Glenn: Every time Klein is attacked in swarms by bloggers and commenters, he spends the next 3 weeks in atonement, writing anti-McCain and anti-Bush posts, anti-war posts, apologizing for post conduct, etc.

Indeed, consider the following as evidence:

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/04/too_many_kagans_too_little_kno.html

But Klein is constantly billed as a "liberal". Still, it's nice to see him doing some fact-based blogging once in a while.

I rather like the idea mentioned on a previous thread of having a copy of Great American Hypocrites shipped to your favorite local newsreader. While it may not be as visible as a copy donated to a library, it may have a more direct effect on attitudes in newsrooms.

The only problem is, of course, how to make sure that the recipient reads it. For the newsreaders that I am familiar with, the only sure-fire way to guarantee their reading is through their egos. The message included with the book should read:

I was fascinated by the references to you in this book.

First, re conspiracies: Personally, I consider the spectacular success of the September 11 attacks to be dispositive that the Bush administration had nothing to do with it. From what I have seen of the Bush administration, both before and after, the result of the attacks might be what could be expected if the Bush administration were actively trying to prevent them.

I mean, you might as well consider Hurricane Katrina to be a Bush administration conspiracy in which they conjured up a hurricane and steered towards NOLA in order to stop a gay pride parade. As far as I can see, the disastrous aftermath of Katrina is the natural outcome of the Bush administration trying to protect a major American city from a category 5 hurricane.

As for the idea that the intercept mentioned my Mukasey is one that was legally obtained pre-9/11 but not acted on at the time or not followed up to be highly likely. I have always felt that analysis of pre-9/11 intercepts would indicate that there was enough information available to predict, if not prevent, the attacks if the dots were connected. Unfortunately, the Bush administration was not in the dot connecting business at the time, having "other priorities".

Hopefully, this 8-year-long tragedy-of-errors is almost over. Bush ran a campaign based on returning "dignity" to the White House. I fervently hope that whoever the Democratic nominee is plans on running a campaign based on returning competence to the White House.

I propose that everyone who buys Glenn's new book buy two copies. The second copy should be sent to the print or broadcast media reporter of one's choice. Choose a local or national reporter and simply have Amazon send the second copy to them.

The price of the book and the shipping to the reporter would be less than $25. Amazon makes it easy to include a brief gift message to the recipient, so include a polite greeting to the reporter. I'm going to send my second copy to a local TV news anchorman with a reputation for a barely concealed right-of-center bias.

If 10% of them actually read the book, that will be progress!

I think you could guarantee that 100% would read the book. Just include with your gift message the statement "I read/watch/listen to you regularly and I was fascinated by the references to you in this book." Which of these people could pass up an opportunity to see his/her name in print?

Alas, I don't think it will work. Not that they are not as vain as you posit, of course. The problem is that they have all mastered one investigative skill, at least: immediately upon picking up any book about journalism or politics, the first each reporter will do is look for him or herself in the index. Then one of two things will happen: (A) she will not see her name, in which case the book is put down and never opened again; or (B) he does find his name, turns to the page where he is mentioned, realizes he is being criticized -- in which case the book is put down and never opened again.

Sorry.

Yes, that is precisely what would happen if you don't include the note that mentions the references to them in the book with the book. When they don't find their name in the index, the possibility that they might miss seeing their name in print will force them to look through the book, at least scanning each page for their name.

If you just send them the book without suggesting that their name appears in it somewhere, what you describe is precisely what will happen. But if you hint that their name appears somewhere in the book, you could send them a textbook on vector analysis and they'd read it.

I was stuck by this phrase in this article: "domestic military operations". I had always understood that we have a law that specifically prohibits domestic military operations, that is, it prohibits the regular military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force) from being used in any way in any conflict within US borders.

No, the US military is prohibited from carrying out law enforcement (search, seizure, arrest) in the USA by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. The military can perform other functions within the US, such as emergency services (particularly in natural disasters), protecting property, or more mundane tasks such as delivering mail. And, of course, if the United States is invaded by enemy forces, the US military stands ready to defend the country.

If the US military could not be used in any conflict within the US, anyone who wanted to invade the US would have a free ride as soon as they got a foot on American soil.