Your one stop pundit shop.
David Broder talks sports. I never thought I'd say this, but Broder should stick to politics.
Doug Feaver writes:
... in defense of the anonymous, unmoderated, often appallingly inaccurate, sometimes profane, frequently off point and occasionally racist reader comments that washingtonpost.com allows to be published at the end of articles and blogs.
E.J. Dionne explains that Nancy Pelosi isn't a power-mad, San Francisco liberal.
Roger Cohen talks about Israel and Iran:
What’s critical right now is that Obama view Netanyahu’s fear-mongering with an appropriate skepticism, rein him in, and pursue his regime-recognizing opening toward Tehran, as he did Wednesday by saying America would join nuclear talks for the first time. The president should read Trita Parsi’s excellent “Treacherous Alliance” as preparation.
Joan Vennochi on immigration reform:
Those old Republican hot buttons are growing cold. For proof, check out a recent interview with Mitt Romney, a former presidential candidate and ex-governor of Massachusetts.
According to TheHill.com, a congressional newspaper that publishes when Congress is in session, "Romney believes that one way to attract more minorities to the GOP is to pass immigration reform before the next election, saying the issue becomes demagogued by both parties on the campaign trail."
John C. Eastman defends John "torture" Yoo being employed as a teacher of the law.
Lawrence Rosenthal, on the other hand, says:
Should incompetent or irresponsible lawyers be teaching law? As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once wrote: "The question answers itself."
Rick Santorum, former senator and noted dog lover, spews idiotic talking points. What a shock.
Naif Al-Mutawa on the distinctions between Islam and extremism:
It has been shown that chimpanzees will go to war to protect their territory. I argued to my students that aggression toward others who don't share one's beliefs is nothing more than war over intellectual territory; religious faith is an intellectual line in the air. I concluded by saying that the religious extremists must be right about Darwin: Clearly, there are no signs of evolution here.
My intent was to advance the notion that extremism is nothing more than a bunch of neurotransmitters working overtime - or perhaps under time. It is not Islam or Judaism or Hinduism that creates extremism; rather, some people are predisposed to extremism and will pursue it in any faith.