of the two-party system. Some topics are just off the table. They are beyond the reach of public discourse because both parties agree. Therefore no politician raises the issue, no news outlet can report it, there is no discussion in Congress, etc. This is true, not because it is not an important issue as this unquestionably is, but because the two parties agree and no one else is permitted to offer an opinion. When was the last time you saw an editorial saying the military budget should be cut in half or otherwise substantially reduced? Other issues about which there is no, or no meaningful discussion include (1) significantly raising the cap on social security earnings to fund that program sufficiently, (2) government-run, single-payer health system, (3) defunding Star Wars, (4) defunding the war on drugs, and others.

When money, the press and party politics all agree on an issue, it is essentially impossible to publicly discuss it. The people do not have a voice. Period.

he was right when he said that. What did Al Gore do to promote environmental sanity as an elected office-holder? Right. As it turns out, not that much. He attended Kyoto, but that treaty was never endorsed by the U.S., so...

Gore has done a lot of good work on the environment, just not when he was in office. And that's what Ralph was talking about.

Name one person who has done more for American consumers than Nader has. Jim, your ignorant disdain is disgraceful.

You just don't know what you're talking about when you claim men aren't "slammed" by media, TV, etc. That's just flat wrong. I can't believe you live in this culture and say that. Read James McNamara's doctoral dissertation on male portrayal in popular culture and you'll learn that negative images of men are pervasive. Or, if you want to spend the money, read his Media and Male Identity. I don't know why you'd need to read a doctoral dissertation to see what is in front of your face every day, but it seems you do.

Again, regarding "deadbeat dads," read something informative instead of just recycling media stereotypes. For example, read Sanford Braver's Divorced Dads. The fact is the vast majority of men who fall behind on child support do so because they lost their job or had a health crisis. I know it doesn't fit your demonization of men, but at least it's factual.

You're worse than ususal today. As to custody, the only men who seek it are the ones who are fairly certain they'll get it. After all, why spend money on attorney fees when you know you'll lose? According to a British paper within the last few days, 90% of British moms get custody. You didn't see that? Maybe you should read something sometime. And how do you feel about the fact that non-custodial parents (almost invariably fathers) are almost completely unsuccessful at enforcing their visitation orders? What about the fact that non-custodial mothers are actually worse than fathers at paying child support? Deadbeat moms? I didn't notice your writing about them. I wonder why not.

In the first place I was responding to fetboy who doesn't seem to notice the things about pop culture portrayals of men that you and I and countless others do. So I confined my response to that.

But when you say that pop culture "requires" women to fill in for all that the males lack, isn't that another way of saying that women are depicted as able in all the ways men aren't and then some. That's scarcely negative; it says women are strong and competent, doesn't it? That's how I've always viewed it.

and we are Marshal Will Kane and "they" are the Miller Gang. Simple as that.

about percentage of GDP being what's important in defense spending just doesn't hold up. In defense spending as with everything else, enough is enough. The debate should be about how much is enough in dollars, not in percentage of GDP.

One analogy would be this: what percentage of net income should a person spend on, say, clothing? If the answer is 5% then the person who makes $10k would spend $500 and the person who makes $10M would spend $500,000 on clothing. But does the person who makes $10M need that many clothes, particularly if he/she is deeply in debt and has no health insurance?

is the one true dark horse in this postseason. They can beat anyone because they're the most physical team in the playoffs. No one wants to play them. If there's one surprise team right now that you'd pick to go all the way, the Jags are it.

of what many African-Americans expect of the political system here is this: America will never elect a black person president. So, far from becoming "unhinged" if Obama loses, I believe their response would be more like "so what else is new?"

on this year's elections is that anything, and I mean anything, can happen. I think the electorate is so disgusted with Bush and the mendacious, incompetent Reps, AND with the spineless, do-nothing Dems that literally anything can happen. And that includes electing a black man with a Muslim-sounding name. It also includes electing a third-party candidate. People voted overwhelmingly for change in 2006 and got zip and I don't know anyone who's happy about it. Everything's been tossed up in the air and no one knows where it'll land. Vamos a ver.