I laughed out loud when I read this. This women says that most women can't write about sex? Well, it makes sense I guess,(at least in terms of balance), as so many men can't talk about sex. I guess we'll all have to continue drifting aimlessly in a fog of ignorance, guided only be a self-selected few.

C'mon, she's really a guy, right?

Dear Broadsheet,

Please, please, PLEASE-- for the love of whatever god(desses)you worship-- never let up on this neo-fascist clown.

I'm not asking this out of any sense of moral outrage, or liberal sensibilities, or even a need for civilty in public discourse. Rather, there is a compelling need for the sort of squirmy entertainment that's only possible when O'Reilly is called out, or confronted by the truth.

What we have here is a thin-skinned, paranoid narcissist with a side of megalomania. The sort of reasonable, calm yet determined effort demonstrated by Ms. Walsh is the best possible way to deal with him.

Dreams are what drives us in our quest for justice; mine is having Al Franken sitting in O'Reilly's guest chair.

Naturally. A central result of the neocon philosophy of governance is ongoing warfare, preceeded by a ginned-up "crisis" to keep the populace distracted. In this way, the actual process of governing, (and the players involved), never undergo the ongoing scrutiny required for a functioning democracy.

In the case of Iran, we have those "foreign entanglements" referenced by George Washington, and beloved by the war hawks. The neocons have allies of convenience in the fundamental biblicalists. Among their core tenets is the belief that a "Second Coming", (the return of Jesus to Earth), is contingent upon certain events occuring in the Middle East. Most worrisome among these is the existence of a sovereign Israel, and the rebuilding of the ancient Jewish temple in Jerusalem. This is perfect for the neocons, as it combines war with a favored religion in pursuit of their foreign policy objectives.

Neocon foreign policy, simply, is the projection of American power and corporate influence by any means necessary. Attacking Iran meshes with a desire to use Israel as a politically popular surrogate. This would keep intact the neocon alliance with the biblicalists, and at the same time, blunt efforts by the Obama Administration to engage in a dialogue with Iran. It's a continuation of the Straussian agenda followed by Feith, Wolfowitz, Kristol, et al. Their current joy derives from the prospect of a destabilized Iran, one that would worry its neighbors and America for years to come.

Dear Broadsheet,

Wow. Such outrage. Such offensive speech. Such scandal.

Covering the entire shock range from ho to hum, one can only guess that some of Governor Palin's minions were busy brewing up this latest tempest in a teacup. A casual perusal of similar comments from other comics, especially during the 2008 campaign, shows that Letterman's jokes were sophmoric and puerile-- and hardly on a level with some of the more caustic remarks regarding Palin and her rambunctous offspring. And that doesn't include some truly vile stuff from political memes.

Letterman has apologized, twice. The last I checked, it is well within the job description of a comic to be silly, rude, and offensive some of the time. The Republic stands, our flag still waves, Letterman's hairpiece still looks like a drowned rat.

The Tea-Baggers will stop at nothing to defend the honor of their besmirched heroine. Woe betide those foolish enough to cross that threshold.

Good points throughout, though what Krauthammer, McCain, et al omit is at least as telling as what they discuss.

Harken back, if you will, to those dark days immediately after the September 11th attacks. Everyone-- including the Iranians-- were willing to help us. No friends of the Taliban, Iran was willing to give quiet assistance, partially on the assumption that such a move could placate an angry America.

They needn't have bothered. George Bush was obsessed with the need for revenge, which dovetailed nicely with the neocon desire to re-invade and occupy Iraq. The cherry-picking of intelligence, (while simultaneously ignoring inconvenient truths), set the tone and tenor of American intentions. Iran saw this, and reacted by preparing for war.

Also not discussed, (or more accurately, mis-characterized), is the implied threat of an Iran ready to use nuclear weapons. Lost in the alarm and outrage is a simple fact: every country has the right to defend itself, and by any means necessary. The Iranians live with the day-to-day reality of a nuclear-armed Israel. Nary a word of acknowledgement ever crosses the lips of these savants, though Israel has had dozens of "suitcase" bombs since before the 1973 war.

An aside: why do the neocons think Henry Kissinger was in such a frenzy to broker a cease-fire? Because he had a date at Club 54? No; it was due to the distinct possibility the Israelis would employ nukes if their tactical situation continued to erode.

The neocons have found a niche, along side the Wobblies, Whigs, and Madame Chiang-Kai Shek. There, they'll always have a fanatic audience willing to listen to the same discredited arguments. The danger is a Wahington establishment willing to cede them credibility.