I'm always amazed at the weird level of vitriol directed at Farhad Manjoo on these comment boards

Perhaps the reason Manjoo engenders so much vitriol is because he is such a bad journalist. His Machinist blog isn't as bad as his political reporting was before they reassigned him, but this piece is really weak.

He totally lost all credibility discussing rigged elections when he rejected well-supported claims that the vote count in Ohio was questionable in the 2004 presidential election. Not only that, he spent far too many words of this posting discussing how attractive these two plain "reporters" are.

He should have lost his job several years ago. He just isn't very good at it. It shouldn't surprise anyone that his writing constantly spurs people to complain about its quality.

I think they are knowingly and willfully lying. I think they know what the truth is, but they hope that if they lie enough they will be able to convince a few people to swallow their lies.

breschau clearly demonstrated how to get an Editor's Choice star from Manjoo: Kiss up to him.

Yes, the point was that the "poll" was gimmicked. We noticed that. But we also noticed how Manjoo called two very plain looking "reporters" hot. We felt that his extended fawning over their very run-of-the-mill looks was an apt point to reflect upon, since this article was so pointless.

But I bet you are way proud of your star!

The definition of "hot" is very different for "reporters,"

or

These are very bad pictures.

The guy just looks scruffy. With that kind of beard and those glasses, all you can see is a beard and glasses. The woman is not unattractive in the picture, but she is far short of "hot."

I guess there is another possibility: DC "reporters" are an unattractive bunch, and these two are just the best of slim pickings. But that is not how they are described.

Do you really think Michael Vick will do hard time? No matter where he is incarcerated, he will still be a famous millionaire athlete. Unless he ends up in some all-white Aryan Nation prison, he will be the king of the cell block.

Anyone who has the money can legally own a car. Cars kill orders of magnitude more people than dogs ever do. A poorly operated car can kill several people at one time. Almost all traffic fatalities are caused by improper operation.

Anyone who has sex can create a new person. Humans kill orders of magnitude more people than dogs ever do. A poorly raised person can cause, either directly or indirectly, many many deaths.

We just accept the deaths and injuries caused by cars and other people. We try to legislate in such a way to minimize the damage. But we accept the fact that there will be a certain level of mortality that results from cars and sex.

Yes, "pit bulls" are more potentially dangerous than almost all other dogs. There are numerous reasons for this. Dogs with responsible owners are much less likely to attack other dogs or humans.

My personal experience with the breeds of dogs known as pit bulls has been extremely positive. They are generally sweet ,kind, fun, happy dogs. But I will never own one. I have no desire to take on the responsibility of being in control of such a powerful animal.

I drive a car because it would be very difficult to exist in modern culture without one. Not impossible, but more difficult than I want to deal with.

I will never father a child. I don't want the responsibility. I am far too selfish. I don't want to spend the money child-rearing requires.

We are never going to legislate perfect safety. It may be necessary to highly regulate pet ownership. But what is important is to keep this all in perspective. Singling out a certain type of dog, without addressing the issues behind the perceived benefit is unfair and short-sighted. It also isnever going to work.

If he is prosecuted before the end of Bush's term, he will just be pardoned. If he is not prosecuted before the end of Bush's term, he may take advantage of the innate ineptitude of Democrats, get another Republican elected president, and just be pardoned.

If I could believe that one of the Democrats would win no matter what, I would say "wait." Otherwise, it may be necessary to go ahead and start now and take our chances.

I think it is crucial to the future of the US as a democracy to put this man in jail for a long time.

What to do, what to do.

The way I understood it, Giuliani was saying that he had spent as much time at Ground Zero as the cleanup workers in order to refute their claims that breathing the crap in the air had made them sick. Yes, he was grabbing a chunk of political capital as well. But mostly he was saying that he was there as much as they were, and he didn't get sick, so they have nothing to complain about.

This is about something much more vile than some cynical grab for the spotlight. This is about avoiding responsibility for telling lies that led innocent people to their deaths. This is about telling more lies to cover previous lies.

Talking about the time he spent with the Yankees, or talking about his other qualities, or talking about the amount of time other politicians spent at Ground Zero is actually hiding the crime. I don't think that's how we want to respond to this lie.