This phenomenon is yet another example of the different meanings of Republican electoral victories, which are universally hailed as sweeping mandates, and Democratic ones, which are at best aberrations, fraught with danger. Bush, who promised a "humble" foreign policy and a "change of tone" in Washington, was lauded as "bold" when tilting far to the right despite losing the election. No one questioned that even the most cockamamie and destructive policies, the craziest judges, and the mean-spirited attacks on any critics were anything less than his "due."

Worse, the predictably disastrous outcomes of his policies, which fell like rain for eight years, were explained away as almost meteorological events that "no one could have predicted." Thus an entire administration slid into upward failure, where medals of honor and promotions were bestowed upon those who deserved a pink slip and/or jail.

But woe to any Democrat who might actually deign to behave like one. The "dangers" of, say, protecting the environment, expanding access to health care, or tightening regulations on our kleptocratic financial system are endlessly trotted out, and a bewildered public is assaulted with nonsense about how, say, not torturing people or prosecuting flagrant war criminals would surely have the direst consequences.

Sadly but predictably, it seems that the most eager exponents of the Bush Legacy Project are precisely those who praised, admired, and told us how wonderful things really were all these years, despite glaring evidence to the contrary... The Village Idiots, who have managed to fail, if not upward like Kristol, at least laterally like Ignatius et al while the country was looted like the Baghdad Museum.

Clearly, these narcissistic cretins have a vested interested in shoving the criminality, stupidity, and moral turpitude of the Bush years under the rug, since without some drastic intervention their credibility would be even lower than the President they all have been making excuses for all these years.

Would that any of them would have the humility, or plain common sense, to simply admit that Republican policies have failed, and it's time for their complete repudiation. No, far better to speak of the peril of "looking backward." The sight in the rear-view isn't very pretty, and "no one could have predicted" that.

Well, it turns out that Shooter is the Dr. Spock of the right, with some pretty good advice for parents (like Israel) of errant children (the Palestinians.) Who'd a thunk it, but you guessed it, a whupping is involved. This sparing the rod business is obviously a liberal plot. It's time for the kind of learnin' they don't teach in books, sayeth the Sage of New Jersey. (erstwhile)

Jeez. The hanger scene from "Mommie Dearest," with Israel in the Joan Crawford role. Sounds like a recipe for success to me.

I like Maureen O'Donnell's idea better... (is it just me or has the weinie crept into the conversation with unusual frequency today?)

Omooex hits Jojo's point very well; why don't we start setting aside the moral questions about war, which simply don't sell in America, where "life" must now always be qualified by "innocent," and bloodshed amongst those we're told have it coming anyway never matters.

Money, and its disappearance, however, seems to be something every American suddenly cares about. Shouldn't, say, Iraq, be subjected to as ruthless a cost/benefit analysis as the bank bailout? Oops. Bad example.

Couldn't our escalating military adventures and those of our client states like Israel be discussed for what they are; throwing money in the street? Particularly now that there isn't any money to throw. Even shooter has mentioned this, and I think it has tremendous validity. We're tired of the circuses and we need some bread.

My, what a wonderful world it would be, if only the media were interested in asking really relevant and important questions with impact on all of our lives, so sayeth the troll.

Say, like Bill Clinton and Monica. Why, the shameful silence of the media, pushing that whole thing under the rug for ten years, now it can finally receive the attention it deserves.

And for valuable insight, what could beat getting to the bottom of that Tawana Brawley story, at long last? Viewers would flock to MTP to hear about that!

And perhaps the one of these genius suggestions which might have current relevance, that of the financial collapse, can now be turned into a homophobic wank-fest for righty peeping Toms, by turning it into something to do with Barney Frank's sex life.

The only possible way political coverage could be any stupider and less valuable to democracy than it already is would be to try it Ehiilesum's way.

Several of you supporting Israel's actions ask the same question, essentially. What should Israel do about rocket attacks, given its massive military dominance? The answer, of course, is the same as it's been for forty years.... Bomb some Arabs. Round the rest up. Fun, satisfying, and at times even exhilarating, but as a path to peace it hasn't been successful. The logical extension of this argument, to which you are curiously blind given its significance, is that this strategy will eventually pay off, but only when there are no more Palestinians.

A few hundred a day isn't going to cut it, though. Since you're so easily able to dehumanize others and see tribal violence as essential to survival, perhaps that's the argument you should be making.