I also harbor some hope that the more time that elapses before this issue is settled, the greater the chance that public outcry, and maybe some of our letters and donations, will have an effect. Remember when Michael Powell (more rightie nepotism....) tried to ram through media deregulation?

Three million angry comments stopped him cold.

Sometimes the Washington bubble is so thick it takes a massive assault to pop it. This could well be one of those cases, given the rank obviousness of it all. Ordinary people understand that ex post facto absolution in inexcusable. The fact that every American who can fog a mirror has had an unpleasant experience with their favorite telecom ought to play a role, too. Further, a lot of truly disgusting behavior from the right as they trot out, for the umpteenth time, the "weak on terra" taunts. There is some evidence this tactic is beginning to backfire.

Let's all keep the pressure up.

The lack of historical perspective so pervasive in the US is clearly at the root of the problem, but its source seems something of a mystery. I'm 43 year old college dropout, and I understand these things, so I'm constantly aghast at "leaders" seem so clueless about what separates a democracy from a dictatorship.

One theory, and probably the only one that holds water, is that the shallowness and inanity of what we call "news," and the treatment of politics as a subject unfit for polite conversation, has rendered even those who know better unable to stand up for American values.

Your hypothesis that this tendency is spreading to the rest of the world hasn't really been borne out by my experience, so far, but the increasing globalization of the media may well make it a reality.

It seems fitting that the telecom behemoths and their kissing cousins in the media are jumping into this fight, because this is the world they want.

Your letter hit more excellent points than I could have, and with the respect and civility that is so difficult to maintain these days.

If that doesn't get him, nothing will.

Thank you for posting that Shailagh Murray piece. It was the most deceptive, nauseating piece of slanted nonsense I have seen in, oh, several days.

How do these people get jobs? I watched Dodd's speech, (thanks, Glenn) and there wasn't anything "breathless" about it. Indeed, it was an eminently sensible and principled response to a critically important issue. And the unabashed contempt she shows for those who would dare choose principle over political gain is as repulsive as it is journalistically indefensible. Indeed, the same creatures of the MSM who constantly scold Bush opponents as "political" can't seem to let go of their craven and shallow focus on politics to honestly convey to their readers (victims?) what they saw with their own eyes.

I'm as disgusted as you are.

When I was in the U of O journalism school, there were two, count 'em, two people in my Reporting 1 class of 25 or so who could, or had any ambition to, write. The rest were all just languidly jumping through a hoop on their way into PR or advertising.

How did Murray end up at the WaPo?

Burston Marsteller wouldn't hire her?

Will the narcissism and megalomania never cease? The idea that there could even be such a thing as Shooter derangement syndrome is a product of someone who not only overestimates his own intelligence, but drastically overestimates his own significance. Basking in negative attention like a child soon to be sent to military school, he then convinces himself that he's really got someone's dander up, when he merely has been treated to a collective eye roll, like the crazy uncle who drinks too much at holidays.

Bush Derangement Syndrome, as he would call it, now afflicts 76% of Americans. It has much to do with a rank incompetent with too much power, who having been handed the world on a platter, is still pissed off at everybody. Worse, the obvious pleasure he takes in insulting, devaluing, and harming or even killing others clearly makes him a sadistic sociopath.

While Shooter displays many of these endearing qualities, he is decidedly not President, and is far too insignificant to have a syndrome, or anything else, named after him.

Maybe a stool sample.

MMG and Kitt....

If those three were to be guesting, I would be forced to take the week off from work.

"There are times when it is more than a moral duty to speak one's mind... It becomes a pleasure."

--Gwendolyn Fairfax in The Importance of Being Earnest

One must really wonder about the naivete of black evangelicals, homophobic or not, to ally themselves with the rapture right. These are the same folks who pander to Jews, leaving aside for the moment what they think will happen to them, come the rapture.

They also are largely responsible for the "seg academies" that allowed white racists to "protect" their children from attending schools with black children.

Obama should point out that bigotry is bigotry, and surely black evangelicals should get this.

White racists, anti-semites, and homophobes must be laughing all the way to the ballot box, and the thought that Obama could gain votes from such pandering is laughable.

There are no votes among homophobes for any Democrat; and black homophobes are so deluded as to be unmoved by reason.

If he thinks otherwise, he's not smart enough to be President

I'm delighted, albeit a little surprised, at how this issue has caught on. Good work Glenn, FDL, and most of all Senator Dodd.