On the slim chance that someone clicks on the link to my comment and is wondering where the other Orwell quote came from (which I forgot to source) and then happens to reading the 500th plus comment in this thread ... it's from "As I please" (1944)

http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/eaip_02

and the link for "Notes on nationalism" is

http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=1&q=http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat&ei=7VdhSZfVMpjAtgex-4DnBg&usg=AFQjCNF6bFoe1LBzysLowKDpLJ1erANOgw

http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat

Copied the google search link by accident.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/opinion/05bolton.html?_r=2

By insisting on the proper constitutional process for treaty-making, Republicans can join Mr. Obama in advancing a bipartisan foreign policy. They can also help strike the proper balance between the legislative and executive branches that so many have called for in recent years

Har har, funny joke coming from John "no treaty" can prohibit the president from crushing children's testicles Yoo.

From "The Freedom of the Press"

http://orwell.ru/library/novels/Animal_Farm/english/efp_go

Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban. Anyone who has lived long in a foreign country will know of instances of sensational items of news — things which on their own merits would get the big headlines-being kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervened but because of a general tacit agreement that ‘it wouldn’t do’ to mention that particular fact. So far as the daily newspapers go, this is easy to understand. The British press is extremely centralised, and most of it is owned by wealthy men who have every motive to be dishonest on certain important topics. But the same kind of veiled censorship also operates in books and periodicals, as well as in plays, films and radio. At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals

There is no such thing as "terrrorist rights." There are human rights; and you're either for them or not.

I was here sitting at my computer, all fired up and ready to write a post about Obama's campaign pledge of lobbyist reform in relation to Tom Daschle, then happen to notice on the left of my blog in the blogroll this post about Daschle. I would have quoted this passage from Robert Reich's Supercapitalism:

Bipartisan lobbying firms serve rosters of blue-chip corporate clients. To push the Bush administration's Medicare drug benefit bill on Capitol Hill, the pharmaceutical manufacturers hired Democratic lobbyists Vic Fazio, a former Democratic congressman; David Beier, who had been a chief domestic policy adviser to Al Gore; and Joel Johnson, a former top aide to President Clinton and Senator Daschle [who also became a lobbyist after failing to get re-elected]. To push their side, the generic drug manufacturers hired Chris Jennings, who had helped devise Clinton's unlamented health plan, and former Republican Mark Isakowitz, who had helped defeat the Clinton plan. Similarly, in 1998, when tobacco companies wanted to sell Congress the settlement they had reached with state attorneys general over tobacco health claims, they turned for help to both Republican and Democratic lobbyists, including former Gore aide Peter Knight, the former Demcratic governer Ann Richards, and George Mitchell, former Democratic Senate majority leader.

While nonbusiness interests have better access to power under Democratically controlled government than under Republican, businesses have excellent access under both. Upon leaving office, more than half of the senior officials of the Clinton administration became corporate lobbyists. Clinton's first legislative director left his post after less than a year to become chairman of Hill & Knowlton Worldwide. Clinton's deputy chief of staff departed in less than a year to run the U.S Telephone Asociation. According to the Center for Public Integrity, between 1998 and 2004 more than 2,200 former high-ranking federal officials, from both Republican Democratic administrations, registered as federal lobbyists, as did over 200 former members of Congress. By 2003, more than half the total number of former members of Congress who were registered lobbyists had served as Democrats. Almost all were lobbying for large corpoarations.

Daschle is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress think-tank, which was founded by Obama transition chief John Podesta. Daschle advised CAP on health care.

I read this post before I read the Krugman column. I anticipated that Krugman's use of "heretics" would be in regards to the theology of supply-side economics. The next sentence in op-ed makes clear that's what he was talking about:

"In both the House and the Senate, the vast majority of Republicans rallied behind the idea that the appropriate response to the abject failure of the Bush administration’s tax cuts is more Bush-style tax cuts."

It's not that pressuring politicians to take a stand is inherently wrong, it's that supply side tax cutting has become a religion for the conservative movement based in faith and not reality. In his 1994 book Peddling Prosperity Krugman wrote that "Not only is there no major deptartment that is supply-side in orientation; there is no economist whom one might call a supply-sider in any major [economics] department.”