I think it's very reasonable to oppose the war and still stupport the troops. While I imagine I disagree with most of the troops about the the war, it doesn't mean I'm wishing them ill will. I rather be wrong than have more suffering to prove my point. There's nothing disingenuous about that.

It's like having a disagreement with a friend, you can disagree with them a still support them as person. Especially with troops, they are but cogs in the machine. They have to go where the Government tells them to go given the chain of command.

When did everyone here at Salon become such a Marxist? I'm going to echo Andrew, and some previous posters. I cheer higher prices. Maybe this is the only way we can learn

The industry doesn't need regulation, it just need enforcement of the current rules. They broke up Standard Oil years ago. Price collusion is already illegal. Large corporate profits are not, and why should they be? Yes, Exxon Mobil profits of 40 Billion last years sound ludicrously large, but don't forget how ludicrously large Exxon Mobil is. They had revenues of close to 400 Billion. So their gross margin's are about 10%. Do you complain when a restaraunt makes 10% off it's good and services?

There are complaints to be made about how America corporations are more profitable than ever, but many people still don't have health insurance. Yes to echo Andrew, we could use a little wealth distribution. Higher taxes wouldn't be bad thing if we spent the money on the right things such revamping the health care system. But to complain in itself that someone or something is making too much money is counterproductive.

I think it's understandable that Peter couldn't fly at that moment. He couldn't control his powers. So I give the creators a pass on that. I'm assuming Nathan doesn't come back, and dissapointed to see him go. I'm curious to see if Peter comes back. In some ways he shouldn't. He's a little too powerful, it's unclear what if any limitations he has...

I thought this was an amusing, and generally speaking a light hearted article. However when I read comments like "no doubt just another benefit of her rigorous education at Regent University" that smack of snide sarcasm. I can't but think that maybe liberals are being rightly called elist... I think the coverage questioning Ms. Goodling qualifications was reasonable and justified. Slipping in a little dig without a context seems on the other hand petty.

I think the answer to James Levy's point about who is to consume the supply is staring us in the face. If it's Africa time to rise up via supplying the world, the most ready consumers of cheap finished products will be the economies in Asia that at time will have moved on to bigger and better things. This might not happen tomorrow, but given enough time this could happen. Economic progress is not a zero sum game.

Romney sways in the wind - that is the criticsm laid upon him. Being a flip flopper as a result probably puts him more center than right. Personally I rather have President who is more flexible and willing to compromise than one who is rigid like the one we have now. Either way candidates from both parties are swinging to the edges to win the primaries. I hate the primary system. Us people in the middle want to throw up.

Standards are great, and energy policy made by fiat is effective, but the question always remains who gets to set those standards, and policies? The argument for the free market is to let the market/people decide, and ultimately the collective will make the right decision. If somehow how the Chinese government decided that all cell phonese should be using old RS-232 interfaces, everyone would suffer. The free market protects us from poor decision made by particular insitutions.

While I think care obviously needs to be taken, but once you've cooked the chicken, I'm not sure what difference between a healthy chicken and a sick chicken. I mean if it's dead - that's about as sick as you can get...

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. I'm just not worried. Not to say that U.S. economy won't face a downturn. It will, but housing led recession is not the end. This too will pass.

Isn't the problem that there are string attached to buying these corporations? I mean if there were no strings attached then China should have full voting rights.

Being a user of ICE, and NYMEX, I've never understood why is regulated and the other is not. I think there might be an argument to be made that electronic trading not be under regulation in the initial stages to spur development. Just as the Govt did with the Internet with regards to taxes. At this point, there is no reason for trades on ICE to play by a different set rules. Consistency in the market is a good thing and is basic premise for the operation of a free market.

While I do think Amarath may have raised the natural gas prices for some consumers, I think that's not necessarily the natural outcome of it's action. If anything if there was better implementation of customer choice in the Natural Gas market, Natural Gas customers could have stood to benefit if they somehow chose gas companies with smarter gas traders than Brian Hunter.

However as things stand, natural gas and electricity is a joke on the retail consumer side. Until consumers in the U.S. understand that they oil/gas/electrcity are not inalienable right and need, and they have choices in both what they consume and who them consume from, the U.S. will continue to have problems with these resources.