One line smacked me in the kisser like a wet pickle: the bit about politicians who support lib causes like pro-choice and vote for the interests of the rich. What did that remind me of? How conservatives in blue collar districts supposedly stay in office by being anti-choice, even as they vote to support the interests of the rich.

Looks like the rich have figured out liberals can be just as hypocritical about their material interests as conservatives who pretend to represent Joe the Plumber.

The write thinks Obama's little homily at the end about everybody doing their easily affordable share will somehow get traction. If that were likely, then there'd be no need for tax reform to begin with....taxes would've been fair all along. It's not like the country hasn't heard for years, if it's willing to listen, how the distribution of wealth and tax burden is set up in the U.S. I really see no cause for optimism, especially when people can be diverted for days over that kerfuffle with the modest, self-effacing Prof. Gates, the smartest man there is.

Read some letters here, and it wouldn't be surprising to find that every one puts you down, poor LW. So I'll do my good deed for the day.

Look, many of us have been fools for love and did things that even years later make us red inside with embarassment. So you did yours, and I'll lay a compliment on you: flying unheralded to Asia was a biggie, much more spectacular than knocking drunkenly on her apartment door at 3:00 A.M. OK, you did it, and here's the solid I'll do for you: you're free now. You won't ever do anything like that, even on a much smaller scale, again. You learned from a mistake, which is what you're supposed to do. (You're not supposed to go through life without making mistakes).

You're cool now. And as someone who's been terminated by "irreplaceable" women, let me tell you, each succeeding one has been better than the last, impossible as I would've thought it. That's what's great about women: they'll almost all great. Be glad you're a man and can enjoy the best that life has to offer: women.

That's what a vow of fidelity is, a vow of celibacy. After not that many years sex will be so infrequent in marriage as to be a non-factor. So why expect the man -- or woman -- not to have some on the side? You people are either hypocritcal, ignorant, nuts, or don't know anybody I know. And what good is a promise of fidelity from a man, say 33 years old? What does he, or anybody, know about how'll they'll feel after ten years of marital grinding sexual boredom, topped by spousal acceptance (read: indifference), and lack of excitement all around? Cary finesses all this with a torrent of b.s., but in a way he's being very honest in not believing in Santa Claus.

Just askin'

Stop focussing on the Republicans semi-racism or nativism or whatever. Focus on the main thing: Obama's first selection for the Supreme Court is a lightweight. Nobody credible (or incredible) has claimed she is going to make history with her opinions, and there's no evidence to think she will. Obama had the chance to find somebody on the left side who is brilliant and a phrase maker, a deep thinker and a sterling rhetorician. What did we get? Somebody who's qualified in the sense that she passes the intelligence test. Big deal. She should've stayed on the 2d Circuit, a good fit for also-rans.

.....what will he do? Why did you vote for him? When does he take action?

Yes, Palin is quite relevant these days, with obama's economic program failing, his health care package turning into mush, his disregard for civil liberties for detainees worse in some aspects than Bush's, his diplomacy with tough places like Iran/Russia/China looking like so much pap. Why not write about Palin, who really is relevant to the country's welfare? Good job, Joe.

Shelter is as primary as health care: where's the free guaranteed housing for people who can't afford rent or purchase?

US emergency rooms will accept anyone with a broken leg for treatment.

And congressmen's health benefits are as unusual as any employers -- do people constantly argue everybody is entitled to the same? Why not a salary also for people who don't work?

Maybe you think "this guy's trying to be ironic, but ironically all those things should be free." I say, fine, but let's not pretend there's something magical about health care -- it's just something else you want for free if you can get it.

And what about treatment for illegal aliens -- will the new health plan let them wither away in the streets? Sorry for asking pesky questions, so much more fun to grandstand about HEALTH CARE FOR ALL (as demanded by people who assume "the rich" will be the ones paying higher taxes).

With seven of our military people dying in Afghanistan yesterday, I would suggest people focus on the "lesson of Viet Nam" as it relates to the here and now -- Obama's war. Of course, Afghanistan is different -- the present folly always is.

You must agree, or you wouldn't be reading this.