send him email! There's a page on the Times site: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/thomaslfriedman/index.html?inline=nyt-per

It takes a few seconds. If nothing else, knowing that there are thousands of people who despise him as a conspirator in US war crimes might give Mr. Friedman pause when he's wondering around in public.

Friedman means Man of Peace in German, by the way.

"But universal health coverage will not be a huge boon to doctors financially. They will probably find that they have less paperwork, but less money also. ."

Actually, doctors in Canada seem to have average salaries within 10% of US doctors for the most part, as well as much shorter hours and less stress.

http://payscale.com has some good comparisons. Note that the "average" is also very misleading - there are a small number of superstar or supergreedy doctors in the US who take home millions every year and push up the average. You'd be lucky to take home $80K as a rural GP in the US.

I've known doctors in Canada, and they had very good lives, and deservedly so. Don't try to snow us by claiming doctors would be poor if we prevented the insurance companies from stealing a third of our health dollars off the top.

...at least they're doing something.

As for you misguided people who believe that Pelosi is doing something to stop the war, I ask you in all seriousness what that something could possibly be? To what slightest extent has she opposed the Bush regime?

As Republicans continue to flout the law, what legal powers can Democrats summon?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-linda-sanchez/why-karl-rove-should-go-t_b_113417.html

Karl Rove refused a subpoena. How can this happen?

A subpoena is backed by the force of law, which means at some fundamental point there is the implied threat of violence to enforce that law, that there's some "cop" somewhere. How would this work in practice?

How do you feel that the Republicans have "supported the troops"?

They've certainly supported the *war*. No one can doubt that. But all the military people I know are constantly complaining that the government is cheaping out on body armour, cheaping out on armoured vehicles, on the Veteran's Administration.

Do you consider stop-loss orders "supporting the troops"?

Somehow you've learned to believe that being "supported" actually means being sent off to die for the profit of others. I'm very sorry for you.

(I have to confess that I'm a little skeptical about people who post here with various claims. We absolutely know that Republicans use ringers to target these boards for their propaganda...)

They're beggars at the table; they extract billions from the US tax dollars because.... because... for some reason that never really gets explained, oh, wait, it's the universal war, the US against everyone else, and they're the Middle East pitbull (except when they're spying on the US to steal military secrets like the atom bomb).

There's universal health care in Israel, but not in the US; why don't they send us money?

I think a better way for Americans to decide a President is to pick the candidate who's worse for Israel.

In case you didn't read the article, dozens of studies over years have unanimously shown that people talking on cell phones are as impaired as if they were drinking.

You must know people who tell you how they can drive as well drunk as sober. Would you change the law to allow them to drunk drive?

Over 40,000 people in the US die in car accidents a year. Two-thirds of the drivers responsible are not drunk. The most common cause of accidents is "losing control of the vehicle".

I'm good at multitasking; I can literally juggle and carry on a conversation; but I'm also very aware of the fact that I'm less aware; I know that when I get a phone call in a car that I'm less aware of the cars around me, the signs and all that.

If you really believe you do exactly as good a job driving while distracted as you do when your full attention is on the road, then I have to believe that you're sufficiently lacking in perspective and self-insight that perhaps you shouldn't be on the road at all.

"I will use my phone twice as much now

"Just for the hope that one of you flips out so completely you go home and shoot someone. Go ahead roll your fucking eyes right into the back of your head."

I think this sums up the mental illness that is America very succinctly: "I'm willing to endanger my own life and the lives of everyone around me because I want to make them angry because I hate them."

So, wait, I'm supposed to believe your guesswork from watching professional drivers on TV?

Endless studies have shown that you're just as impaired as a driver talking on the phone as if you're drunk (if it isn't obvious to anyone with half a brain who's ever been in a car in the US).

Every argument that is used to justify using a cell phone while driving could be used to justify drunk driving.

Tell me, you say you're lost and need to get directions. Then pull over and avoid endangering your lives and the lives of others. You're really late? Perhaps you should have called before you left (late?) Is it worth endangering your life and others to call someone you'll see in 10 minutes anyway?