The report was a interesting one. The fact that Anders Breivik sent a 1500 page manifesto tells a whole lot. He told people his intentions to kill about 1000 people. Unfortunately the police was unable to capture Breivik before his killing spree began. It's a tragic set of events that took place in Norway.

Wow! No one wants to confront the issue of Breivik and what he has done, at all?

I was more than appalled. I became fearful that his main mission, in my view the creation of a large contingent of fresh faced northern European martyrs for his cause of white supremacy, might be fulfilled but when I saw coverage of Bano Rashid’s and Mona Abdinur’s (a transplanted Iraqi Kurd and a Somali-Norwegian) funerals, I understood that Norway had found a way to utilize Muslim funeral convention (quick burial) for the larger purpose of singling these “foreign” youngsters out and eulogizing them to the point of idealization. Breivik’s purpose thwarted!

I wish American politicians so adept at thinking on their feet, which this effectively was but as the police rescue mission was not.

Re: "Nonviolent knives". Can you provide a link to more information about the Belgian politician who was interviewed by the BBC about distributing knives to his supporters? I can't find the story on Google News. Thanks.

Charles -- "The Family" was most certainly not an attack on Republicans. It was not an attack, and it was about both Democrats and Republicans -- there's a chapter about Hillary Clinton, for instance -- who feel that transparency is not a part of the process by which they bring their religious ideas to bear on policy making. Are my sympathies to the left? That's fair to say, and I make that plain in my work -- I'm from the school of journalism that holds it's better to reveal one's perspective plainly than to pretend neutrality. Then again, it's never that simple -- the heroes of my last book, "C Street," were all devout Christians, right down to the end with a self-described fundamentalist street preacher who put liberty of conscience as the highest of his religious values.

Charles,
While "The Family" is primarily composed of Republicans, there are also Democratic members. So it's hard to take seriously your characterization of the work as "an expose/attack on Congressional Republicans."

I find it curious that Jeff Sharlet was introduced as simply a "Dartmouth professor who frequently writes about religion."

Sharlet has an extensive history as an advocacy journalist, apart from acadmia. He is the author of "The Family," an expose/attack on Congressional Republicans. A list of his articles is a travelogue through American liberal press. All of which would make him qualified, and comfortable, in a left-wing haven like OTM.

http://jeffsharlet.com/content/articles/

Just a couple of observations on comments made by your guest who used to work for WSJ. His concern over a journalist and/or publication being labeled as being biased: mainstream media has been accused of "liberal" bias continually by nearly everyone on Fox that the general public accepts it as fact. He also confirmed my fear that reporters simply don't want to do their job, which is research their stories, because, as he said, "there isn't enough time." That's no excuse. If someone says that all feminists are lesbians or all Democrats are liberal or when Jon Kyl said that abortion services accounted for 90% of Planned Parenthood's expenses, the public relies upon whoever is reporting the story to both question the source of the person's information and to do their own research. Frankly, Jon Stewart and his staff seem to be the only folks doing this kind of work most, if not all, of the time.