Agree with Marin145. Calling Geitner your friend seriously damages your credibility, Mr. Kudlow. Obama and every single member of his administration -- to a person -- are not interested in 'bipartisan' anything. They've proven it time and time again. It's their way, or not at all. Democrats stopped 'reaching across the aisle' many years ago. 'Bipartisan cooperation' means that Republicans compromise. And when Republicans don 't compromise, they're on the receiving end of the Democrat politics of personal destruction. There's no honor, character, or integrity among the Dems anymore. Not sure why you'd count someone like that as your friend.

That line got my goat too. Followed by ".. the groundwork has not been laid for a serious debt debate". Time to get your head out of the sand, Mr. Gerson. You establishment types might want to trivialize and ignore it, but the TEA Party candidates have drawn the battle lines, and make no mistake - it WILL define the 2012 election. Americans WANT an actual balanced budget amendment, not just talk about one. Lead, follow or get the heck out of the way. But ignore the consequences of the 2010 election at your own peril.

David, I’m a big fan. Typically I really enjoy your columns. Unfortunately, I just don’t see the point in this one. I appreciate your heart and your desire to see America restored to its former greatness. But even the suggestion that Oblahma would consider such a change in direction is so completely farcicle that it doesn’t resonate anywhere in the universe of reality. It implies at best, that 0 simply doesn’t know any better and that there’s a possiblilty he could make a rational and different choice. On the contrary. He’s made his choice. And it’s not an intellectual issue; it’s a heart issue. I hear so many people say, ”can’t he see what he’s doing to the economy?” Yes he can. He’s doing it on purpose. People need to...

Add to that we're about to see unprecidented inflation thanks to Fed policy.

Ditto. Hilarious

I'm a Tea Party member, and I approve this message.

I absolutely agree with that our involvement in other countries' conflicts should be based on the question, "what's in the best interest of the U.S?" and/or "what's in it for us?". History has shown many times over, most recently with Libya, that a rebel faction can rise up with a "cry for freedom from their tyrannical leaders", and the U.S. will jump in with both feet. In the end we usually see one terrorist regime replaced with another terrorist regime, which (surprise!) is no longer loyal to the United States. We've been used time and again to settle internal disputes in countries who never were and never intended to be our aliles; who will never share our value for freedom of speech and religion; and who will never share our...

Perfect. A CNN "report" that references HuffPo as its source.

Ditto. Ironic too, that Mr. Greenberg indicts himself by his own criticisms. He seems to think that it's ok for him to discredit O'Reilly, Beck, Limbaugh, and Olbermann because of their style, while simultaneously failing to debate their positions with substance. Wasn't that the chief point of his complaint?

I believe it's telling that GOProud's response to the departure of the Heritage Foundation et al from CPAC was to denegrate them, not languish their action or lament the failure to find common ground. They didn't even acknowledge the great work of these organizations; just went straight to insults. GOProud has no interest in integrating into the conservative movement. Their goal is to take over.