Yes, we're in the middle of a war, so continuity at the DoD makes sense. But by the same argument ... we're in the middle of an economic crisis, so does that mean Obama should keep Bush's people at the Treasury Department? And hard times + war = crime, so should Obama retain Bush's Attorney General? Our foreign relations are in the toilet; should Obama thus leave the State Department alone?

Etc. Of course there are crises going on. There are always crises going on. The idea that any crisis justifies keeping the top people who are largely responsible for the crises strikes me as absurd.

Perhaps Obama should just say to Bush, "You know, George, things are really a mess right now and what America needs is continuity. Tell you what, why don't you just stay on as President for a while, and I'll kind of hang out and watch you to figure out how the job is done." Um, no, I don't think so.

The only rational choice for SecDef, IMNSGDHO. Solid Democratic credentials, a deep understanding of both the military and the international situation in which it operates, and nobody can claim he doesn't have the credentials. I was really disappointed in the way Obama threw Clark under the bus after Clark said something about McCain which was both patently true and beneficial to Obama; hopefully Obama will get over it and choose Clark to succeed Gates in the near future. But, politics being what they are, I'm not holding my breath.

The misogyny happened when McCain chose Palin as his running mate for the sole and obvious reason that she is female and considered by many to be attractive. Everything else ... pretty much follows from that.

"Moose face" is pretty much a generic insult, not sexist -- it's childish, I agree, but it also follows clearly from the campaign's bragging about her alleged ability to field dress a moose. "Tits and ass" is certainly sexist, but I don't think it's sexist at all to point out that the Republican Party chose to use Palin as T&A, and that apparently they're still doing it. Again, if you want to see where the misogyny (in this particular case) is coming from, the Democrats are the wrong place to look.

Have you ever read any of Lewis' religious writings? There really is such a thing as C of E fundamentalism, and he exemplified it.

Imagining how one tiresome blowhard would describe another.

Okay, yeah, the idea of buying a robot to have sex with creeps me out. You know what? So does the idea of buying a robot to act as a companion for my aged grandmother. Both involve simulating a real human being with something that is very clearly not human, and caregiving is no less intimate than sex.

She's operating the system she has. In the US, anyone convicted of such an attack would be sent to prison for a very long time, perhaps for life, and we consider that the best choice. But it doesn't sound like Iranian law has that option in this case. So what is she supposed to do, say "Oh, okay, judge, I'll just take the cash?" Look, I think eye-for-an-eye is pretty barbaric too, but there is no amount of money that's enough punishment for an act like this.

I have never heard anyone, male or female, use the word "tipsy" to describe their own or anyone else's state of intoxication. Seriously, who the hell did they survey who talks that way?

... we just need to stop spending money fighting wars for oil and propping up oil-rich dictators.

If you accept that we need an army, then you accept that we need companies to build the equipment that army uses. And a lot of that equipment is going to be designed to kill people, because, you know, that's pretty much what armies do. Blaming a company that makes artillery shells for a fucked-up foreign policy that sees war as a first resort is like blaming a car company for drunk drivers. Whirlpool and Presto didn't kill anyone in Vietnam; the US government did.

It seems impossible for anyone to write about anything having to do with social contact in the modern world without throwing in something to the effect of, "Oh, people have e-mail and social networking sites, but that's no substitute for the real thing!" This cavalier dismissal gets really old. Online communication can be a lifesaver (sometimes literally; I know of at least one person who was talked out of suicide by online friends when the people who were physically near him didn't give a damn) for people who are isolated due to geography, physical condition, or just not having anyone in their physical presence they like very much. And even for those who do have a good in-person social network, e-mail and social networking sites are often valuable parts of their social lives.

The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."

Until you figure this out, you have nothing useful to contribute to the discussion.

I've looked in my dictionary, and I can't seem to find the part where "plenty" is defined as "a screeching minority of right-wing fanatics." Could you cite your source for that usage, please?

... I say to Cohen, kick that blogger's ass!

I am a degreed biostatistician. Please explain your argument in detail; I guarantee you I'll understand it (if, that is, it makes any sense at all.) If you can't or won't do this, what you're doing sounds an awful lot like an only slightly more sophisticated version of "93.7% of statistics are made up on the spot, everyone knows that!"

You win. Have some internets!

Thanks. :) But just to make it clear, I'm not Dick Dworkin ... and, to put it bluntly, given how often he lives up to his given (nick)name, I really don't want to be confused with him.