Thank you for pointing out the seemingly obvious but rarely discussed point that all (or virtually all) players were likely doing the same thing as A-Rod. As a society we love celebrity and scandal. Bonds, Clemens, A-Rod and a few others have made headlines but the real story is the rampant use of steroids throughout baseball. The Mitchell Report clearly documented a culture where players and trainers worked with each other to obtain and use these performance enhancers. But the press likes a scandal and they love a villain. So the press picked the biggest name out of the report (Clemens) and made him the villain. The real story of the Mitchell Report is that everybody was taking performance enhancing drugs. Here's my (flawed but useful) logic flow:

1) Many players were taking the drugs. (proven fact)

2) Methods of obtaining and injecting the drugs were discussed, albeit discretely, between players, trainers, doctors and agents. (proven fact)

3) If there were any clean players, they would have at least known what was going on around them. (assumption but how could they not given 1 & 2 above?)

4) Baseball players are a competitive bunch and their standard of living is dependent upon their performance relative to their peers. (fact)

5) A clean player would have every incentive to expose a dirty player in order to remain competitive on the field and valuable on the free agent market. (assumption but seems reasonable...maybe not every clean player there should have been a few)

6) No players (other than Jose Canseco) have come out accusing others of using performance enhancing drugs.

7) Given 5 & 6 above, there must not have been any clean players.

This argument isn't air tight but I find it compelling enough to believe that a vast majority of major league players have taken drugs. From there, it's not too much of a leap to bundle a lot of players in the minor leagues, college and, why not, high school.

I support the ban on these substances and the testing for their presence but I'm under no illusions that baseball is now clean of performance enhancing drugs. The testing will always be one or two steps behind the technology. What we need is a full acknowledgment of how widespread the problem is and then a referendum by the fans so that the drug users feel unloved, unwanted and possibly unpaid. As it is today, we have our villains (Bonds, Clemens, A-Rod) and we are supposed to believe that "our guy" is OK. That's how MLB wants it and that's why we'll never get anywhere until we realize that "our guy" has probably taken drugs too.

And when will they move that camera over to the front to allow for mobile video ichatting?

This is a battle over more than $17 billion and I hope Obama stands his ground. This is about making a statement about the way things are done in Washington and starting to bring about some of that change we were promised.

During the campaign McCain was anti-earmark so Obama had to be anti-anti-earmark although it's clear that he probably is fairly aligned with McCain's thinking on this issue. And that's a good thing. The issue with earmarks is more than just the price tag. In fact, the relatively small (only billions!) sums are exactly the problem because they are only small relative to the overall budget allowing lawmakers to slip them in unnoticed. The costs in terms of corruption, special interest influence and distraction from more critical issues are huge. Earmarks are a major contributor to all that is wrong in Washington.

Obama should be done peddling favors to those in Congress who got him the Democratic nomination (remember the Superdelegates?). He delivered the White House to his party by promising true change. He has common sense and most of the voters on his side. I hope he sticks to his guns.

Obama's line about Rahm Emmanuel and Mother's Day is about as funny a joke as you'll get anywhere. Too bad we ask these people to get up there every year and be funny and then we spend the next week letting their jokes divide us further. Let's go back through it all and look for the humor and not the partisans cheap shots.

"My job was to change the majority in Congress and to fight to have a new president." I'm sorry. We all know that our representatives spend most of their time focused on the next election. But they're not supposed to say it.

Another point. Pelosi and other Democrats who may have been aware of more torture details than they've let on are paying a price for making the Bush torture policy such a focus of public debate. Yes, it helped with the election last year. But the issue gained traction with the public. It turns out that most of us are against torture and now the Democrats who knew about it and Obama who has to deal with it in real time are facing a more informed and active public when it comes to this issue.