General Odom lays out a pretty good case for why we need to leave Iraq.

Does anyone know if there is a posted interview that makes the opposite argument of Odom - that is, explaining why we need to surge in Iraq? I know if we all clap and cheer for our troops loud enough we can will our way to victory...obviously, that is a given. But is there anyone out there who is making an intelligent argument for this "new" plan? I would like to see someone actually say, "We need 20,000 more troops because...." and back that up with a strategy that doesn't feel like more of a bad thing.

Can anyone provide me with a link to a fact based, articulate, reasonable argument from a surge supporter?

Glenn said: Wolffe similarly enlightened the confused, misguided critics of journalists as follows:

They want us to play a role that isn't really our role. Our role is to ask questions and get information. It's not a chance for the opposition to take on the government and grill them to a point where they throw their hands up and surrender.

See, all journalists are supposed to do is ask questions of their friends -- like that great guy, Tony Snow -- and that is how they "get information." Then, they pass it along. That's it. That's their job (that echoes what Gordon told Goodman: "the way journalism works is you write what you know, and what you know at the time you try to convey as best you can").

This made me immediately recall Stephen Colbert's speech at the White House Correspondent's Dinner last year.

Colbert: "Over the last five years, you people were so good. Over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming....we Americans didn't want to know and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.

But hey, listen, let's review the rules. Here is how it works. The President makes decisions - he's The Decider - the Press Secretary announces those decisions and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put it through a spell-check and go home."

Glenn's analysis of Howard Dean's "insurgent campaign" explains exactly why Jesse Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota. (And his inability to overcome the Minnesota beltway insider-ism was a major reason why he chose not to run for re-election.)

Even on the days when Glenn "may not have time to post much today, or at all," I know I am going to get a few tasty nuggets. Glenn's column is just one smack down after another.

<<>>

Ummm, that would be yes and yes. Pitiful.

Well, if you feel that strongly about it why not do a better job of criticizing the institution. --shooter242

Ummm, in case you haven't been paying attention to GG's column for the last year or so (but those of us that read these letters regularly know that you have), that is precisely what he has been doing.

Vick claimed in statement that he made a mistake and that he accepts responsibility for his actions. In my book, a mistake is stupid, one-time occurence. Someone who flips out and smacks his coach has made a mistake. Someone who decides to drive home while wasted has made a mistake. But someone who exhibits the same pattern of bad behavior over and over has not made a mistake, they have a problem. And that isn't something that can be just waved away with a 3 minute mea culpa.

Vick is just sorry he got caught. I hope he proves me wrong because I have always liked the guy - well, at least I have always liked the athlete. But if he is truly sorry about his behavior, he'll do something about it - donate money to fight the problem, conduct public service announcements, etc.

Wow...

But when you go so far as to post a photograph of them as prime evidence that they are in fact unmasculine (as you did of Mark Hemingway), you are seriously over the border into the same territory right-wing commentators have staked out for their own--and they're welcome to it. Point out the hypocrisy of their words, but hinge their hypocrisy on the way they look?

When I first read the column, I agreed with you. But I also initially agreed with Kerry's refusal to "stoop to their level" and swing back at the Swift Boaters. Certainly, I figured, people will be able to see right through their attack and Kerry will come out looking like the adult. We all know how well that panned out.

It's time someone other than comedians (Franken, Maher, Stewart & Colbert) start swinging back.

Among the comments were a number that were homophobic, as if the authors were unaware that you yourself are gay.

Whoa! Wait just a minute here...you mean GG is gay? Uh, yeah, I ummm don't know Glenn Greenwald. Never read his column on Salon. Is it even on Salon - Do I even know who he is? And I take back all of the positive comments I have made about him. In fact, I never made them at all. Yeah, yeah, ummm, someone logged on as me and made them. Yeah, that's it....

backpedal, distance, backpedal

Yes, what your column really needs is more NHL bashing. In fact, I am surprised you haven't made it a regular portion of each of your columns. But its not too late.

Wow.

...oh, wait a minute.

I don't believe in momentum or curses, destiny, karma or superstition.

How can you be a sportswriter and not belive in momentum? This series is the definition of a momentum shift.