Maybe Krugman didn't mention it on his blog, but what should be read into that? That he isn't coming clean about who he's meeting with, or that he doesn't brag? If he bragged about meeting Obama and then sounded less critical, wouldn't that be seized upon as evidence the iron-fisted dictator of the party fantasies was forcing his critics back into line?

If Krugman took a position and didn't tell his readers, or got handed money and then backed an administration initiative, that would be an issue. Absent such a reasonable suspicion however, I'm just not seeing anything nefarious.

If the report recommends disbarment, and if disbarment happens, that's mild punishment for war crimes, but at least it's something. My understanding is Bybee would be disqualified from serving as a judge, and Yoo would be disqualified from working as a law professor. I could be wrong, so don't take that as final.

While the punishment would be mild, it might be enough to be a deterrent to current and future DOJ lawyers.

I wondered if I was trying to see too many levels when I read about Obama's proposal. It occurred to me that Obama is developing a reputation for playing chess while his opponents play checkers. Myabe going after the tax havens is a way to get corporate special interests to back off on something else. Reich suggested heal insurance reform; my first thought was EFCA. Make the lobbyists stretch their resources. If this isn't a bargaining chip, then maybe Obama is thinking they'll be so overwrought about EFCA or health insurance that this can slip through, though I doubt it. He wouldn't have had the big announcement.

Of course, it could just be Obama is really sick of the wealthy dodging their taxes, and is going to channel populist anger to do something about it.

Specter couldn't have been any more Republican since his switch. He keeps voting the wrong way. He denies any loyalty (so why join?) Now if he thinks it's bad there are no more Jewish Republican senators, fine. Maybe it is. If he likes Coleman on a personal basis, or thinks collegiality requires him to say something nice, that's fine too. However, the "do justice" remark crosses the line. He's supporting the conspiracy theories that Franken somehow stole this thing. Specter, if not really Republican, is at least grossly irresponsible. Pennsylvanians, tell Joe Sestak to run.

Wow, I didn't even get to the second page of comments and there was a Nazi reference already.

Why is is so hard for so many commenters to just say that whatever anyone thinks of Obama in general, in this instance at least he's doing the right thing. Instead, there's an annoying dribble of misanthropes.

"I think you would find among House Republicans varying opinions on the man-made origins of global warming."

They're bitterly divided: some say it's purely a hoax, while others say all the scientists are wrong.

Corn based ethanol is a mature technology, whereas making it from other sources is still developmental, and that's why ethanol producers rely on corn. Corn has serious problems, but it has allowed ethanol to be proven as a viable fuel. The market will be there when it becomes economically feasible to produce it from greener sources. At some point, rather than cutting off government aid, the aid should be shifted from corn to other sources, and certainly there's a good case that we've reached that point. I'm just saying that rather than cutting off biofuels altogether, we should recognize there could be a value to producing them from some sources, but they're too far from being commercially viable to get by without government money.

The strength of the show is the story has been set up to grow in interesting directions, rather than relying on a formula that gets everything back to square one at the end. The audience has been told the dollhouse is one of several and there's a bigger agenda behind it all. Alpha has a backstory only hinted at and an ability to present a real threat to these people who seem all-powerful over the dolls. I really have to like how the dollhouse seems barely hanging on to its secrecy, when it seems impossible something that large can stay secret indefinitely.

I would accept that conservatives don't disapprove of all science, but they appear to accept it only within specific boundaries. Some boundaries are economic, by which I mean science is acceptable in the service of business, but when it appears to restrict business, such as about any environmental issue, then the corporate sponsored junk science and misleading PR campaigns start. The other boundary is religious, meaning any science that may contradict the bible is rejected, regardless of the evidence. Global warming seems to hit both boundaries, since not only to we have misleading junk science, but some deniers have almost a conspiracy theory mindset that causes them to discount all evidence.

Unfortunately, teaching people that evolution can be believed or not according to whether it feels right and fits your faith lets people think all science is just another opinion, nor more valid than opinion formed from religious belief or economic inconvenience, and this I think is where the conservative fear of science comes from.

If Star Trek met Stargate, would "replicators" be these spider-looking metal creatures that produce Earl Grey tea on command?

Paid staff are hoping to catch on with more campaigns when their current campaign is done, and being suspected of sabotaging their candidate would end their hopes for more jobs. That alone tells me the story is nonsense. If they knew about the affair they'd either hope it didn't come out, or get out before it broke in hopes of saving their own reputations and job prospects. My guess is they either believed the rumors were false, or didn't know.