Why do articles like this always seem to miss the most important tip?

Work from home if and when you can. Most of our driving is done to and from work. If you could telecommute, but your employer doesn't permit it, ask why.

First, Glenn, thanks for all you do.

Appropriate response for Obama should have been:

"I didn't call her a pig in lipstick, the Republicans did. But if that's what they want, then fine, she's a pig in lipstick. And what's further, she's an abstinence-only, book-banning, evolution-denying, right wing religious nut job. We've had one of those in the White House for the past 8 years. You telling me you want another?"

I'm *completely* serious. This is the turf the battle is being fought on. As you point out, taking the high road is the loser strategy. How many times do the Democrats need to learn this lesson? The Democrats may think the Republicans are stupid and ignorant (cause they are), but they're smarter at winning elections than the Democrats!

The press wants dirt! The electorate wants dirt! Give them dirt! He who piles it highest wins. It's really that simple.

Sling now. Govern later.

What we need right now is a "no sense of decency moment". We need someone to stand up to Paulson in public and dress him down. Firmly, yet without yelling, like a parent under control to child that's gotten too big for his britches.

This would, in a flash, not only would give us a well-thought out solution to the financial mess, but it would also usher Obama into the White House virtually uncontested.

The fatal mistake of the Democrats will be to treat Paulson with respect, and to listen to his input. He needs to be told to sit down and that he'll take we give him.

Glenn, I'm expecting something from you as soon as the bailout goes through. In my opinion, it's as you predicted (Dems rubber stamping whatever Bush asks for) because (1) real economists are against this plan, and (2) no real economists were even invited to the meetings. Why do businessmen think they are economists? Not to mention that their economic expertise put us into the position to start with when any moron could have told you that giving away money without collateral could never end well.

The host/interviewer (Chris Wallace in this case) should simply cut them off, saying, "Unless you admit to the facts, I'm not going to let you use anymore air time. It's either that, or I'm going to have to interject 'Liar!' every 3 seconds while you speak. Which do you choose?"

I'm certainly no Roosevelt expert, but did he do things that were extremely unpopular with the Republicans, like raise taxes on the richest Americans to 90%, and introduce Social Security? I seriously wonder if Obama has that kind of fortitude. So far he seems more like somebody who wants everyone to like him than somebody with a vision. And that's why I still wish Hillary were in his shoes today.

So, can the administration that follows Obama's prosecute him for not prosecuting Bush?

"Inside The Beltway" is the name our country's most exclusive club. Break the rules of the club, and you're out on your ass. As a journalist, just ask a tough question. As a politician, buck the party line. But break the laws of the nation? No big deal! Those mistakes are made and forgiven! As long as we stick together to keep power and fleece the nation, that's all that matters!

I pity the liberals who see their salvation in the Democrats and Obama. They've yet to see that they are just fans in stands cheering for the blue team, who, with their high salaries and pampered lives couldn't care less about the suckers who give up their votes for so very little in return...and who aren't, and never will be, in the club.

Glenn, have you considered the theory that the Democrats actually agree with the Republicans on what the bill should look like, and that they haven't actually compromised at all? Maybe it's just all an act for liberals, just like their blustering on privacy before voting for FISA?

Why is it assumed Democrats are going against their true wishes here? I think it's more likely that they are parading as an opposition party with progressive ideas for purely political reasons when in fact they are largely in agreement with Republicans on just about every issue.

Isn't it possible that Obama is simply playing the good cop here? If his DOJ does end up pursuing these issues vigorously, over Obama's "objections", then he wins twice: the crimes don't go unpunished and it doesn't look like he personally is going after the Republicans.

I'm not sure I believe that myself, but I can't quite write off Obama as an honest, moral player yet. It will be bitterly disappointing if it turns out he's showing his true and final hand at this point, when it's both wrong AND diametrically opposed to what he campaigned on.

The sad part is that the Democrats in Washington are filling the void left by the collapse of the Right. The Republicans are totally whacked out at present, but the Democrats are now largely indistinguishable from the Bush Republicans of just a year ago.

Glenn, when will you stop praising Obama for what he says he's going to do? I mean, it's a well-established pattern. He makes announcements like this to win points from people like you, and then doesn't follow through, or, more likely, nobody can even determine if he's followed through.

Let's have a prediction. After this list becomes public, will there ever be a revelation, or smoking gun, that comes out of it? Or will it all be scrubbed of every interesting visitor?

I know where my money is.