63debra beat me to it.

What is it about most consumers (particularly but not only American) that can't be comfortable unless they are hooked up to a food source 24/7?

After many years of flying I discovered that I am better off not eating on any but the longest flights (SFO to Logan or Narita) at all. Litter aside, I turn out feeling better when I finally clear baggage claim. It is then possible to look forward to eating somewhere with decent and satisfying food (either home or a destination restaurant) without busting my daily calorie budget.

I just flew to SFO from Denver on United, and I think they are on the right track. You can purchase from a menu in-flight, and if you don't want to eat you don't have to feel like you have thrown away something you've paid for. Their selection is not great but not bad either. On the subject of trash, I noted their "EatRight(tm)" snack deal was packaged as elaborately as an Apple iPod. Well I guess that old marketing reflex is getting in the way there.

John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira had all these numbers 8 years ago, writing "The Emerging Democratic Majority" in the year where it looked like Rove's wet dream was all but accomplished.

I would not want to be a Republican official trying to turn things around right now. Any political leader that does not fully appease the racists and the religious whackjobs has no chance in his own party, and almost no chance of attracting any cross-over vote. The temporary ascendancy they had yielded the unfortunate presidency of Bush II, and that was only possible with the unholy alliance between the religious right and the corporatist/countryclub Republicans. Which has become untenable. Even the idiot extreme libertarians are dissolusioned, and that takes doing.

To save the Republican party you will have to destroy it first.

I remember a while back the good Lt. Col. Bob Bateman got all huffy and righteous over something Glenn wrote about the Posse Comitatus Act. Basically he took the position that something like this happen was just left wing hysteria.

A lot of us continue to have a lot of respect for Col. Bateman -- he's a good writer and offers many good insights on the military man's point of view in this screwed up world. But we felt that his taking on Glenn on this topic was a low point for him.

I wonder if he had anything further to say about this. Anyone know?

When in history has the Fed ever considered itself subject to oversight by any branch of government? Other than the initial appointment by the president, they are on their own. Elite and for the most part secret. I never understood how such an institution has managed to survive this long without imploding in a greasy black ball of corruption.

His NYT pieces were so full of errors, one really wonders if he knows what he is doing. Perhaps the founder and even this current Kristol's father would claim that he has not reached the level where he can tell a good lie

I used to think this. That is the thing that right wingers and neocons and the Bushies and the save-your-soul evangelicals all count on: in order to be a decent person yourself you have to give the benefit of the doubt. That they really "believe" the crap they give you rather than they are deceiving you. I've gotten over it.

At this point there is no credible doubt left to give them the benefit of. Although electing Obama was a good thing, the one thing it apparently did not do is reverse the shrinkage of the reality based community. What this means is you and I and everyone else here have to give up the reflex of being polite because there is no difference between that and being a carnival mark.

... supported the swift boaters. Why not the birthers?

I see two differences:

1) Although both movements were pure hooey, the swift boaters had a chance (which payed out for them) of affecting a maajor power shift because of the upcoming election. The birthers don't have any such chance -- it's just noise from the loony bin.

2) The swift boaters were organized and funded by interests in line with the Republican party. The birthers are propelled along by reactionary (possibly racist) crazies that are not really connected to anyone high up in the Republican party.

That whole essay and not once did the phrase "moral relativism" appear. I'm impressed.

We live in a day an age that a certified government document, repeatedly affirmed by every government official as correct and valid, is taken as proof of nothing by 70% of southern white male voters. So I don't expect Olbermann's confirmation to be much accepted by those not inclined to accept it.

Just as an aside, it seems like you have a good working relationship with Olbermann. Is that true and do you have a sense of where his head is on this whole affair?

Add to the list the statement "Obama and his brownshits in the media" by Orly Taitz in that MSNBC interview.

Orly's clients sue her for malpractice. That would be just sweet.

On your own blog you brought up Pollan's observation about "nutritionism." (It isn't about health, it is about marketing.) I just read that before coming here.

I think there must be a similar word for what Holder is doing: it isn't about justice, it is about marketing. Justice-ism? (doesn't work). Legalism? (already used). I think we need some help from Colbert.