Well, let's see, could it be an unacceptable questioning of authority? If you have a certain viewpoint, that is more important than the war itself.

"Unacceptable" according to whom? To the 28%ters? Who gives a ****?

Exactly, the problem is that the percentage is much higher for the press.

last week, the general's role was political.

Glenn, I am puzzled by the need to make this proposal so public. Acceptance of the contributions implies support. This has always worked. So why announce this policy in a campaign wherre it could cause unwanted attention?

...indirectly. When people see tasering at public functions involving speaking, they will be less inclined to speak next time.

"I think it's better that they played it safe and arrested her."

You don't think questioning her and inspecting the gadget might have been enough? Why is "arresting" the automatic response to something unusual that might possibly be of concern? Enough of this police state stuff.

The police received a 'complaint' from a counter person and had to respond. They did. Fine. They did not have to arrest anyone. I am not accusing anyone of intentionally creating the environment of a police state. I think we have an "accidental police state" growing out of over reaction to 9/11. The harmful effects of this are obvious.

"But I am almost in the position that I want another terrorist attact to happen on US soil. And then we can read 500 letters from Salon readers asking why no one did anything, and why it was allowed to happen. And 500 letters about how our government has failed us by not keeping us safe."

Please seek help before you do something you will regret.

Taking someone somewhere for questioning need not be followed by arrest. These are two different things. Charging with a crime is yet another step. They have gone two steps beyond reasonable.

...is this:

The original intention of our representative branch was that congressman should represent the interests of people in their districts, and senators, the interests of the state as a whole. Universal large corporate contributions are not consistent with this, and as a result only a few in either house really represent the people. If anyone is interested in a really difficult but very practical project, this is it. Any ideas?

Nobody said he was "good". And no one said Jews are bad. Could you justify what you are saying? Are you trying top help start a war?

...there is no reason to go non-linear and overstate his significance. Do not try to start a war.

With the possible exception of the first link (rifles from Iran to Iraq), the stories are mostly about speculation. You are proving Cons. Slayer's point for him.

Yes, there is certainly evidence that arms have been smuggled from Iran to Iraq. From where not? But the EFP stuff is just more speculation. They can be made in Iraq, and it seems unlikely that Iran would sell them to Sunnis.

I have not seen a convincing explanation of why the BPs do this. Anyone care to explain?

"Can someone please explain to me why the press so readily humiliated Dukakis for donning military drag as a sign of fatal weakness, and then celebrated Bush's masculinity and strength doing more-or-less the same thing on that aircraft carrier."

Their justification is that Bush looked better doing it than Dukakis. The reasons are complicated, but the rightward surge of the press played a big role.

Dyson. I think the most notable comment here is that Feynman is missed. He understood so much and could put it all to practical use. And he had a sense of humor!

"I don't use "bad logic," any more than Bohr's atom still describes how electrons function."

But it never did.

What seems to stand out here is that WinSmith is even less astute than David Brooks.

to imply that radio frequency transmissions from a cell phone make your ear hot without providing a reference. Or could it be that there is no such reference because it does not happen?

"She provided a citation in the Fresh Air podcast." On ear warming by cell phones? I just listened to that and I did not anything about ear warming. I did hear an anecdotal reference to warming the head and brain as an indication that other damage is possible. But no citation. By the way, I agree with the doctor entirely: we might have a real problem with cell phones. That is why I am looking for any good research on the subject. But let's not confuse the issue with speculation.

Some environmentalists are very emotional, therefore pay no attention to the science?

Why do we claim unlimited right to spy on foreigners? We do not like it when people spy on us. Is it possible we could do a better job of learning about terrorists if we respected others enough so that they might cooperate with us? Surely the US government could start by showing that it respects its own citizens.

Glenn, you have a point that "I spy on mine" is worse, but I think you are underestimating the problem nonetheless.

"Before 9/11, the most likely outcome for a hijacking was that most people would walk out alive. So when the hijackers took over the planes, most people might have been "if you shut up you might survive" mode."

The unexpected trip to Cuba was long a thing of the past. The possibility of using a plane as a bomb was well known from failed plots, and so leaving the cockpit accessible was one of the stupidest security blunders of all time. Maybe telling people they had a better chance by attacking the hijackers was too extreme, but the wisdom of the 70s should have been known to be false.

You are right. That has looked like the most likely path for at least two years. This is why it is so important for the administration to keep people thinking like shooter, and why so many are paid to write like Lowry.