and those of you who might be quick to point out the issues arising from his Central American policy would do well to remember that it was the Clintonites who came along later to explain that "rule of law" was a) a matter of interpretation and b) beside the point, at least where illicit sex was concerned.

-------------------------------------------------------

^ I'm astonished by this quote. It's the sort of reductio ad absurdum of conservative rhetoric that I'd expect to see in a Tom Tomorrow cartoon. To see it written by someone who is ostensibly trying to present conservatism in a good light is bizarre.

I expect that Wingnut may now regret writing it. If he were able to rewrite the column, I expect he might take more time to elaborate his point. He might state that he isn't equating Iran-contra with Clinton perjuring himself over Monica Lewinsky (of course), but simply pointing out that it is naive to expect any president to perfectly abide by the rule of law at all times.

But, of course, he can't rewrite his column. And the above quote is an extraordinary display of rhetorical ineptness. (It's not the only such display that I've seen in the Wingnut columns I've read, but it is the most striking.)

The "editor's note" that precedes this column claims that Wingnut's purpose at Salon is to explain the ways of conservatives to liberals. To present a bungler as a representative of American conservatism is a disservice to both liberals and conservatives. To liberals, because conveying the impression that the likes of Wingnut are all we are up against is liable to make us complacent. To conservatives, because they are being badly represented.

Salon, of course, has a right to publish whatever they want to publish. (Though it is jarring to have an anonymous conservative commentator on the same site where Glenn Greenwald regularly inveighs against conservatives who attempt to influence the public discourse while hiding behind anonymity.) But the "Editor's note" to these columns is a case of false advertising. I suggest that the above quote be tacked on to the top of all Wingnut's subsequent columns, to give readers an approximate idea of how seriously they ought to take him.

...but given that Robert Reich evidently won't be happy until he's filled the entire Salon Opinion with variations on his "How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love Deindustrialization" theme, I suppose that entitles me to another. Two points:

1. It's perhaps telling that Robert Reich's definition of "the best-trained workers" seems to mean "the workers trained to be most like Robert Reich."

2. If we really want a prosperous economic future, a good first step might be to ignore anything said by anyone who worked in the last four presidential administrations.

Because their movies sucked.

(For the same reason, white-blonde-and-blue-eyed Princess Eilonwy from The Black Cauldron never shows up on Disney merchandise either.)

(Jasmine is semi-prominent, because her movie was good whenever the genie was on screen, boring whenever he wasn't, and she isn't the genie.)

If The Princess and the Frog is good, Tiana will be on pillow cases. If not, not.

"A few weeks ago, I took my five-year-old daughter to a birthday party. Every other child in the room was African-American or Latina, and almost all of them were wearing a Disney-issued white girl’s face on their chests. They played together in a room festooned with images of Belle and Cinderella. They danced in blonde Hannah Montana wigs. And as one parent observed, 'We’ve got to give these girls something other than Dora or the Bratz.'"

------------------------------------------------------------

So, basically, the girls don't care what color their role models are. The parents, on the other hand, do.

I submit that the girls may not be the ones in need here.

Reich is rather ambiguous. Granting his premise that robots will be doing all the world's manufacturing in a couple of years, is he suggesting that America should not expect manufacturing to employ a large number of people? Or that America should not bother manufacturing anything?

If the former, he should stop making soothing sounds about job loss and start using his pulpit to demand that America invest in enough robot manufacturers to bring our trade deficit within, oh, let's say 1% of GDP.

If not, he should abandon the pretense of having America's interests in particular at heart and stop writing for American publications.

You do realize I was referring to a website, yes?

(http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com)

...but if the previews on YouTube are any indication, Mike Judge should be paying creative property loyalties to Stuff White People Like.

"As for Prop 8 being repealed in the future, dream on. Look at the demographics of California--educated people moving out, poor and uneducated moving in.

My partner and I will be leaving California next month after 15 years here. We have plenty of money to weather the recession. I have reached the point where I can't even pretend to be nice to those who have been so hateful to us.

I hope California goes broke and has to cut as many services to the poor as possible."

^ Thus we take another step toward redefining the political rift in this country as "The socially liberal rich versus the socially conservative poor."

This "new superpower" would be the same China that consistently ranks somewhere below 70th place in the Corruption Perceptions Index? (http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2008)

The real news here isn't China itself. It's the prominence of commentators like Dilip Hiro, prostrating themselves before Chinese authoritarianism.

("Whereas most Western leaders could do nothing more than castigate bankers filling their pockets with bonuses as the balance sheets of their companies went crimson red, the Chinese government compelled top managers at major state-owned companies to cut their salaries by 15 percent to 40 percent before tinkering with the remuneration of their workforce." (Gee whiz!))

Dictatorship is chic again. Wonderful. This really is turning into a Great Depression redux.