Just wait until a Democrat becomes president in '08. Rush will be doing his part to encourage the extreme right wing to do something manly, which will end up with an increase in right-wing domestic terrorism.

Of course, Rush won't be alone. He'll have the mainstream "liberal" media helping to spread the lies and bullshit and what not about the Democrat president, just like they did with Clinton. Except now we've had a terrorist attack and the market deregulations which allow the noise to thrive have increased its influence and further eroded whatever remnants of decent journalism this country had.

Back in 2000 (before the election) Chris Mathews said he thought Al Gore wasn't very American.

Eric Alterman also noticed Mathews tendency for man-crush "journalism"

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070409/alterman

"We're proud of our President. Americans love having a guy as President, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton.... Women like a guy who's President. Check it out." - Chris Mathews

In It Can Happen Here Conason notes that one of the Podhoretzs - I can't remember if it was Norman or John - wrote an article in 2002 delighting that an invasion of Iraq would have the benefit of distracting the public from the corporate scandals and/or it would be a good election issue or some such.

I wish I had my notes with me so that I could find the exact article, but you get the idea. Its not above these folks to start a war for partisan political reasons. Conason also notes Irving Kristol writing an article righting that invading Grenada was a good way to improve public opinion after the marine barracks bombing in Lebanon.

Really, we should be out in the streets protesting that these folks are still allowed anywhere near the military.

That's what Cohen and the rest are ... ghosts in the machine. Every now and then they appear to journalists doing journalistic work, but its most just a phantasm that you see. The machine has taken over.

Paul Rosenberg has been calling this the Versailles press. In The Assault on Reason, Gore quotes Habermas as saying that we're seeing the "refeudalization of the public sphere."

These neo-vassals are trying to push us out of the democratic process. That's what an article like this from Cohen amounts to. I ain't gonna be a serf.

But Cohen wrote a column a week or so ago where he tried to revise reality to describe Bush as a "neoliberal"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/28/AR2007052801053.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Years ago, someone coined the term "neoliberal." I was never sure what it meant, and it has since fallen into disuse, but whatever the case, I'd like to revive (and mangle) the term and apply it -- brace yourself -- to George W. Bush. He's more liberal than you might think.

that kind of bullshit is helping to head this country off a right-wing cliff.

But in case anyone hasn't mentioned it yet, philosopher Peter Singer noticed the Good/Evil mentality of the President and wrote a book about it a couple of years ago.

http://www.amazon.com/President-Good-Evil-Ethics-George/dp/0525948139

The President of Good and Evil: The Ethics of George Bush

I point this out 1)because if you haven't read it then it might be a nice companion to read along with Glenn's new books and 2)Singer in analyzing the President's rhetoric of Good vs. Evil takes him at his word and does not speculate about his inner motivations. Singer's focus was on demonstrating that the president does not act from any coherent ethical base.