Hey, instead of feeling dumped on, I think you should be stoked that Krugman is reading your column! Dude, you've hit the big time!

Of course it is Reagan's fault, overall. "Greed is good". Wealth is virtue. Wealth trickles down from the Rich to the Poor. Regulation is bad for business. Government is the problem.

That's all thanks to Reagan, no doubt. It is certainly the foundation for the present disaster we are hoping to climb out of.

However, since Reagan set the stage, we've seen that sensible management by the Chief Executive can still move America forward. We know it can be done. But, as a country, we decided it was more important to stick our noses into the private affairs of our citizens, and to engage in wars of domestic culture and international unilateralism. This is Brooks' point, and it isn't necessarily a contradiction of yours.

You're talking about different things, is all. Just nice to see Brooks paying attention to the old values of conservatism that were jettisoned in favor of jingoism and shallow service of immediate wealth.

And you're getting noticed! What's not to like?

Next up, the essay condemning Obama for eschewing LBJ-style tactics for pressuring Democrats to vote for a Public Option on healthcare.

"Oh, for the old days, when presidents were tough and knew how to twist arms and use backroom deals to get the agreements the country needed!"

If fellating Spector get his vote on Employee Free Choice and a moves a Senate bill with a Public Option past the filibuster, then, fellate away, by all means. I'm still sending money to Sestak, but I understand that bills are passed by current Senators, not potential replacements.

One thing (maybe the only thing) I like about Republicants is that they don't have as many whining armchair quarterbacks like Sirota on their side.

This constant state of vapours is getting really tiresome.

Questions of consensuality are meaningless.

Any parent who has sex with their child, even if that child somehow makes a concerted effort at seduction, has done a terrible thing.

Terrible.

Sometimes, otherwise good people do terrible things because they are incapacitated by substance abuse, I suppose. Madness can generate awful acts.

But a parent who has a sexual relationship with their child is a monster.

I don't know why anyone would even want to debate this.

I think the military support of the Karzai Administration in Afghanistan is different from Iraq.

First, there is a threat to the United States (and to our allies India and Pakistan as well). We have been attacked from the region (several times, if you include the Cole, and our African embassies), and could well assume that further attacks would be planned and attempted if we left certain extremists to themselves.

Second, unlike Iraq, there is considerable desire in Afghanistan for orderly government free of extremists. Speaking to soldiers who have served in both theatres, they have universally expressed to me a desire to continue the fight in Afghanistan, where the locals support them and are willing to fight alongside U.S. troops, and Iraq, where the hatred was palpable and Iraqi troops unreliable, to put it mildly.

Third, I believe the Obama Administration is deeply desirous to resolve the situation and get our troops out of a combat role in Afghanistan. They do not regard this a an employment program for their Military Industrial friends. While I am sure this notion is unpopular on this forum, I still believe it.

I also do not believe the Obama Administration will continue an Afghanistan occupation if it becomes obvious that there is no hope of resolving the conflict. These decisions may well be made in the next couple of months, if the Karzai Administration insists it has a victory strong enough to avoid a runoff, even in the face of widespread cheating. We could see a change happening very quickly in that case.

Obama has had 7 months in Afghanistan. I would like to give him at least a year, and listen to what he says we can accomplish, and what obstacles we face before I rush to judgement.

It's not like Obama let the situation fester for 7 years, which turned it into a much more difficult problem.

LW, thank you for being concerned about your friend.

Cary, thank you for a beautiful response.

Not a good effort Anne.

Better stick to New Age pabulum.

I don't want my kids to be perfect saints. But I do want them to wait until they're no longer children to start experimenting with substances.

I made it through High School chemical-free, although I was a major geek. Experiments after that had mixed results. But I knew who I was without the reality modification.

I've seen a lot of others who started early, and who made various chemical crutches part of their personalities crash and burn because they couldn't say "No" when they had to.

Kids need to learn how to deal with the world sober. After that, they'll have the reserves necessary so most of them will be able to make their way through the pitfalls of adult mental manipulation.

That's just some darn good soap. The peppermint variety smells good enough to drink, and the essential oils make your skin feel all tingly.

I've washed a lot of my increasingly thin hair with the Good Doctor.

There is a great deal we can do to compensate for our current greenhousing of the planet.

The scheme to make certain areas (especially in the tropics) more reflective, and therefore, less warm, is quite possible.

Of course, not everything would become white, but certain areas could become solar reflectors and make up for some of our carbon.

The solution to the greenhouse problem will not be made up of one or two things. We will have to do many things in concert to manage the problem, both short and long term.