The conservatives have rightly complained about the fiasco that was the CNN/YouTube debate, to say nothing of Chris Matthews' execrable moderating. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and it doesn't fit any better on that side.

Of course Mr. Musharraf doesn't want to share power. Who does? Does The Times want to share power and influence with the LA Times or with the Washington Post? Of course not.

The Trust doesn't answer to anybody anymore. They don't even have to be right.

By taking this preposterous action, the CIA has provided a signal service.

Having been put on the scent, the blogosphere discovered that this was only the tip of the iceberg.

Unlimited money, unlimited visibility, unlimited clout - what could possibly go wrong?

Somehow, we have reached the point where we view democracy and elections as ends in themselves. But they aren't.

Why "Hillary"? In 1980, did we have a race between Ronald and Jimmy?

Leaders know that there's nothing as disruptive as information.

What are we to make of the news that career State Department staffers are refusing to go to Iraq?