These are the same people that moments later will fall into the spiel of American Exceptionalism, the whole "City on a Hill" diatribe. How they think we can be equivalent with Al Queda one moment and a shining example for the world to look up to the next shows the depths of their sociopathy. They either can't tell right from wrong or don't understand how their different ideas fit together. Either way is an example of insanity.

Evidently it is no longer just that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Now even the pursuit of power corrupts and the pursuit of absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I think they are so desperate to justify their own greed and ambition that they say whatever needs to be said at the moment and pray that no-one tries to keep track.

So, do you use a little trough or a bib?

You know, to catch all the drool, you slack jawed moron. You need serious medical help. Please seek it out before you hurt yourself or someone else.

Just another troll with nothing to say but to advertise for his own site. Doesn't that go against Salon policy? Delete this nonsense please.

It is tiring seeing idiots like this come here and complain that the Left hasn't offered any way forward, even though they have. The posters just ignore it and then complain.

1) Your own side hasn't offered a viable way forward. You break it and insist we fix it? Likely 'cause you know we're the ones with brains.

2) Part of the way forward is acknowleding the past and present. Not understanding this is part of the point of the article (which you didn't understand, obviously) and is part of the reason we're in the mess we're in today.

3) Bush is a criminal, as are many in his administration. If your house were robbed, would you say "enough of this investigation, tell me how to move forward" or would you want the criminal brought to justice? Unlike you, we can walk and crew gum at the same time. We can posit ways forward while examining the past and bringing the criminals to justice.

But I still enjoyed the interplay between the characters, even if 11 of them, let alone 12, are too many for one director to handle.

Funny, It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad world handles it with no problem. Then again, the talent level there was much higher. Other movies over the years have also done a good job with many characters. Perhaps this director or story line just isn't up to the task.

So what would happen if Gonzales were disbarred?

Farhad Manjoo gets a blog, despite the fact that he doesn't really understand the technology he writes about. His blog has been better than I expected 'cause he isn't really trying to explain anything, he's just relaying things he's found.

Camile Paglia gets to spew her drivel on Salon, I don't read those articles any more

Debra Dickerson gets to write articles despite having written that OJ Simpson should kill himself, despite her having avoided paying any attention to his trial. Of course, if a letter poster were to have written that, you'd have deleted it. I don't read her articles any more.

You bring on Berkely Breathed, who's comic ability burned itself out 20 years ago. Once a liberal, now a brain-dead conservative. You may feel sorry for him, but I'm not going to be reading his tripe either.

Now this nonsense? Tina Brown? Getting a column where she can talk about celebrity crap from the 90s? Or are we going to get coverage of celebrity deaths from all eras? Is James Dean next? Maybe John Belushi? I vote for an expose on Valentino. At least those won't have been as overexposed lately.

I'm not the kind that threatens to stop subscribing. I understand that fluff has its place in a newspaper. I understand I'm not going to want to read every article in a publication. However, if this trend continues and I find I'm not reading anything but Kauffman, Greenwald, Broadsheet and the War Room, I'll seriously start wondering why I'm bothering to pay.

The free market by itself doesn't always yield the best solution. Poor technology can sin out if it has other benefits, price, addons, etc...

From the top dictates often don't yield the best result because they change too slowly, are usually behind the technology curve, etc.

The only real solution is a well regulated marketplace. One where standards can be encouraged, where competitors are forced to actually compete, where no-one can gain a monopoly or near monopoly on content or other piece extraneous to, but needed by a product. Free marketers in this country seem to have disposed of the "well regulated" aspect of the market, thinking that somehow everything will magically work out and companies won't sieze whatever they can for themselves. Greed is not good if unchecked, despite what any 80s movie might tell you.

How is it really any different for kids from a couple that marries, has kids, divorces, marries others and has more kids? All those kids have several moms & dads. If the parents all get along, then the kids won't notice much of a difference between that and a poly relationship.

trudyb -

I know quite a few poly people and they rarely talk about it. On the other hand, I know hobbyists of several varieties that think you're an idiot if you don't "get" their hobby and why it is better than anything else.

But you go ahead and enjoy your generalizations.