57 thoughts on “Worst Op-Ed of 2007”

  1. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough.

    I think that quote sums up everything we need to know about Ignatius’ column.

  2. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough.

    I think that quote sums up everything we need to know about Ignatius’ column.

  3. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough.

    I think that quote sums up everything we need to know about Ignatius’ column.

  10. If you’d like, I can work out a randomized incomplete block design, to assign sets of column to judges, so that they can read and rate them.
    It’d have to be an incomplete block design, of course. If the judges each had to read all nominees, we’d be left with no sane judges. This way, they’ll just be a bit unhinged 🙂

  11. If you’d like, I can work out a randomized incomplete block design, to assign sets of column to judges, so that they can read and rate them.
    It’d have to be an incomplete block design, of course. If the judges each had to read all nominees, we’d be left with no sane judges. This way, they’ll just be a bit unhinged 🙂

  12. If you’d like, I can work out a randomized incomplete block design, to assign sets of column to judges, so that they can read and rate them.
    It’d have to be an incomplete block design, of course. If the judges each had to read all nominees, we’d be left with no sane judges. This way, they’ll just be a bit unhinged 🙂

  19. Ignatius is a goon.
    As soon as I read this line: “There isn’t a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could.”: I know the whole column is a waste of time.
    There are a lot of things I would do if I could, but I can’t. Neither can our enemy du jour.

  20. Ignatius is a goon.
    As soon as I read this line: “There isn’t a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could.”: I know the whole column is a waste of time.
    There are a lot of things I would do if I could, but I can’t. Neither can our enemy du jour.

  21. Ignatius is a goon.
    As soon as I read this line: “There isn’t a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could.”: I know the whole column is a waste of time.
    There are a lot of things I would do if I could, but I can’t. Neither can our enemy du jour.

  22. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    Got a problem with that, take it up with the founders. I’m just quoting.
    Thanks –

  23. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    Got a problem with that, take it up with the founders. I’m just quoting.
    Thanks –

  24. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    Got a problem with that, take it up with the founders. I’m just quoting.
    Thanks –

  25. it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, house democrats are going to end up pushing a “condemn rush” resolution.

  26. it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, house democrats are going to end up pushing a “condemn rush” resolution.

  27. it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, house democrats are going to end up pushing a “condemn rush” resolution.

  28. So, are the people who become “political” journalists in this country merely the ones who weren’t smart enough to do actual reporting on important things like football? Name me one beltway pundit who does their job with anything approaching the competence of a Peter King or Peter Gammons?

  29. So, are the people who become “political” journalists in this country merely the ones who weren’t smart enough to do actual reporting on important things like football? Name me one beltway pundit who does their job with anything approaching the competence of a Peter King or Peter Gammons?

  30. So, are the people who become “political” journalists in this country merely the ones who weren’t smart enough to do actual reporting on important things like football? Name me one beltway pundit who does their job with anything approaching the competence of a Peter King or Peter Gammons?

  31. “it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, house democrats are going to end up pushing a “condemn rush” resolution.”
    Posted by: kovarsk
    So, given an opportunity to take the high road, they’re actually going to take it?
    Great! Rush should be condemned.

  32. “it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, house democrats are going to end up pushing a “condemn rush” resolution.”
    Posted by: kovarsk
    So, given an opportunity to take the high road, they’re actually going to take it?
    Great! Rush should be condemned.

  33. “it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, house democrats are going to end up pushing a “condemn rush” resolution.”
    Posted by: kovarsk
    So, given an opportunity to take the high road, they’re actually going to take it?
    Great! Rush should be condemned.

  40. Great. Another spambot that quotes previous comments. I’m a little surprised these “smarter” spambots haven’t caught on, despite occasional appearances over the years. They could be a real annoyance.

  41. Great. Another spambot that quotes previous comments. I’m a little surprised these “smarter” spambots haven’t caught on, despite occasional appearances over the years. They could be a real annoyance.

  42. Great. Another spambot that quotes previous comments. I’m a little surprised these “smarter” spambots haven’t caught on, despite occasional appearances over the years. They could be a real annoyance.

  43. There are a lot of things I would do if I could, but I can’t. Neither can our enemy du jour.
    WARNING! Area Man Would Sleep With Hundreds Of Supermodels If He Could!

  44. There are a lot of things I would do if I could, but I can’t. Neither can our enemy du jour.
    WARNING! Area Man Would Sleep With Hundreds Of Supermodels If He Could!

  45. There are a lot of things I would do if I could, but I can’t. Neither can our enemy du jour.
    WARNING! Area Man Would Sleep With Hundreds Of Supermodels If He Could!

  46. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    And, apparently, the path to heaven is cobbled with evil ones.

  47. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    And, apparently, the path to heaven is cobbled with evil ones.

  48. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    And, apparently, the path to heaven is cobbled with evil ones.

  49. When has “taking the high road” gotten Democrats everywhere. What I fear more than them “ignoring smears” to take the high road, is incompetently pursuing the destruction of bullies and goons like Rush.
    If you only hit them a little, they’ll come back at you. Time to go for the f*ing throat.
    The American public has shown, time and again (Willie Horton, Osama/Cleland, Swift Boat) that they respond to this type of agressive partisanship. The faux-moderate “concern trolls” can suck it.

  50. When has “taking the high road” gotten Democrats everywhere. What I fear more than them “ignoring smears” to take the high road, is incompetently pursuing the destruction of bullies and goons like Rush.
    If you only hit them a little, they’ll come back at you. Time to go for the f*ing throat.
    The American public has shown, time and again (Willie Horton, Osama/Cleland, Swift Boat) that they respond to this type of agressive partisanship. The faux-moderate “concern trolls” can suck it.

  51. When has “taking the high road” gotten Democrats everywhere. What I fear more than them “ignoring smears” to take the high road, is incompetently pursuing the destruction of bullies and goons like Rush.
    If you only hit them a little, they’ll come back at you. Time to go for the f*ing throat.
    The American public has shown, time and again (Willie Horton, Osama/Cleland, Swift Boat) that they respond to this type of agressive partisanship. The faux-moderate “concern trolls” can suck it.

  55. it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, [Senate Republicans] are going to end up pushing a “condemn [MoveOn]” resolution.
    Fixed!

  56. it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, [Senate Republicans] are going to end up pushing a “condemn [MoveOn]” resolution.
    Fixed!

  57. it is worth pointing that, when presented with the opportunity to take the high road, [Senate Republicans] are going to end up pushing a “condemn [MoveOn]” resolution.
    Fixed!

Comments are closed.