Thomas L. Friedman

He's more of a neo-liberal, but really the differences between a hard-core neoconservative and a neo-liberal oftentimes simply comes to methods and execution.

This is a guy who recently argued that the Soviet Union never represented a threat to the US. Apparently he's forgotten that whole episode with Nikita Khrushchev banging his shoe on a table, threatening that "we will bury you," or a major confrontation like the Cuban Missile Crisis, or Berlin, or any other number of skirmishes during the Cold War. What's even more odd is that he considers Iran, a nation with only $7 billion in military expenditures against our $700 billion, no nuclear weapons, or delivery capabilities, a graver physical security threat to the US than the Soviets were.

Tell me again why he still has a regular spot on the op-ed page of the NY Times. Surely there are more meritorious writers out there than this guy.