... is that he would be anathema to the religious right, whose recent success - via Bush - has left it hungry for more. They'll never rest until America is some sort of watered-down version of Iran or Saudi Arabia, and it would appear - at least according to this article - that Paul would stop their power grab in its tracks.

The main lesson I've learned from the Bush administration is that centralized government, which can be a force for good under enlightened leadership, can easily be perverted by power-mad pirates. Before Bush, I never really thought the American people would put up with this peculiar mix of incompetence, cronyism and tyranny. Now that most branches of our government are in the control of religious cultists and other nutjobs, I've become well aware of its power to harm. I'm rather embarrassed by the naivete of my previous assumptions.

Of course, a true libertarian would simply smile and say, "I told you so." Though I'm still a liberal, I've definitely been chastened during the Bush disaster, and am more receptive to anti-government candidates like Paul. I feel like sending him a donation.

Okay, I'll admit: I was initially intrigued and watched the first two seasons. But sometime early in season three it became clear to me that the writers/producers were just toying with the audience in some sort of bizarre sadistic exercise.

"Lost" is not only not thrilling, it's also unconscionably devoid of humor. Maybe that's because a few wry jokes would risk unravelling its undergraduate-level, soap-opera philosophizing. You can find more genuine philosophy in "The Simpsons".

Once the creators finally get around to giving the audience any kind of explanation, it will likely be something utterly banal: they're all dead and in limbo, they're all part of a government experiment, etc. Yawn.

That this drivel manages to get decent ratings, while a truly intelligent show like "Friday Night Lights" struggles is beyond me. Thanks to Heather for her observation on the latter.

Somebody should get Kotb and James Dobson together. Except for her being dark-skinned and unsaved (and for his being an imperialist and infidel) they'd get along great!

The difference is that Dobson is considered a certifiable kook by intelligent people in the U.S., while - if this article is to be believed - Kotb's voice is that of a radical.

Although we can't dismiss the danger of Christian fundamentalism - our own cross to bear, I'm afraid - the relative difference in how these people are perceived in their respective societies is illustrative.

So Kotb has cured 30 or 40 men of homosexuality? Well, I guess if I were terrified of being stoned or hanged for being gay, I might be persuaded to pretend I was straight too.

I heard a report on the radio today about a school for women in Morocco. Literacy is apparently fairly low in Morocco, especially for women. The school was inside a mosque, which one woman who was interviewed claimed was crucial - since her husband wouldn't trust her to go to some place where lascivious things might happen - some place like a school!

I'm not a scholar of Islam, and I have no idea why the Muslim world (perhaps with the exception of Turkey) has so thoroughly rejected modernity, but I find their backwardness frightening. There is a level of toxicity in most Muslim culture that every American, every Westerner should find incredibly alarming.

The narcissistic mentality of the LW is mirrored by American spending habits and politics. It was okay for taxpayers to pony up funds for her education, but, once she has what she wants, she can't be bothered to pay the favor forward for future generations.

There's no amount debt we won't incur if not doing so means denying ourselves the latest gadget, McMansion or gas-guzzling status symbol. Of course, once we're too old to work, then we'll demand more money from Social Security to make up for our lack of retirement planning. Oh, the injustice.

But there likely won't be any money for nice social spending like that, as we also have no qualms about borrowing vast sums from future generations to pay for our military misadventures.

One way or another, it's all about me!

Just look at how Bush made mincemeat of them once again with the Iraq War funding bill. These people are their own worst enemies - timorous, halting, and very, very afraid of their own shadows. Yes, Kucinich is an exception, and I'm holding out hope for Obama. But Clinton and Edwards? Really? She of the control-freak, bone-chilling laugh (great line) and he of the blow-dried, trial lawyer bromides?

Camille is right to call them on this crap, as it's this very quality that has been killing Democrats at least since the disastrous candidacy of Michael Dukakis. John Kerry wouldn't even defend himself against the scurrilous Swift Boaters. How, exactly, does it get any dumber than that?

Remember how it was inevitable that the Democrats would win in '88, given the scandals of the Reagan administration? We got shellacked in that election by Bush I - a really bad candidate. Like Camille, I'm afraid it'll happen again.

The Republicans at least have the virtue of not having to talk out of both sides of their mouths. They're proto-fascists and plutocrats, and are clever at spinning those sentiments to appeal to a gullible public.

The problem for the Democrats, I believe, is that most of them really don't believe what they're saying. They get their money from the same class that funds the Republicans. I have a hard time believing that any of the leading candidates would actually get us out of Iraq or restore habeas corpus, for starters.