Bloggers for Edwards are causing a ruckus because their previously published words and opinions don’t exactly comport with Edwards’s messages and/or positions—or with the image that some of Edwards’s fans expect of him.

Ezra Klein, writing at TAPPED, thinks it’s unfair—to the bloggers.

And if it turns out that a possibly controversial public record will effectively bar you from political positions down the road, how many young people will avoid the wonderful, chaotic, educational world of the blogosphere because they don’t want to close off future options?

Well, not blogging is one option. Those bloggers could also pause, count to ten, and use the critical thinking skills (presumably) bestowed on them by their high-priced Ivy League educations before hitting “publish.”

All we need now is a picture of Rupe and Wendy:

FishbowlNY (”New York Media Loves the Elder Kiss Photo Op”

That’s me. (Shhhh—don’t tell anyone. You’ll ruin my image.)

Why am I a cheap date? Because I am happy to receive this single measly gift—from Reuters of all places—for my one-year blogging anniversary: news that some prominent Europeans have not lost their minds, and that they are willing to say so in public.

The French magazine that published two of the Mohammed cartoons a year ago is having its day in court, having been sued by several Muslim groups for slander against all Muslims. 

Charlie Hebdo publisher Philippe Val said … the lack of prompt European support for Denmark as its embassies were attacked in the Middle East also upset him.

 

Val said the cartoons targeted Islamist militants: “In no way do they express any contempt for believers of any faith.”

He rejected suggestions from lawyers for the Muslim groups that Prophet Mohammad should be beyond criticism, saying religion had no place in the political sphere and that debate and criticism were essential elements of a democracy.

“What is sacred for a religion is sacred only for believers of that religion,” he told the court. “If we respected all the taboos of all religions, where would we be?” 

Indeed. A Paris professor weighed in too:

Paris University philosopher Abdel Wahhab Meddeb said he laughed when he saw Charlie Hebdo’s cartoon. “I urge Muslims to adapt to Europe and not the other way around. That would be catastrophic,” he told the court.

So did Le Monde:

“The trial against Charlie Hebdo is one of a different age,” the daily Le Monde wrote in an editorial. “In a secular state, no religion and no ideology is above the law. Where religion makes the law, one is close to totalitarianism.”

Finally, Reuters reminds us:

Courts in France, which observes a strict separation of church and state in the public sphere, have repeatedly defended free speech rights against religious objections.

Vive la révolution!

Politico reports that the “GOP Views Clinton as Virtually Unbeatable”

What many conservatives regard as the nightmare scenario — President Hillary Rodham Clinton — is increasingly seen by veteran Republican politicians and strategists as a virtual inevitability.

In GOP circles, the Democratic front-runner is seen as so strong, and the political climate for Republicans so hostile, that many influential voices — including current and former lawmakers, and veterans of President Bush’s campaigns — have grown despairing.

Repeat after me: she’s scooping up mindshare.

Rinse with a dose of the Feiler Faster Thesis.

Take an aspirin and call me in February 2008.