Talking about Forvm wagers... look what I found cleaning out my bookmarks. I had forgotten all about that. Hmmm. Looks like I have an Amazon gift certificate coming my way (even if it was a bit of an eke-out.) Makes me regret that I didn't set the stakes at a bottle of Hank's Glenmorangie instead.

I've finally had enough of my doctor. Every time I go he strikes as more corrupt and contemptible.

It's not just how he sexually harasses the pretty young saleswomen the pharmaceutical companies send to his office. Or how he screams at RNs over the phone, who are merely trying to get clear directions on how to treat his patients.

Dear Congresswoman Maloney:

I've been a Democratic voter all my life. I contribute money, to the best of my modest means, on the Presidential and Congressional levels, and I've been known to volunteer my time too. Back in 2000, when friends told me they would vote for Nader, I was appalled and tried to talk them out of it.

Yet here we are in 2010, and as best as I can tell I will -- for the first time -- pull the lever for the Green Party candidates this November. How did I get here?

It may be premature to write the obituary of health care reform today, but it’s hard to deny that it is bleeding, panting and prone. Who was responsible for what may be its mortal wounds? It wasn’t Martha Coakley or Scott Brown. It isn’t her fault that she’s an awful candidate, or his fault that he’s a talented one. No, the bulk of the blame belongs to others. With deference to one of our honorees, let’s call these… the worst persons in the world!

'Cause I have to scroll too far down to find one.

The iSlate (if that's what they call it) is going to be unveiled a week from this Wednesday.

My major beef against the GOP is that it is the major purveyor of fiscal infantilism in our country. What's the standard line?

"Obama has run up a $1.2 trillion deficit! We need to cut spending to bring down that deficit, and cut taxes to get our economy going again."

But won't cutting taxes hurt our deficit?

"No! Cutting taxes pays for itself by spurring the economy."

Nathan Myhrvold appeared last week on Fareed Zakaria's GPS making a compelling argument for geo-engineering in general, and one scheme in particular. I encourage you all to hear him out.

The arguments against geo-engineering tend to fall into three categories. The first is that we don't know whether geo-engineering will work. The second is that it is harmful to even talk about geo-engineering because it might puncture the political will to reduce carbon emissions. Third and finally, geo-engineering is a bad idea because it might bring about unwanted side-effects.

Like most advocates of geo-engineering, I would argue that it should be researched further and deployed in conjunction with emission controls, not replacing them. However, in the interest of a fuller examination of our options, I will note that all three arguments could be made just as convincingly against emission controls.

Why? Because I want to have an excuse to post this link for those of you who had mentioned you were thinking of buying a home. Play with it and have fun! (The advanced settings are kinda important, so dig into them.)

The rest of you, gab on.

President Obama is currently pondering the most difficult decision of his young administration: our country’s future direction in Afghanistan. His choice has often been portrayed in the media as binary: should he pursue the counterinsurgency strategy (COIN) proposed by General McChrystal, or should he follow the counter-terrorist strategy advocated by Vice-President Biden?

Media reports indicate that Obama is unsatisfied with the choices he has, and he should be. Both approaches are fatally flawed. Before I say why that is the case, and what a better strategy might be, let’s review why we’re in Afghanistan at all.