As with most situations in a reality-based world, the truth always lies somewhere in the middle.

While I agree with Glenn Greenwald that this should not be the primary narrative defined and falsely amplified by the MSM, it is one of many threads in the colorful fabric of discourse.

Lost in the argument is why the "anti-war left" is confined within quotes -- and thus marginalized to political left field to begin with. Why shouldn't the anti-war left be taking over America? We WERE right after all. Knock, knock knock... hello!

Like (or unlike) our elected officials at the time, we reviewed all of the available "evidence" and rightfully concluded that this pre-emptive war was ill-advised to say the least. And as anyone who recalls the Dixie Chicks at the time, it was not easy being "the ugly face of dissent" as David Frum once denigrated those of us who openly protested one of the most hideous abuses of power in this nation's history.

Rarely (if really ever) discussed is the death-grip hold that the pro-war extreme right fringe still has on America. In a normal world, these people would have long been since dismissed from the table.

But with this week's spotlight on Hillary Clinton, it is quite obvious that Democratic leadership will be answerable to the "anti-war left" in some significant manner during the campaign for the 2008 presidential election.

Unfortunately, however, there will be no take-over because there is really nothing left to do so. America is teetering on the edge of economic, moral, and environmental bankruptcy. World events will increasingly render obsolete this tired paradigm of right and left.

Considering that Boomer was actually still at the helm of this so-called "kill" while Gen X was busily attempting to produce replcements for Nirvana, I believe that blame can be assigned to a whole host of perpetrators, not just Gen Y. The proliferation of media streams, personal listening devices, file sharing -- all have contributed to the diminishing (if not outright demise) of the rock star.

Oh, and the propensity by Gen Y to produce contrived, manipulative emoti-rock designed for television soundtracks for the likes of the OC rather than true listening pleasure.

That was hilarious. Debra Dickerson expressed exactly what I, as a gay man, have generally thought about Mr. Savage for years. Occasionally illuminating, his column more often is just too much information. And it's always delivered in a fey, cloying manner.

I'm proud to be of the "girls gone mild" variety gay. When I sit down to enjoy a fat pint of vanilla ice cream, I don't need to enjoy it in the construct of an elaborate fantasy, or "scene." I can enjoy it on the floor, the sofa, the bed, and even in front of the television.

I only have one contrary observation: I believe that "vanilla pounding" is an oxymoron in this context, and that "vanilla humping" would have been a more apt term.

Ms. Paglia had me until global warming. As I had it explained to me recently by Albert Bates, author of Post-Petroleum Survival Guide and Cookbook: Recipes for Changing Times, you can't take what we have from the earth and deposit it into the air without serious consequences. Any other supposition defies logic.

So, I hope that Ms. Paglia, along with the editors of the Wall Street Journal, will eat their words about how the market will ultimately prevail, and leave us alone -- at gunpoint -- when those of us who do believe have prepared for the ramifications of global warming, and peak oil, and they have not.

To Mr. Kamiya and Salon for publishing this illuminating piece that so eloquently dissects what is wrong with American media and how the Iraq debacle is portrayed.

After watching tonight's episode, the perspective of matters at hand by this fat white man and his armchair / SUV backseat "analysis," is absolutely appalling.

Richard Perle doesn't even either listen to, or know of what he is saying. The contradictions are numerous and ironic.

That these messages are funded by donations and tax dollars is even more offensive.

Fundamental American values, indeed!

While I agree in theory I think you need to consider other factors in the overall equation. Those CRT monitors, if they avoid the landfill, will probably be shipped to some overseas locale for "recycling," an effort that will consume an inordinate amount of energy in itself, and expose probably third-world workers and their land to the hazardous chemicals that result from "e-waste". Secondly, the origin of manufacture for those energy efficient LCDs will most likely be China, where further environmental degradation is likely, and will also consume more resources (although somewhat less this time around than their CRT predecessors) to get them to the welcoming arms of U.S. consumers who think they're being "green."

Globalization (and/or "free trade"), no matter how you cut it or poke it, is a race to the bottom. It's all about corporations finding the cheapest labor possible, with the fewest consequences in labor strife, wages, and taxes.

Our "trade" agreements, starting with Bill Cinton in the 90s, first saw U.S. manufacturing jobs shift to Mexico, which was shortly followed by a subsequent shift to China. We wouldn't be having discussions about illegal immigration if our furniture, clothing, etc. was still manufactured in either the U.S. or Mexico.

We are rapidly suffocating the middle class in the process of creating a two class society: over-compensated investors and CEOs on one hand, and cheap, disposable labor on the other.

As a consequence, that our denial-based, unsustainable bubble is predicated on unprecedented deficit military and consumer credit spending, will only hasten the decline of our unfettered capitalist empire.

Put the fork in me... I'm done.