Not much time this afternoon, so here's a self-serving link to one of the only reasons to ever view the NY Times Op/Ed page (Bob Herbert, the other, has a weak column today about the Iraq war) - Paul Krugman.
Krugman points out what I mentioned in the Krauthammer post last week - if the problem with Social Security is that benefits may one day need to be cut, cutting benefits doesn't count as a solution.
A hilarious counterpoint to Krugman's column ran yesterday = David Brooks argues, essentially, that Democrats have no right to complain about President Bush cutting benefits for people making more than $20,000 per year because they didn't like it when Bush gave a massive tax cut to people making over $200,000 a year.
Which makes sense, probably, to whoever traded Shaq. But to me it's a little tough to grasp.