"Kennedy's death: Ireland mourns a "true friend"" - GlobalPost

This is such an important part of th KENNEDY legacy.

"Rendition of Terror Suspects to Continue Under Obama" - NYTimes.com

President OBAMA, whom I supported vigorously, is risking the loss of a huge measure of my support if he continues to take positions like this one. I cannot believe what I am reading and am sorely disappointed he has made this decision.

"Under Agreement, UBS to Give Up 4,000 Names" - NYTimes.com

I'd like to know what's being done to deal with the same problem in Monaco. Does the IRS believe that it knows the names and has the required financial information on all US taxpayers whose financial holdings in Monaco are taxable under US law? I very much doubt it, and I am surprised not to see this being discussed.

"President Obama is the real target of health care protesters, not policy"

This is perhaps the best analysis of what we are witnessing in some number of places around the country. I have thought this from the beginning and this commentary explains this very well.

"Jewish Groups Say Obama’s Pick for Medal Has Anti-Israel Bias" - NYTimes.com

If the Jewish groups opposing this award can look at themselves in the mirror and not grimace, I feel sorry for them. There is no need for anyone to have an unblemished record of support of Israel in order to receive anything, and the groups that think they can make this a litmus test insult themselves, I am sorry to say.

Mary ROBINSON explained herself fully and that should be all it takes. She has advanced more human rights in more places for more people than the office workers in these groups who probably write these protests. They make it hard for anyone to support Israel when its rabid supporters do silly things like this.

The next person they will be criticizing is Justice SOTOMAYOR for being biased since she is a Roman Catholic. The Israeli supporters are going to learn that we all have to get along and accept the fact that support of Israel is not a prerequisite to get there. It's their choice whether we do.

"Health Debate Turns Hostile at Town Hall Meetings" - NYTimes.com

Whatever the competing merits may be in health care reform, there is no place for violence and no place for people who cannot respect our marvelous informal rules of civil discourse. Those rules are founded on the notion that allowing the expression of as many views as reasonably possible is a good thing for our democracy. That is not always easy to do, but disrupting presentations and interfering with the speech of others is neither necessary nor productive. If people have ideas and points of view to express, let them work to voice those opinions in a civil and respectful manner whatever their political orientations might be.

It is an embarrassment to our stellar system of freedom of expression to see what is happening around the country. Those who realize this will move to correct it; those who do not .... well, I feel genuinely sorry for you.

"Shape of planet blogging" - Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com

What a great and sad point!

"FreeScore.com: Not Exactly Free" - MousePrint

This is one of the most deceptive marketing programs I have ever seen and if this is what Ben STEIN wants us to associate with him, he is free to do so. I think he ought to be ashamed of himself, but there is something about his money-making instincts that probably prevent him from doing so. Thank goodness for this blogger who signed up to get the answer on fees. If news media were really concerned about reporting what is important to customers, they would be telling us all what the advertising for freescore.com is not.

"Driven to Distraction - Cabbies Stay on Their Phones Despite Ban and Proven Risks" - Series - NYTimes.com

I refuse to stay - or pay any fare - in a taxi whose driver uses a telephone of any kind while driving, or any other handheld advice.

Cash for clunkers....

I am a very strong supported of President OBAMA and his programs, and the idea of getting fuel INefficient cars off the road is a good one.

However.....

Replacing them with more cars may help the economy but I do have to swallow hard on anything that means more cars on the road, even if more fuel efficient. Who knows whether the cars being scrapped were driven very much by their owners and whether the new cars will actually result in increased air pollution because they are used a lot more.

In my own case, we own two 1988 Hondas. We made conscious decisions at the time to opt for good fuel efficiency, and we have been very happy with both cars. Neither qualified for this program because they are rated at higher than 18 MPG. While it is good to focus on the worst offenders, I have to ask myself, at least, whether it is fair for someone who - in 1988, for example - bought a gas "guzzler", and who has been polluting our air to excess during twenty years to receive up to $4,500 from the government when we receive nothing toward the purchase of our next car which we hope will be much more efficient than the ones we own.

This system has worked successfully in France, Germany and perhaps elsewhere but I do not know if they have the same requirements. In France, for example, it appears that the only requirement is that the car being traded in is older than 15 years. Even if a lower amount is offered, that seems much fairer.

"Detained journalists get no media play" - Abby Phillip - POLITICO.com

"Driven to Distraction - Texting Raises Crash Risk 23 Times, Study Finds" - Series - NYTimes.com

Why does anyone else have to die or be injured before we stop to this madness? No one driving a motor vehicle should be permitted to use ANY electronic device, period. Pull over to use your phone, your GPS, or whatever other toy you may have with you. That's common sense. That's what the law ought to be.

"Measure to Expand Gun Rights Falls Short in Senate" - NYTimes.com

So many of us want to see many more good outcomes like this one.

"Driven to Distraction - In 2003, U.S. Withheld Data Showing Cellphone Driving Risks" - Series - NYTimes.com

To me there is no need for further research in order to impose a country-wide (either by federal or collective state action) ban on the use of any electronic device while driving a motor vehicle. The ban should be imposed immediately.

Dismissing the Risks of a Deadly Habit - Multitasking on the Road - NYTimes.com

Anyone who uses any telecommunications or any other electronic device while driving an automobile is quite simple a stupid jerk. I have no use for anyone who does this, and will tell any driver to stop if they want me to remain in their car. If I could help anyone sue a driver who had an accident and caused injury as a result of using one or more of these devices, I would do so pro bono.

"Editorial - Newspapers’ future" - FT.com

Yes! I would add to this.... the word "essential". If newspapers do not find a way to become essential - to address essentil information and service needs of customers - others will continue to overtake them. On a base of "essential" both great journalism and profitable additional lines of newspaper business can be built. Take away the essential and the future is newspapers remains very bleak.

"President’s Detention Plan Tests American Legal Tradition" - NYTimes.com

Justice delayed is indeed justice denied. Either try these people in a US court or set them free. No more, no less.

In the name of our system of justice, I accept the risks that are associated with that move. I would rather fear someone on the loose than to see that person imprisoned without the procedural safeguards the rest of us enjoy. Period.

"Portfolio May Rise Again! In North Carolina" - Gawker

"After Boston Crash, Cellphone Ban May Loom" - NYTimes.com

Will it take something awful like this happening, God forbid, here in NC to lead to a ban on using any device whatsoever when driving? Everyone behind any "wheel". Every device. What could be simpler and better than that?

"How Well Have Media Covered The Flu Outbreak?" - NPR