Ho-hum. Opinion, opinion, opinion. A sprinkling of carefully selected facts along with the requisite faux moral outrage do not accurate reporting make. It is interesting, for the inquiring reader to note, that the Author is typically, regularly, and most reliably an ardent practitioner of vituperative screeds against the very systems of governance he praises here. The hypocrisy is strong with this one. That, and on the credibility scale of self-styled public intellectuals (which he decidedly is not) his rating, comparatively speaking, is near, or possibly even below, zero. Now, while this may seem a bit of editorializing on the part of your reviewer, rest assured it is not. 'Tis merely an accurate representation of the channel of duly informed consensus amongst the true cognoscenti. However, for the final word on the subject let us turn to the inimitable Samuel Langhorne Clemens, whom I believe said it best: "I am personally acquainted with hundreds of journalists, and the opinion of the majority of them would not be worth tuppence in private, but when they speak in print it is the newspaper that is talking (the scribe is not visible) and then their utterances shake the community like the thunders of prophecy."