On a not entirely unrelated note, one of the panels I am on at Yearly Kos this year is entitled "Blogs and the MSM: from Clash to Civilization". The panel, to be moderated by The Nation's Ari Melber, also features Jill Filipovic of the Feministe blog and Mike Allen of The Politico, whose journalism I examined here.

That should be a warm and bracing conversation. If you get a chance, I wonder if you might inquire of Mr. Allen if it is normal for a news director to also be a contributor to a political party. It is my understanding that both the news director and ownership of The Politico are financial contributors to the Republican Party. I'm all for healthy partisanship, but shouldn't it be out in the open?

And if so, shouldn't they disclose this fact when making appearances in the media, and reporting at their blog? After all, when stock analysts appear on TV or blogs, they always disclose whether they have any financial interests in the companies they are reporting on--this is important information for consumers of financial news.

In the same vein, wouldn't it be fair--and helpful for consumers of political news--if those reporters stated something like: "before we get started, I need to disclose to your viewers that my news director and the owners of my company have contributed financially and in other ways to the Republican Party".

...we wind up performing Kremlinology on the simplest of stories, suspicious of everything we're told, literally "knowing" nothing, theorizing the worst, drawing conclusions from error.

Naturally stresses of this kind are destablilizing for the individual, leading to widespread passivity as a coping mechanism.

Very true, but I think it goes further than that. The rise of conspiracy theories of all kinds stems (to a large degree, maybe) from an individual sense that he or she ain't being told the truth. So passivity is one reaction, but not the only one.

Institutions are also being harmed, along with individuals. Take DOJ, for example. Or Homeland Security. The song-and-dance that passes for news (and the fact that the AG is a liar of course) harms public faith and confidence in our institutions. Gonna take years to get it back.

that their beliefs and decisions are grounded in theology and religion and moral absolutism, not politics or pragmatism.

or Law.

We've known since the Nixon-Kennedy debates that appearances matter and that candidates wear makeup. But the american media wants it both ways. If candidates don't look like film stars, the media snipe at them for it. But if candidates invest the money needed to look like a film star (and investment is the proper word I think), the media will snipe at them anyway.

Lincoln wouldn't stand a chance.

There are simply too many scandals to keep track of.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/18074.html

We've had a number of debates about how many Daniel Ellsbergs were left in government. It appears there have been a few.

And that is encouraging. Tempering that a bit is the fact that we're looking at an article in The Guardian, a UK outlet, about actions and statements by a European legislator.

And the thought dawned on me that it takes more than one thing to bring an inside whistle-blower to the public. Yes, one has to have the whistle-blower willing to risk ruining his or her life by going public. But we also must have a fourth estate that is willing and eager to find such people and properly use the information whistle-blowers have.

The way things are going, one can envision a whistle-blower taking great risks to reach out to a media regarding some malfeasance, and having the media look at that person and say "yeah? So What?"

I believe it can also be asked:

Is the CATHOLIC political platform contrary to Catholic teaching?

Because 2004 was in some ways a coming-out party for the catholic church as a political entity.

One might also ask:

Is the BEHAVIOR of the catholic church contrary to Catholic teaching:

"Church is said to settle L.A. sex abuse cases

By Laurie Goodstein

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Lawyers for more than 500 people who say they were victims of sexual abuse by Roman Catholic clergy members said they had settled their lawsuits against the Archdiocese of Los Angeles for $660 million.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/15/news/abuse.php

Apparently, nobody except Gerson is allowed to claim divine knowledge of "WWJD".

Yes. Just him (and George Bush of course).

Did you see the video of her on the Senate floor last night? Like I said, she made me proud.

-- Michael Harold

I saw her last night on CSPAN and thought she was very good. She followed Alexander from Tennessee and I thought refuted his points well. She had a tinge of anger that helped the delivery immensely.

The one who most impressed me was Menendez of NJ. I had not heard him speak before and he was particularly good.

What can one even say about all of this?

Well, for one thing, make sure Cheney is on board for the next one. Most cruises now offer skeet shooting.

Clearly, we'll need a spreadsheet to compile all of the vile, hateful, political pronouncements that your own readership is responsible for.

This from one who's been spreading sheet here, steamy and thick, without any aid from software

To Jonah Goldberg, to win the War in Iraq, we need to be more ruthless, which means we have "a single-minded determination to win."

Excellent. I'm all for winning. Who is it we're winning against?