Edward Luttwak, senior fellow at Georgetown's Center for Strategic and International Studies:
At present (Army soldiers) are so few, it is pointed out, that not enough troops can be sent to Iraq to contain the insurgency - and even this insufficient number requires excessively long tours of duty, repeat deployments to Iraq without a decent interval at home, and the mobilization of too many National Guard and Reserve personnel for too long. These contentions are valid and the consequences are serious indeed.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, on threats to the modern world:
Terrorism is among them, and it is no less dangerous and cunning than fascism.
Norma McCorvey, the formerly pro-abortion "Jane Roe" of the 1973 Roe v. Wade case striking down many state laws against abortion - who turned against abortion after working in abortion clinics:
I don't want any more women to be injured by abortion. . . . I plead with all that I am for the Supreme Court to take Roe v. Wade and reverse it.
National taxpayer advocate Nina Olson, in her annual report to Congress, on waning taxpayer compliance:
Without a doubt, the only meaningful way to reduce the compliance burdens (on taxpayers) is to simplify the tax code enormously.
Van Gordon Sauter, president of CBS News 25 years ago, on CBS News today:
For one thing, it has no credibility. And no audience, no morale, no long-term emblematic anchorman, and no cohesive management structure. Outside those annoyances, it shouldn't be that hard to fix. . . . I stopped watching it some time ago. The unremitting liberal orientation finally became too much for me.
University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey Stone, author of "Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime":
It is a well-settled principle of First Amendment doctrine that a reporter ordinarily may not violate a law of general application merely because it has an incidental effect on her ability to report more effectively. A reporter does not have a First Amendment right to violate the law against burglary in order to steal a document from someone's office. She has no First Amendment right to violate the law against wiretapping in order to overhear a bribe. . . . By similar reasoning the (Supreme) Court held in 1972 (Branzburg v. Hayes) that a reporter has no First Amendment right to refuse to answer otherwise lawful questions from a federal prosecutor engaged in a legitimate law-enforcement investigation, even though answering such questions might make her job more difficult. Having said this, I have to say that I agree with The New York Times that the Supreme Court erred in Branzburg.