedom--to worship God as he chooses, to purchase goods or property, to raise a family without interference, to determine his job, hours, or wage, to freely assemble with other citizens, to obtain a fair trial, or to criticize government policy.

Is there any area of our government, over the span of the last seven years, any area, in domestic or foreign policy, national defense, public welfare, the economy, name it, where the average, reasonably informed American might point to success, to signs of progress, of improvement, something, anything, to point to with satisfaction, with pride?

Yesterday I read an article by Steve Benin on the resignation of Karen Hughes from her post as Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, a mouthful there, and a job for which she was as ill suited and unqualified as the man who appointed her and in which, during her two year tenure, she accomplished little, if anything.

In truth, she accomplished nothing, unless you want to count convincing large portions of the world that all Americans must be as out of touch with reality, as clueless and unthinking as their current Commander in Chief, and at that she excelled, as anyone might, having been dispatched to the Middle East with the rank of Ambassador, but without knowledge of the language, culture, history, religions, and general pet peeves of the various states and peoples of the region.

But Karen Hughes was tapped for her office for the same reasons as all Bush appointees are chosen, not for expertise or experience, not for performance or integrity in public service but for loyalty, for unwavering belief in the Messianic delusions of neo conservatism, and a willingness to march in lockstep, nah, goose step, against all who might disagree or dissent.

There is a good chance that you, or someone you know, have experienced abuse in a relationship.

I did.

My ex had me convinced that he deserved preferential treatment. He did a great job of blaming me or making me feel guilty about anything that went wrong in our lives. If I was concerned about a problem or an issue, he usually found a way to minimize its importance. I was over-reacting. Or his problems were always more profound and deserving of attention. He set the agenda for everything in our lives.