...It was. Episode 23, Acceptance. The quote was something like: "If we accept that the disease made him do it, then we dismiss the efforts of every other person with this disease who didn't go out and murder six people."

There had better have been extenuating circumstances on this ruling. Otherwise, by the sentiment above, I have to call it a miscarriage of justice.

> otherwise it will always be employee's of the stores that have parking and people shopping will not have access to the stores.

I call bullshit from personal experience and logic.

Logic: Right now, if an employee wants that spot, they can pay the meter and take it. If they're really that unscrupulous they can take the spot, get a ticket, not pay the ticket, and drive off laughing maniacally if it suits them.

Personal experience: You know what keeps employees from taking up the spots in front of the stores they work in? Bosses. Back in the day in that first computer shop I ever worked at in Small Town, USA, my boss made us move our cars. He was very concerned about people blocking up store parking, and refused to park his own car there. The street was absolutely free to park in, but the only people who parked there were customers. Us employees were more concerned with making sure we made money off the customers than denying them access, because our paychecks came from those people. As far as I could tell, this policy was nigh universal on that street and throughout the downtown area where parking was scarce.

Taco's kid isn't the only one. My son started watching Colbert with the family quite young. It never failed to get a reaction from six months onward: Sesame Street got interest and curiosity, but that eagle and the opening theme heralded a wide-eyed sit-up-take-notice response. It was so strong that we'd play Colbert to get him to stop crying during teething misery. (Not crying makes giving medicine a whoooole lot easier.) Nowadays, when we sit down to watch something and start the music, he promptly runs over and plants himself on the middle of the couch between us and stares raptly.

It doesn't last, of course - he runs off again pretty quick, particularly losing interest during the interviews - but everything before that seems to hold his attention pretty good, and he's now almost two. Stewart gets a lesser but equally approving reaction - he's more likely to come sit down with us, but not so likely to sit up and take notice at the opening theme.

Babies: nature's shininess meter.

By my experiments, Colbert > Noggin > Sesame Street > Stewart > Teletubbies, etc. There's a ranking system at work here in my boy's brain, though I'm not quite sure what it is yet, as he hasn't got the ability to inform me of his true opinions.

I will note: John Stewart introduced a puppet named "Gitmo". It was Elmo with a beard. When he fed that thing to the dogs, I do believe we experienced the boy's first traumatic television event. Ever after, the hubby vets the programs before the baby gets 'em. That was the one moment I regretted the TV. Most of the time, I tend to take Jeff Vogel's parenting approach. TV is a god at capturing a child's attention, and should be used wisely.