or at least ask for comment as part of your post? I mean, I understand the concept that this is Opinion and Commentary, but shouldn't he have a chance to respond?

Another great post. Fascinating to hear that minister/lawmaker's closet militancy. Also, when everyone (including former vp mr. cheney) makes the argument "let the states handle it" we forget what that would've meant in years past. At least, I forgot - until you reminded me.

Thanks again. Please ignore some of the idiots who comment here. Often, they're not worth responding to.

nothing better to do today?

Thanks Pam. It's great to see someone blog about this. And infinitely awesome that it's on Glenn's blog. (You have a new fan of yours as well.)

I'm of South Asian descent and the pressures are there as well. Not just hair on your head, but the hair everdamnwhere. It's exhausting to fight, and I understand why many women don't.

I'll add to the shameless idolatry and say that one week without you already feels like an eternity. (And I have a life!)

Your tweets today have been magnificent. Do you ever wake up and feel like writing a whole essay entitled "Why I Am Awesome." I do.

Seriously, I can't even read your update because a national geographic ad covers it and there is no "X" or close button. at minimum, can we at least see the TEXT that you write? I get that salon needs this moneygrab but, hving ads covering text with no option, even for the patient people, to see text, is annoying as hell.

Can you contac Keith or Richard for comment? Or Charlie? And did you notice that neither Keith Olbermann nor Rachel Maddow came close to mentioning their coworker Jim Cramer's very newsworthy appearance on The Daily Show? Do you think this is the first time the parent company has exerted their influence?

And Is it not truly bizarre that Charlie Rose, who considers himself a bonafide journalist, is somehow in the middle of this? Why? What could possibly be the motive? A close relationship with Jeffrey Immelt? What mandate - other than reporting on it - does he have to impose a truce between two corporations?

Journalists would do well to print this out and pin it to the side of their cubicles where they receive their daily press releases from the White House.

There's much to write about -- write! Too few blog posts too far between. Especially on a Monday morning -- I crave your posts with my coffee.

Just wanted to note that this interview inspired me to write four comments. (I'll stop after this.:)

Thank you for this awesome, revealing interveiw into the cynical, morally bankrupt and not particularly intelligent mind of Chuck Todd. Unlike what some commenters are saying, you were restrained -very restrained- in your debate with him and some of his ludicrous points. Please, please more broadcast.

Thanks again.

P.S. The whole journalist vs. pundit thing is moot. A normal listener laughs when Chuck claims at the end he's representing Obama's view. You were right to let Chuck make that plain.

His comments were pretty clear and unambiguous. While i agree with the commenter above that you should engage these media stars more often, not wait for them to contact you, I don't think that should preclude you from writing about them immediately. When he goes opining about the distractions of torture investigations, that's tantamount to an Op-Ed.

Not that you wouldn't have been immune otherwise, but I'm kind of glad you live in Brazil -- I'd worry about the insiders getting to you. The "Call me first, man." type people

I love Chuck's insidery "Wish you had called me, man" at the end. In his mind, ideally, you two would've hashed this out in private and then Glenn would have written something less negative. Sorry, Chuck.

Another formula of Chuck's: "I don't disagree with you." followed by: 1)Here is why I disagree with you. {political reality, come on man , it's not black and white, 30,000 feet etc. etc.)

From 30,000 feet we shouldn't kill people arbitrarily, but Chuck Todd lives in the "real world", c'mon Glenn.

Chuck Todd "knows the political realities, c'mon Glenn. Investigations are retributive and inevitably be polarizing!

Chuck Todd doesn't have strong feelings about this, he's is a beleaguered moderate among extremists on both the left on the right. He is the sensible one. He respects the rule of law. From 30,000 feet.

It's funny to me how you bring up the Anti Defamation League's concerns about Cohen's old movie "Borat" while completely ignoring how offensive that movie might be considered to people from Kazakhstan or, say, to Muslims generally? Or people from countries that end in "stan".

If people don't get the joke, isn't it more likely that the bigoted view that Muslims are a bunch of anti-woman, anti-Jewish zealots gets reinforced? After all, hasn't anti-Muslim bigotry been mainstreamed in the United States now? If you're gonna examine the potential repercussions of a movie like Borat, maybe include the most obvious victims -- the people Borat claims to represent. You certainly don't hestiate to examine how Bruno represents homosexuals.

Must be read to be believed. Two tenacious reporters writing love letters ...one to Sheila Bair, the other to Nora Ephron. You may not care about the Ephron one (though it's preeningly ass-kissy)but the Lizza one ought to bring back fond memories.

I had the misfortune of listening to Eli Lake at length here: http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/19716?in=22:56&out=27:22.

I would very much like to hear what you think of his argument against (you and others) singling out Bush admin officials as war criminals rather than seeing torture as an American problem and a World problem? (that's only part of the discussion)

What about him saying the CIA's entire reason for being is to operate outside international law?

What did you think of this discussion?