One of the most common questions is: “How do you set up your charts when looking for a trade?” First, you have to know the basic timeframe of the trade you are about to make. Is this going to be a 30-200 minute trade? A 1-2 day trade? A 3-4 week trad…

It’s just that you seemed sort of confused about it before.

Here’s George Wills opinion:

It is important that Miers not be confirmed unless, in her 61st year, she suddenly and unexpectedly is found to have hitherto undisclosed interests and talents pertinent to the court’s role. Otherwise the sound principle of substantial deference to a president’s choice of judicial nominees will dissolve into a rationalization for senatorial abdication of the duty to hold presidents to some standards of seriousness that will prevent them from reducing the Supreme Court to a private plaything useful for fulfilling whims on behalf of friends.

The wisdom of presumptive opposition to Miers’s confirmation flows from the fact that constitutional reasoning is a talent — a skill acquired, as intellectual skills are, by years of practice sustained by intense interest. It is not usually acquired in the normal course of even a fine lawyer’s career. The burden is on Miers to demonstrate such talents, and on senators to compel such a demonstration or reject the nomination.

And Pat Buchanan”

But her qualifications for the Supreme Court are non-existent. She is not a brilliant jurist, indeed, has never been a judge. She is not a scholar of the law. Researchers are hard-pressed to dig up an opinion. She has not had a brilliant career in politics, the academy, the corporate world or public forum. Were she not a friend of Bush, and female, she would never have even been considered.

What is depressing here is not what the nomination tells us of her, but what it tells us of the president who appointed her. For in selecting her, Bush capitulated to the diversity-mongers, used a critical Supreme Court seat to reward a crony, and revealed that he lacks the desire to engage the Senate in fierce combat to carry out his now-suspect commitment to remake the court in the image of Scalia and Thomas. In picking her, Bush ran from a fight. The conservative movement has been had — and not for the first time by a president by the name of Bush.

And to Miss Elephant:

Your supercilious remark to me on understanding the electoral process is touching.

How have I managed to survive as a US citizen for as long as I have without brilliant people like you instructing me in how our democracy works.

Plenty of their henchmen (and women) were found guilty, though.

I agree that Tom DeLay is entitled to the presumption of innocence. However, I also think that leaders should be held to a higher standard than criminal defendants: they should not only avoid impropriety, they should also avoid the appearance of impropriety. In recent years, Wright, Gingrich, and Rostenkowski all lost their positions due to ethical problems, and I believe that Rostenkowski was the only one who was indicted (and later convicted). John Tower was disqualified from being Secretary of Defense because he drank and womanized, and hence gave the appearance of impropriety. (My recollections may be a little fuzzy — hey, I can barely remember where I park my car at the mall — but I think they are correct). Even if he is acquitted, this should not lead to the conclusion that everything is hunky-dory. I believe that DeLay should resign even if found innocent, because there are enough events with the strong appearance of impropriety that the people would be better served with someone else in his position.

Mark,

I’ll apply that dictum as the Repubs applied it to the Clintons during the Whitewater investigations. (Which cost over $70 million and did not find the Clintons guilty of anything, but it didn’t stop the Repubs from speculating on their guilt in newspapers and magazines.)

As to Plamegate, I most certainly know this:

Scott McClellan unequivocally stated that Rove and Libby had nothing to do with it.

Scott McClellan is a spokesman for Mr. Bush, his press secretary. Mr. McClellan lied. Or someone in Mr. Bush’s White House lied to McClellan. People lie to cover up things.

This is what I know about Plamegate.

And apparently the Ham Sandwich that was indicted by Ronnie Earle is losing support with his colleagues. I just heard on Joe Scarborough’s cable show that Representative Shays said that Ham Sandwich would not be welcomed back into the House, even if he were acquitted of his accusations.

As Bette Davis said in All About Eve “Gentlemen, buckle-up your seatbelts because it’s gonna be a bumpy ride!”

The point? Don’t get too excited about Delay’s indictment – I assure you Ronnie Earle has a history of letting his partisans down…and believe me, you don’t have the slightest clue what’s going on in PlameGate, and neither do I – we get what the two sides leak to us, nothing more – just hold your horses, nobody’s even been indicted in that one yet. And nobody at all has been convicted in either situation…innocent until proven guilty, right? Or doesn’t that protection apply to evil Republicans?