Please, see if you can get that one into the Democratic platform for '08. "... the country that Israel stole from the Palestinians..." I'm rooting for you! Keep rooting for the Indians, too! And you're not talking about Cleveland, are you? Matter of fact, I'd like to see you make an empassioned plea for all of the oppressed peoples that the Democrats will help in '08; the Palestinian Authority, the Tamil Tigers, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Robert Mugabe, Kim Jong Il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah, Bashir Assad... so many oppressed groups, so little time!

I appreciate your comments:

No, Elephantman, It's REALITY That Has A Left-Wing Bias

Program on International Policy Alternatives (10/03/2003):

Variation in Misperception by Support for President and News Source

Frequency of misperception that evidence of links to al Qaeda have been found among:

Bush supporters who watch: Fox 78% / PBS-NPR 50%

Democratic nominee supporters who watch: Fox 48% / PBS-NPR 0%

http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03/IraqMedia_Oct03_rpt.pdf (pg. 21)

One can easily see why BushCo Republicans hate public broadcasting. For all its faults, it does a lousy job of brainwashing Democrats.

-- Paul Rosenberg

For my part, I never cared much about any allegations about WMD's, and I never cared about or believed in any Saddam/Al Qaeda link. (I favored the removal of Saddam based on Iraq's unrelenting targeting of, and resistnace to, our defense of the Northern and Southern No-Fly Zones. If you target an American warplane, in my view, and keep doing it for ten years, it is an act of war.)

But I am more forgiving than you are about simplistic understandings of terrorist states. Inasmuch as many Americans, in the aftermath of 9/11, believed in an essential truth that any state or organization that officially cheered the attacks, that would not play a constructive role in the war on terror, was a part of the problem.

We could poll Americans on all sorts of misperceptions. We might find majorities of Americans who believe that JFK was murdered by a conspiracy. Or that silicone gel breast implants cause a wide range of diseases. Or that wealthy Americans pay a small share of the total the income tax burden.

So I always bristle when critics pick on the polling that you cite. It just makes me want to poll the constituents of John Conyers and Charlie Rangel to check their current events knowledge.

Do you perhaps have time for an unkind word for whoever it was that planted the bomb, wore the explosives, or who drove the truck?

If someone wanted to, Salon could feature some writing about the bloodthirsty subhumans who are planting these bombs. Right?

Or do you think that President Bush is responsible for bombings in Baghdad?

the same day that the DJI closes above 13k. Some bankruptcy. Could we get 25 more years of this kind of bankruptcy, please?

...the Salon faithful equating (or worse?!?) the U.S. military with the terrorists.

Can you please find room for that in the '08 Democratic platform along with "the land that the Israelis stole from the Palestinians..."?

Oh, and the Department of Peace, too, if Dennis Kucinich isn't too busy impeaching Vice President Cheney...

"It is also worth remembering that nearly 700 civilians were killed by the Taliban last year. According to the New York-based Human Rights Watch, the civilian death toll caused by militant Islamist groups is more than three times the total caused by U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. According to Joanne Mariner, the group's director on terrorism and counterterrorism, "The insurgents are increasingly committing war crimes, often by directly targeting civilians."

"But credit is at least due to both Russert and Beinart for appearing on Moyers' program and facing his appropriately confrontational questions."

Moyers, on the other hand, has shown no such courage.

His interviews in the days leading up to the Wednesday broadcast? Terry Gross. Bob Edwards. Tavis Smiley. Amy Goodman.

Not one challenging question put to Moyers.

I should mention: There was one other interview that I am aware of, besides those four NPR lovefests.

It occurred on a sidewalk in New York City, where Moyers was ambushed by a producer from the O'Reilly Factor. I don't like ambush interviews myself, but it does not excuse Moyers' bald-faced lies about the name-calling that he had engaged in regarding Fox news. It was an embrassment to Moyers; O'Reilly played the taped of Moyers saying the things he had denied saying.

What is Salon.com's position on any disclosure-obligation that Glenn Greenwald might have had in regard to information referenced in this quote, from the Wikipedia entry for Moyers?

"In 2003 the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy, of which Moyers is president, gave money to a variety of establishments which have been described as "left leaning," such as the Christian evangelical magazine Sojourners ($500,000), Salon.com ($277,785) and The Nation magazine ($115,000)[13]. He has also been involved with the group Take Back America, an organization that seeks to help elect liberal political candidates."

The part of Moyers' show that I found genuinely valuable was the general sausage-factory quality of journalism, even at places like the NYT and WaPo and the televsion networks. But of course, those of us on the right have been pointing out MSM errors and omissions for a very long time. Welcome to the party.

That part of Moyers' show that I found least credible was his ham-handed attempt to ascribe a method and motive for the likes of the NYT to 'conspire with' the Bush Administration. Last time I checked, the NYT has vigorously opposed every Republican presidential candidate since about 1875, and features an anti-Bush editorial about 2.4 times a day.