has given this guy a well-deserved, major ass-kicking. This statement

Given the continuing controversy in the United States over N.S.A. surveillance when it involves U.S. citizens, do readers who oppose letting the authorities read the private e-mail correspondence of Americans feel any differently about the issue knowing that the agency’s monitoring of these foreign nationals may have helped disrupt a major plot in this case?

and the feeble effort to walk away from it, well, why is it that guys like this can't just come out and say, "Hey, asshole, your silly support of these laws means we're all facing greater danger. Now, I don't know if this is true--sure don't have any evidence to support the contention--but it's what I believe."

That'd be a lot better than this weasly approach--and then to be dishonest about it!

Everyone gets an A, says Timothy.

(like now) when I wish there was such a thing as "death panels," because I'd nominate that idiot as our first subject.

On a more serious note, this balderdash about "rationing," what do people like Palin think we have now? Health care is rationed if you cannot afford it. Really, the selfishness of these people is simply appalling and I just don't get how anyone can behave so inhumanly. How did that happen? When did that happen?

up on comments and wanted to note this from AI

Rather than committing 400,000 US troops to Afghanistan for 10 years, as Petraeusian counterinsurgency theory would call for, George Will, from Arab Pest Control, Inc., prescribes the use of sophisticated remote-control blast technology and small teams of exterminators with experience in flushing out vermin from their hidey-holes to be summarily dispatched before they have time to reproduce:

So, instead, forces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy: America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, air-strikes and small, potent Special Forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/31/AR2009083102912.html

I'm a little surprised he said nothing about tactical nukes or Depleted Uranium munitions, or at least "special weapons observation remote reconnaissance direct action system" (SWORDS) robots armed with M249 machine guns, such as those deployed in Iraq.

Completely true. The goddamn armchair warriors like Will--a guy who couldn't lift an M-16 if his life depended upon it--spouting off military stuff like so much candy.

I believe we need a law that, should one have the to nerve to opine on matters military, one will then be forcibly enlisted and join the front ranks--to better demonstrate one's military knowledge (and thus ends the references to "one").

I really detest these people.

Coburn was not pandering to a segment of the electorate, I think he truly believes that the gay agenda is the biggest threat to our civilization.

This is what worries me (although I do my best to avoid admitting it): that there are sufficient numbers out there who would gladly accept the deaths of those different from themselves. I hope that's not too harsh a thing to say. Nevertheless, it's a worry of mine.

A bit odd coming from a guy who is a member of The Family, the secretive right-wing Christian "C" Street group. (I recommend Jeff Sharlet's The Family.)

I'm not familiar with this. It sounds creepy--am sure it is--but still am unfamiliar with it. By "C" Street, do you mean it's a lobyying group?

As an aside, I always enjoyed the movie Oklahoma! and particularly the soundtrack. I guess that'd guarantee me a pretty quick death in some quarters. Such a shame.

these guys are (hope no one minds the Yoda talk). All of the quotes are notable for their stupidity, but I've isolated one

When running for the Senate in 2004, he (Coburn) ... warned that "the gay community has infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country, and they wield extreme power," and that the gay agenda is "the greatest threat to our freedom that we face today."

Now, I'm no stranger to jerks working the vote but, I mean, really, isn't there anyone in politics with any self-respect whatsoever?

Let me reveal my naivete here: I would not--simply would not--pander to a subset of the electorate in this manner. I'd say, frankly, "Look, you guys don't like this behavior? Too bad. Everyone has the right to live as they see fit when no one else is being harmed," and so on and so on.

Man. "Disgrace" doesn't even begin to explain it (although it's a good starting point).

Final observation: Salon, were it not for my medication, you guys would drive me--pile driver-like--to the depths of depression like nobody's business. This is not a thing to be proud of--it's simply a testament to big pharma (I guess).

Yeah, and a huge number of the blind are at Kos. They "trust" the president, and say that "fighting isn't his way," and that when he says he "expects" the public option to be in the bill, well, that's some damn strong language!

That's really an important point (and one that I make in vain, seemingly daily--well, at least that's how it seems to me). Why are we/them so timid? I'm pissed off daily and make no bones about it; so why aren't others? Why do they give in so easily? That's really the whole Van Jones story, don't you think?