> And so back to you; the corollaries with the left's

> favoritism for Cuba and Castro are, what, exactly?

Favoritism? What about Vietnam? They are still communist and actually bore arms against the US and held POWs for years. How about China? They're still communist and have a huge standing army and nukes as well. These could be more plausibly spun as a threat than Cuba at any time. Those missiles left in 1963, remember?

Cuba is a bugaboo, a Commies-under-the-bed scarecrow, mostly because US business interests got burned with Batista and because of the Cuban refugees' agitation in Florida. There's also the fact that Castro has violated the Monroe Doctrine for fifty years, and we don't like that kind of behavior.

But, really, it's ridiculous that we couldn't co-opt Castro's country right out from under him. Only ninety miles away? Normalized relations would have flooded the country with tourist dollars and made Castro irrelevant. I mean, it's the same concept as "openness" with China, and you see how that's gone. Many of the same accusations could be leveled at China as at Cuba, in terms of oppressing opposition, monekying with elections, human rights, etc, etc. But there's not a peep against China out of any of the usual suspects who also try to make us believe that Cuba is ZOMGWTFBBQ Communist and a threat to our life and limb.

And I love the fact that you bring up the Chavez red herring in your grandfather post. That always makes me laugh. Chavez is a populist grandstander, a corrupt stuffed shirt, and he enjoys tweaking the nose of people like you. I don't support him or his policies one iota, but for some reason you and your type always like to include him in with your typical rants against the "lieberals". Give it a rest, already.

But, Christ on a cracker, I'd rather buy oil from Chavez or ethanol from Brazil a hundred times more than oil from the Saudis, who jerk the present administration like puppets and still support Wahhabinism. Since your type loooooves to jump around and rant about 9/11, what about those Saudi nationals who hijacked those planes? Looks like we should have invaded Saudi Arabia instead of Iraq--we could have gotten just as much oil, and actually gone after the real "turrists" instead of shadows in the rain.

And, word to the wise: the phrase "George W. Bush, a twice-elected constitutional leader of the most free and wealthy democracy in world history" is so trollerific, especially on Salon, that it makes it glaringly obvious that you're living under a bridge. I give you 3.5 out of 10.

Oh, no, the US is probably the best country for a smartass like me. The worst I'd get is probably an all-expenses paid trip to the most exclusive resort in Cuba.

But all snarking aside, this isn't an "evil empire", just a decent country that got hijacked by opportunists who learned to play fear like a pipe organ.

I think it was 1992 when James Carville ran Bill Clinton's campaign on the adage that "It's hard for your opponent to say bad things about you when your fist is in his mouth."

It's pretty obvious if you hear Meghan speak that her blog and any content therein has been created, collected and collated by skilled professionals. And, really, no campaign manager in their right mind would let any candiate offspring near an unfitered web connection.

So none of these intrepid reporters thought to bring along a lapel camera or something palm-sized? Court jesters, that's what they are. I think back to the BBC interview with John Bolton that Glenn posted this weekend and wonder what we've done to deserve our press corps.

I'd say if you threw out most of Christiansen's wooden acting and a bunch of footage of Ewan McGregor riding around on a giant lizard and simply cut to Chewbacca and a posse of Wookiees ripping through the scenery with loud, inarticulate snarling, you'd have done the Star Wars franchise a signal service. Maybe this would work for Friday Night Lights, too.

People really need to go out and rent "Alone in the Dark" if they think that Uwe Boll is any sort of filmmaker to be making commentary on Hollywood and the crap it makes.

That it takes a "maverick" representative to actually call bullshiat on the administration's criminal activities. Yes, yes, political expediency, I know. I'm immature enough to want to see Bush et al. in a perp-walk on all major news channels.

Remember the guy in footed pajamas who could be killed with a glass of water? C'mon, folks, Shamalayan is a hack, a one-trick pony. The reason critics tend to get shrill and snarky while reviewing his movies is that they can't understand why he still gets to make them, and the pent-up frustration has to go somewhere.

It's like the Zombie Legislation that Wouldn't Die. Where's a shotgun when we need it?

Anyone know what the judicial system thinks about this legislation tying their hands? Could a circuit judge kick this upstairs so the Supremes have a say in this? I know Scalia thinks anything's appropriate when fighting turrists, but will the rest of the court agree to such a gag-order on their input?

> If a full (and I mean FULL- not the usual 'we're not sure

> about this or that so we'll just ignore it') energy

> accounting were made, it is more than likely a tree would

> win out as the most efficient means of collecting and

> storing the energy of the sun.

LOL. Photosynthesis captures 5-10% of the sun's area flux. Photovoltaics are getting close to 50%. Reforestation is a great idea, not the least because it sequesters carbon efficiently, but don't talk about using a drill when you want to row a boat. When I can plug my laptop into a tree and post on Salon, then we'll talk.