It's possible, if the speech gets enough play and fair analysis, it could alter the campaign dynamics. It could have more of an impact on ordinary voters than the handicappers are able to predict right now.

-Dirigo

That's the big "if". I wish Obama had given that speech after most people were home . My first thought, even before he was quite done was "He probably just won the election". Later when I heard the FOX-fest , I got depressed .(Point of disclosure , I was skeptical in the beginning, and am late to the Obama party) I expected a "ho-hum" slightly negative reaction . Instead, it's an almost complete tranformation from what the speech actually was . The anchor's (self)reference to the "media frenzy" and Obama "desperately" trying to turn attention elsewhere , a pollster showing Obama's decline , contrary to every other one I've seen , Brit Hume purposely misconstruing things into Obama contradicting himself ,Dick Morris concluding he was permanently damaged , etc,etc,etc.After that, I couldn't stomach checking out the rest of the MSM.

I talked to a FOXophile, that heard the entire speech . His conclusion was that the speech was too good , and Obama = "Slick Willie" II .( He also thinks the whole thing was planned , even after I reminded him of the sermon dates. ) However, he was also disgusted by FOX . "They're full of shit" , to be exact.

If most get to see/hear the speech itself, instead of highlights + what the talking heads say he said , Obama might have made some good lemonade . Hoping.

Good to hear . It's the people without computers, and those with them, for their spouse, that don't touch them , that I worry about, though .

"Recall also that Mohammed Atta, the lead 9/11 hijacker stems from this milieu."

Atta wasn't "lead" anything, according to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. It was the al-Hamzi cousins. (btw, he wasn't in Prague;there was no meeeting)

That big sucking sound was your credibility . ;)

Is what I get . Will try the latest link . tempus , here's Al Jazeera English http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/55ABE840-AC30-41D2-BDC9-06BBE2A36665.htm

Anybody think this idea will get any MSM mention?(In related news , Hell's hockey team has a new manager ;) That is ,the Iraq operation as a new type of crime, or at least a new recognition, that of "Corporate Genocide" .

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/10BD41A2-B1F8-41A2-95B2-45898566C48E.htm

Formal education doesn't have to be bad . Luckily , I was blessed with two teachers that saw this coming , even worse than what it was then (70's, 80's). One spent a whole week on propoganda, techniques, and historical examples , including this country . It came up from time to time otherwise .(Imagine how she'd be crucified now, esp if she came to the attn. of the RWNM?) Another saw her job not as teaching what to think, but as getting us to think, and giving us at least the beginnings of how to start doing it. "The rest is up to you, your job, for the rest of your lives . Don't ever stop."

Forgot who mentioned it , but the disbelieving reaction to Chomsky is familiar. Whenever I tried to refute the Osama-Saddam "connection" (among other things) before the war , the usual reaction was a blank stare, and maybe a comment, that suggested that I was making it up. I was the crazy one .

http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/iraq/

A shooter-type , spouting the heroic liberator narrative, paid a visit there a few days ago.(Telling an Iraqi how much better off she is . O-M-G!) Got slapped around a bit. Don't think he learned anything , though.

Riverbend's blog ,Baghdad Burning, and several others are linked on the author's blogroll.

Here's another . He doesn't post often, but there are also links to others .http://pentra.blogspot.com/

There were some links on the Charlie Rose comments

http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25373

www.democracynow.org

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/634/bo1.htm

but appropos for yesterday :http://driftglass.blogspot.com/

"Iraqalypse Now" lol!

JulieAnna, Pinky, et al , you're buying in that there actually was a safehouse and a call. Doubt it . If you go with the 9/11 - inside job theory, you'd have to assume OBL was in on it (the videos, the stock sales, etc) A bit of a stretch . Simple explanations,in anything, that are based on incompetence,laziness, and foolishness/stupidity are a lot more likely . Our current Politburo have shown themselves , numerous times, to be too clueless, delusional, and incompetent to pull off something as elaborate and delicately structured as you propose.

Maybe part of the problem is the whole liberal/conservative dichotomy . In the political cw they're opposites, but by dictionary definition (Webster's not Limbaugh's ;) they're not. They're not even mutually exclusive . Maybe we need a new labeling system , with two axes (at least). Also it might help to think of the labels positionally, on particular issues, rather than a state of being. How about the consevative/radical axis and and authoritarian/libertarian axis? Maybe a collective/individual axis ?

By this ,for example, the Bush Administration is squarely in the "radical-authoritarian " quadrant on most issues, except for regulation and high income taxes where it's "radical-libertarian".

But McCain actually wants to fix it.

Elephantman, do the Iraqis get any say about being "fixed"? If so , Obama's their guy.

LWM, I hadn't heard of that. No doubt accurate political descriptions would be mind-numbing for most, in part because so many pols are opportunistically inconsistent. It would be nice though, to expand it just a little bit beyond our current two-dimensionality. I suspect part of the problem is that most of the punditry aren't exactly bright lights, or much interested in thinking, or the work of researching politicians.