Reply #5: Not what your asking for but

[heartofthesiskiyou]

on the Carlson subject, He's been particularly out of line on three occasions that I've seen in the last four days or so. He was trying to explain away the Phlame issue as not even against the law and the whole Friz investigation as merit less (paraphrasing) as there wasn't even a law been violated squishing together the theory Bush declassified the intelligence report with the phlame outing (the first arguably legal the second not, and did in fact harm our national security). Once he was called and he didn't challenge back, the other two fact twists stood unchallenged. He's usually not that blatant, is he loosing it?