Right on, David Sugarman! We all want America, our country, our home, the place we live, to lose, lose and lose again!

I can understand why you might perceive that. Lots of people perceive exactly the same thing every time anyone dares to criticize "our" own behaviour.

When all you know is loyalty or betrayal, every opinion, perspective, analysis, or point of view boils down to tit-for-tat, us or them, friend or enemy.

A monochromatic view of reality. No colors, no hues or shades, just black and white. It's a gift, a gift to demagogues, hustlers and charlatans who can deceive and manipulate these colour-blind folks.

Viva le difference! Good for you.

( Iran is virtually irrelevant to American security. )

I'm sorry if my writing was poorly done or unclear, I'm not a very good writer.

What I do know is that Iran has some bad and some good, and is on the other side of the world. I don't know anything about the people there, and I don't much trust what the media says about them.

I also know this: noticing that some nation has played a smart round is nothing like supporting that nation.

It's interesting that virtually everyone these days plays the horse race game: pick a team, identify with the team, and debate how good your horse is compared to the other horses.

Not that the candidates don't matter, it's just that the way we speak about politics sounds more like a game every year.

An individual President's virtues and merits are less important then the power structures that support them. That's how I knew Bush was bad juju in 1999, and why I knew Clinton would have a hell of a bad time in Washington. He had no connections to the powers.

I read the article and didn't find it snobby or condescending in the least.

What the article does highlight well is the preoccupation of Americans with the so-called rat race. It's not snobbery to point out that as a whole American culture is less artistic then fiscally motivated. It's just true.

The mainstream media is just acting like a bunch of upper middle management. Playas, the whole lot of them.

And has anyone considered that making a simple profit may not be the most compelling reason a mega-corporation's controlling owners may want to acquire a media company or two? What better way to ensure 'good press' then to have a controlling interest?

The contemporary mania for explaining all human activity in terms of facile economic theories clouds many a mind. Power-rich people are egotistical, nasty and calculating bastards, not academa-economic automatons.

Breeding of animals is *not* a genetic modification. Genetic modification is changing the genes through wholly unnatural means , cutting and pasting gene sequences from other species. If bushwhacker00 could breed a cow with wings or a flower with fur, then he would have a point.

That said, false equivalence is the trademark trick of the professional corporate polemist and the junk science hack, the shill. It's too bad that critical thinking is so rare that guys like this can influence public opinion.

Bummer.

Hey nameless, the Weekly Standard *is* the touchstone of moderate American political thinking, at least for cable news pundits.

The liberal media mostly pays attention to liberal intellectual institutions like The Washington Times.

When Garrison writes that McCarthy wasn't all evil, he means the man had some good attributes. Even the most vilified dictator has some good attributes. But most people find it hard to take a name out of the "bad" box and consider the complexity of reality.

And reading history *is* a waste of time, if you're looking for simple, clear rules. That's why most people shouldn't bother reading history; they want someone else to give them the simple good vs. bad story so they can get on with their simple pleasures.

Hammers and table knives, bleach and Drano.

Gasoline, kerosene, glue and rubbing alcohol.

All of these are dangerous things.

Shouldn't these be kept from us too?

Sometimes I *really* want one or more of these things, just like a drug addict wants drugs.

How are these things different then morphine?

If these 8 or so were fired for not bringing trumped up charges against Democrats, then the other 93 must be performing within expectations.

Remember this the next time some swing voting friend sez: "They're all corrupt."

"An unfettered marketplace works perfectly"

Regardless of the context, this sentence makes no sense.

I know, I know: Chicago-style economists, deep-pockets think tanks and industry groups have been saying things like this for decades. Such talk has "respectability." It's still baloney.

Sugarman is dead on.

Halberstam's eloquent words need no comment.

But I don't think Dick Chaney is actually all that competent. I think his true skills are blackmail, intimidation and other dirty tricks.

It looks a lot like competence from the outside, but it's not.

So *this* is the horrible thing that Baldwin said to his daughter? I've been hearing talking heads yammer on about his transgression. This is it?

News flash, I can be liberal as hell and still tell my kid he's being a pig.

Not to insult the fine reputations of porcine creatures around the world.

Why do I get the feeling that if a right wing celebrity like Mel Gibson or Aaaanold said something like this, the MSM would yawn and ignore it?

At 20 most people wonder who they are. Their job is to figure it out.

By 40, if you don't know who you are, you're in tough shape.

If it takes starting a band to figure our who you are, then go for it.

Excellent reply by Mr. Tennis, as always.