I think it's true the neocons are distinguished by almost unbelievable corruption, stupidity, incompetence, and arrogance. But their policy ideas, when you boil them down to their essentials, are not that distinctive. The pro-Iraq war coalition was NOT just neocons, or even just Republicans. Gore and Kerry and lots of top Democrats, plus their liberal mouthpieces in the media (including the New Yorker and the New York Times), they were all howling for war. Maybe that's due to AIPAC and the military-industrial complex, but it's misleading to imply that Wolfowitz and his cronies alone are to blame.

Frankly I think having idiots like Wolfowitz in charge of the Department of Defense and World Bank is a step up from someone who knows what they're doing. These are organizations that do a lot of evil. Better to have them drown in their own mismanagement and infighting. The only pity is that they do it with taxpayer money.

The US needs socialized medicine now. Who really thinks that the industry looking after people's health should be run for profit, except the insurance companies, pharmaceuticals, and doctors who rake in the $$? While I'm sure some drugs for mental disorders help some people, in today's greedy, immoral corporate culture, there's simply too much incentive to do sloppy research, market them to people who don't need them, and hand them out to patients on little better than a trial-and-error basis. We just don't know enough about mental disorder, its causes and the ways of controlling it. Of course, in this "instant solution" culture, we're ready to believe that just popping a few pills will solve all your problems. That's probably rarely the case in reality.

GlennA, actually Giuliani is right: we were attacking Iraq before 2003: Clinton bombed Iraq several times, we controlled their air space, funded exile groups and Kurds who were trying to overthrow Saddam, used the UN to impose harsh economic embargoes etc. The Iraq War has really been going on for about 16 years. Giuliani is probably also right that bin Laden did not care much about Iraq. Of course he's wrong to imply that other US policies in the Middle East didn't get bin Laden stirred up. Basically what we have here is two uninformed Republican idiots trading barbs with each other when neither one has the least clue about anything. Pretty typical stuff.

You have to respect Libertarians for their stance on civil rights, but that's about the only thing they understand. Their views on how modern economies work are quite simply the stuff of pure fantasy.

Anyway, great article, very funny! As the Ron Paul-Giuliani exchange proves, there is no point in taking these guys seriously; we might as well have some fun with their moronic blatherings.

Kamiya, I'm not always a fan of yours, but that was a really well-written, thoughtful and accurate article. Couldn't argue with a word of it, and as someone who likes to nitpick, that drives me crazy! Keep up this high-quality analysis and you may convert me into a fan.

It's worth noting that Plato and Aristotle wrote during the time of Athens' political decline. Thucydides and the tragedians of the previous century probably reflect the spirit of democracy better.

Plato was ferociously anti-democratic, and in that respect I see how the neocons could love him. But BUSH as philosopher-king? I'm sorry that's just too rich. Whether it's utopian or not, Plato expected his republic's leaders to be rigorously trained in virtue, wisdom, dialectic, mathematics, philosophy. Bush could barely hack getting a business degree at a school where everyone knew his dad was a US Senator.

Plato also inveighed against moral degeneration, love of wealth, pride, ambition - and wanted to abolish private property and the family. Of course he was building castles in the sky to give us an idea of justice and the Good, but he couldn't possibly approve of Cheney and co.

Hermione dies.

My god you can tell the people complaining about this article are the same ones who think children's books are good reading. People, JK Rowling is already a millionaire, hell probably a billionaire. Her publishers too. If you were intrepid enough you could probably get her book for FREE at the library! GASP! In a socialist society they probably wouldn't even charge you for books at all! Because they're, like, cultural and stuff. So get over it. If I didn't think Harry Potter was for thumbsuckers I would download it a million times and distribute it for free.

And if you think those lines in the article are spoilers, you have regressed to the point of complete and utter infant drooling.

Remember when the underground Amazons stole Spock's brain? They couldn't understand why Kirk kept going on about it!

I believe Roald Dahl wrote a brain in a jar story, maybe one of the earliest manifestations of this theme?

But what's funny about that? The truth is Obama and his wide-eyed Obamanauts are much easier to mock. Do you find nothing ridiculous in a campaign that talks about "hope" and "change" while obviously intending to change nothing, then berating the Republicans for not sticking to the issues? What issues does "hope" translate into exactly? *crickets chirping*