That's probably a bit extreme. But we certainly don't need cops who think and act as if they're above the law.

You can't contribute that much money to a campaign and then claim ignorance. Everyone knows that money like that is going toward smears. He probably didn't know exactly what ads would be produced, but he certainly wasn't naive about their nature.

And Colin, I concur about the Supreme Court ruling. In years past, Supreme Courts knew enough to weigh rights against each other and always tried to rule in favor of what was in the best interests of society. They knew that free speech carries significant responsibilities. The current Court apparently lacks this concern.

The mafia understood the concept of smaller but steady profits. The customer came first. And - compared to the corporations that now run this town - at least the mafia had a code of ethics.

Left to the private sector, many of us lost tens of thousands of our pension dollars. We should, therefore, trust social security to the private sector because . . . ?

What I don't understand is why he's still alive.

Obama has made clear what Congress needs to do. And we don't need him to pass blame:

"It is harming the Republican Party," [John] McCain said. "It is harming the view, if it's possible any more, of the American people about Congress."

That's what he said today.

The 99% is not about entitlement. It is not anti-wealth. It is about ill-gotten gains and the ones who influence government at everyone else's expense. You don't want government to take from the rich and give to the poor? Fine. But don't ask us to support a corporate-controlled government that's equally likely to favor the wealthy at the expense of the poor.

Sorry, that should be "tell the supervisors to suck it up." We've obviously already told that to the subordinates.

I haven't had an "adjustment to improve pay equity" in over five years. Fancy rhetoric for "raise"; George Carlin would have spotted that linguistic twist in a heartbeat.

And if you want to "ensure supervisors [do] not earn less than their subordinates," then lower the pay of the subordinates. Or tell the subordinates to suck it up, like everyone else has to do in this economy.

I'm not against gun ownership, but jeez, in situations like these, what are the odds that the average person, who is likely taken by surprise, is going to be able to successfully pull out the gun, hit the attackers, and avoid hitting innocent bystanders? Or are we all Clint Eastwood?