?!?!?!

"him" .........?

How do you figure? The two are intricately bound.

10 characters?

is it me, or does it seem like you never know if foolsworth is agreeing or disagreeing with you?

This is how I see Foolsworth. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc4tUFWCHdg)

1. Perhaps not Brooks, but [typically] is perfectly useful in discussing just about anything. I used it as a synonym for "usually".
2. Do you think that's what happened in this case?
3. What did the government have on Al Capone besides tax evasion?
4. We disagree. The Constitution isn't the end-all and be-all of our criminal code. It has changed over time, and there is much that is simply not covered in it. 1. Then I'll correct myself. Typically and usually have almost no relevance in the law.

2. I don't know. But I do see a trend (Libby and Martha Stewart) in which perjury has become a total face-saving device for a prosecutor.
It is slowly becoming what they actually try for when they know there is little else.

3. Al Capone was known to be involved in breaking dozens of laws and bribing the criminal justice system to get out of it. They had to get him on something.
The allegations brought against the Bush administration lately are not even clearly illegal (the other day Charles Schumer finally acknowledged that he doesn't know if any law was broken in firing the US Attorneys).
If you think it's fair to intentionally shoot for perjury (as evidenced by you Al Capone analogy) then fine. I think it's ridiculous partisan BS. If they have real charges, bring them on. But don't let more imbeciles like Fitzgerald was time and money for a perjury charge.

4. You're right. The Constitution does change with time. It's the amendment process and it's the job of legislators. Not Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
She wanted a certain outcome and looked around the world to justify it.
That is NOT the job of the judicial branch. They work within limited parameters, they don't create them.
Would you put any limitation on how far a justice could look to justify a personal opinion? How about Egypt's torture laws?