From The Guardian:

The WSJ responds to critics of universal idealism—including Francis Fukuyama’s recent highly publicized backslide into Bush I-era foreign policy realism—and nicely articulates the philosophical divide that I’ve argued will, depending on which path we in the west take, ultimately determine our strategy for combatting Islamism:

…of course, not being God myself, my plan is to kick back, eat some ramen, and watch The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen—with the idea that a bit of relaxation and some pointed disengagement from all this partisan political tussling will the ease the constant discomfort I feel in my chest. But just so I don’t leave you high and dry, should anything negative happen today, take it on faith that

I’m taking the day off from political commentary—I have yogurt to buy and a child to play with—but as a gesture of good will, I’ll point you political junkies in the direction of a number of interesting posts: 1) Tigerhawk notes: Iran has threatened to retaliate against Israel if the United States attacks Iran.  Going out on a limb with my hawkish friends, may I suggest that perhaps that it

“If you haven’t yet heard, Billy, I’m all set to take my campaign of OUTRAGE over this illegal war global!  And I have important allies helping me this time, too—members of EU’s parliament, for instance, are sponsering my Germany trip, where I’ll set up Camp Casey Deutch and point out—with colorful signs and the joyful tambourine music of protest—that Germany is Europe’s hub for wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and others

—Well, sadly, there can be no dancing today, if that’s what you mean.  Seems the little fella went and signed himself up for a Tae Kwon Do class in order to “take care of some business with a certain gekko who, for such a green little bitch, was getting a bit too mouthy.” Which, in and of itself, isn’t the problem.  Instead, the stumbling block here seems to be that

[ed’s note:  Under the conditions of Greenwald Unified Theory of Bush Kulthood, the following bits of argument, excerpted from my post, purportedly betray my desire to hang Bill Buckley—or, at the very least, excommunicate him from the ranks of the true conservatives: [responding to Buckley’s thesis, I write] This is, it seems to me, a well-articulated bit of traditional conservative disillusionment with an ongoing affair; and of course, the question

Interesting take on the modern legacy media from the WSJ’s Daniel Henninger (subscription only, so I’ll quote at length):

Sure, this is meant as a whole grain-manipulated attack on UN ambassador John Bolton and his straight-talking mustache, Regis—particularly on their aggressive, hard-line reform strategy for the UN (which some critics believe will further reinforce the “world community’s” poor opinion of the US as hyperpower bullies in Stetsons)—the entire critique punned into an artistic, fiber-rich performative.  But to me, all it says is this:  now there’s a piece of seed

Interesting bit on fossil fuel reserves from today’s Straight Dope, with Cecil Adams.  For your consideration: