Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Why is it that whenever I read an article (such as this one) that mentions "birth defects" as a result of some drug or other factor, it never specifies what KIND of defects? Are we talking about a relatively mild condition that can easily be remedied by modern medicine, or a truly life-altering tragedy? In other words, what kind of cost-benefit analysis is being applied in terms of danger to the mother if she DOESN'T take the substance, vs. potential and degree of danger to the baby if she DOES?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
