The boos and hisses at Clinton's cancellation were some kind of kneejerk that strikes me as odd for a group presumably interested in getting the truth. Why not first ask what's going on? I mean, did anyone stay to hear what her stand-in had to say? I would be interested in hearing about that.

Hillary Clinton is likely, the numbers say, to be our next president. She is an important, very busy person. I choose to presume that she wouldn't be cavalier with any group interested in her campaign without a good reason. It's perfectly fair to ask what happened, and to press if there is B.S. in the answer. And then to squawk loudly if that doesn't get a decent response. Do all that and you will have my attention.

We're never going to reach a sensible policy on Iraq without beginning with a few extremely important awarenesses:

1. WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE THERE. Every other discussion about Iraq must be based on that clear, undeniable fact. Some may say we have the right because we were invited by the government we installed. But a majority of the parliament has already signed a petition for us to leave, and the only reason it hasn't been voted on is that the parliament, for various reasons is dysfunctional. Is that our problem? Read on.

2. ANY DUTY WE HAD TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT HAS BEEN EXHAUSTED. They've had their chance to make best use of us and our treasure, and instead they are caught up in a civil war. Well, they have a right to that, just as we did. But shouldn't we impose peace? Read on.

3. OUR MILITARY IS BEING USED FOR ETHNIC CLEANSING. We are putatively trying to work with both sides in the civil war, but in reality we are supporting the Shiite government, which is engaging in ethnic cleansing on a broad basis. It's like us being on the side of Milosovic in Yugoslavia.

4. THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST IS HOSTILE TO HAVING U.S. TROOPS STATIONED THERE. And by doing so, we look like exactly the Crusaders the Al Qaeda leaders say we are, thus spreading unrest, sympathy for Al Qaeda, and over time a potentially huge irregular army, against us, but also against democracy.

Got all that? Now, what were you saying about how we should proceed in Iraq?

Capitalism is just a name

For a set of rules -- that is, a game.

The game, like all such, has no soul,

But players might be saint or troll.

It's played by many seeking wealth,

And some do so in evil stealth.

The likes of them taught us we must

Devise new rules, like antitrust.

That's because we are not fools;

We know the game needs Golden Rules.

Only the Rasmussen poll you cite touches on actual reasons why people are upset with Congress. We need a poll that just asks them to say why.

Better polls will help Democrats, and for that matter Republicans, to vote the way people want them to vote. Democrats remain the political dunces of the Beltway, they really do need all the help they can get.

The involvement of Israel in beating back a requirement for Congressional approval for an attack on Iran (arguably necessary regardless of such legislation) is nothing new. History will show that the right-wing Israeli government played a material role in encouraging Bush to start the Iraq war, and in maintaining an aggressive, militaristic approach to the Iraq situation ever since.

The policies of that government are much like Bush's -- strongly antagonistic to fair and reasonable steps to peace, strongly geared to acquisition of more power (and territory) in the region. Their world view is entirely congruent with that of the neocons. When you think of Prime Minister Olmert, think of Dick Cheney with an Israeli passport.

Yet liberals in this country are terrified of saying anything bad about Israel or its strong lobby in our Congress for fear of being labelled anti-Semitic.

It's not anti-Semitic to oppose right-wing governments wherever they are in the world. American liberals loved the Israel of the Labor Party, and still support that party's goals in Israel. Fifty years ago Israel's policies were the soul of sweet reason, and Foreign Minister Abba Eban was an avuncular figure well-known and widely loved by Americans. Forty years ago the Six-Day War, which involved a pre-emptive strike against four Arab armies lined up against them, was celebrated as a triumph here. Even after Likud took power, progress was made, and a plan for permanent peace was widely supported in the world. Then things got darker.

We cannot tolerate the meddling of Israel's war-mongering, neocon lobby in our Congress. Democrats, always short on spine, need to find some to keep that lobby at bay.

Television news was changed forever when the Supreme Court decided that it was OK for Hooters to hire babes as waiters and exclude men and sweat hogs. It was for a "legitimate business purpose." By that time, the corporations that own the news divisions of TV news had made the even more cataclysmic decision to treat those divisions as entertainment profit centers instead of serious, and costly, journalism. That meant, among other things, no commitment to truth when the political winds shifted, and from that lapse followed increasing tolerance for nonsense that charmed a following of sub-100-IQ folks (after all, they're half the population).

So now we have thousands of beautiful babblers reading news on national and local TV, and supplying endless filler chat in between brief periods of actually supplying information to viewers.

How ironic it is that I can pay a little money and get the Naked News, where the babes strip to the buff for you -- and actually pass along the news. But for their commitment to mindless gab it considers entertaining, the mainstream TV media could be reaping huge profits by stealing that market.