[TimPatriot]

I love Laura Ingrams' remark

I heard Laura Igram on Imus yesterday and I agree she was good with one exception. I was disappointed that she put up no defense of Condi Rice refusing to testify under oath to the 911 commission. Maybe she was blind sided by the question, but seems to me that since she is not a cabinet position, she is a direct advisor to the president and oversees sensitive intelligence information, that it is inappropriate for congress to interview her publicly under oath. People say that separation of powers is an "arcane" argument. The same people take very "liberal" interpretations of the constitution and seem to think the whole document is "arcane" I do love Laura's show though, I think she is one of the best. I find her more informative and entertaining than all but Rush.

[tkathy]

If Rumsfeld testifies, Rice should testify. Looks bad, and somewhat chicken if she aspires to VP or even senator.

[Lokibob]

Recent convert to Lauras radio program here.

I like her humor, (guess it goes without saying her politics) and her outlook on events.

Can't say anything about the Condi thing, since I didn't listen to Imus. My remark was based on 2nd hand knowledge.

[OldFriend]

Laura is a McCain supporter so she finds it extremely difficult to support the president.

She can be informative if you can get past her constant kvetching at the beginning of every show.

[johnb838]

she put up no defense of Condi Rice refusing to testify under oath to the 911 commission.

I'm sure this is covered down thread but she did testify privately and I don't think the public has any right to a public testimony.

Don't blow Imus off, I guess. I was watching one day and Chrissie Matthews was supposed to call in and he didn't call and Imus went ballistic and stayed that way for the rest of the show.

[MrB]

The same people take very "liberal" interpretations of the constitution and seem to think the whole document is "arcane"

Simple shutup oneliner answer to that: "Could you explain, then, why the amendment process was included, if the document was intended to be 'interpreted' to fit contemporary values?"