Yes, and you've fallen short of common human decency as well.

The real problem that Russia and China had with the UN resolution regarding Libya wasn't that NATO used it as cover to oust Qaddafi, it's that it actually worked. I think the Russians and Chinese were expecting NATO to go for regime change in Libya and they were expecting NATO to get bogged down in a ground war, thereby further wrecking the West's image in the Middle East through the occupation of yet another Muslim state. When that didn't happen, the Russians and Chinese became much more reluctant to be cooperative over Syria.

In reality, the U.S.'s interest in ousting Assad is not as cut and dry as one might think. Getting rid of Assad could be helpful in reining in Iran, but it might also make it more difficult to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian problem. On the other hand, the possibility exists that we could get the worst of both worlds--that is, a new Syrian regime that continues to ally itself with Iran and that increases its belligerence over Palestine. One thing that I doubt very much would happen is a Syria that cuts ties to Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah and that seeks out peace with Israel without reference to the Palestinian issue.

By the way, if regime change is going to happen in Syria, it's going to be driven by Turkey, not the U.S. or Arab League. But, even the likelihood of Turkey doing something is very low.

It's a disgrace that Americans still buy fuel from Citgo. That's money that goes directly into Hugo Chavez's pocket that he uses to spread anti-American propaganda and to repress his people. Venezuelan oil imports to the U.S. should be zero because Americans refuse to support his evil.

"Profit" and "Chrysler" were two words I never thought I'd ever read in the same sentence again, except of course for the sentence, "Chrysler failed to turn a profit again this year."

Almeida's reaction to Clair's sentence is symptomatic of a big problem that we have in this country: overuse and abuse of the criminal justice system. The people who get imprisoned should be those people who present a danger to the public at large because they are serial offenders. Imprisonment as retribution for a single crime should be reserved for people who commit particularly bad crimes, like murder, rape, armed robbery, etc.

To adjudicate acts like what Clair did to Almeida's son is why we have a civil justice system. Almeida's retribution should be through the civil justice system only.

Of course, Clair did have to face criminal charges for defrauding the government, but even for that he probably shouldn't have done any jail time. Recoupment of the defrauded amount, a fine, and a prohibition against him ever practicing dentistry again would have been sufficient punishment under the circumstances.

We put too many people behind bars in this country for actions that are much better handled through monetary penalties and the civil justice system.

The funny thing is that Gingrich probably believes at this point that he was opposed to the individual mandate. It's like those middle aged guys remembering their glory days of high school sports and knowing that they got the big hit or made the key play to win the game when in fact they struck out to end the game or fumbled the ball on the hand-off. Memory can be a tricky thing.

Who is Rachel Maddow? She's an amateur Mary Lou Retton impersonator.

400 million tons of coal with the current price of about $11/ton for Powder River Basin coal comes to about $4.4 billion worth of coal. I think I have some spare change around here somewhere that I can use to put a bid in.

Um, no, no you're not. I remember him saying in early December that he was probably going to be the party's nominee as well.

There clearly are flaws in and improvements that could be made to the way that we select our presidents, but I can also imagine much worse ways to do so. The nominating process commences too far from the general election, which only increases the need for candidates to raise money. The process focuses far too much on personality and the personal lives of the candidates instead of on what's really important: policies and leadership. Absent a national crisis, the structural electoral system makes it nearly impossible for anyone who doesn't get a nomination from the Democratic or Republican Parties to get serious consideration for the presidency.

But while these flaws are real, I wouldn't be willing to put in a place a wholly new system. What is needed are tweaks rather than radical reconstructive surgery.