Johnny and Jane Buzzkills;

Bill and Sara Naysayers;

Ethel and Julius Paraderainers;

Luke and Laura Fencesitters;

Oh, man, that was your opportunity to include the ever-delightful Monty Burnsisms, like Joe Sixpack and Sally Housecoat

"greed is good Christianity"

In MM's new movie there's a clip of Phil Gramm stating, "When I think of Wall Street has done for the average American, I feel it's a holy place." Only if you worship the God of Money.

What do you bet, ala Salon's piece on Conservapedia's "Conservative Bible Project," that On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there (NIV), will be one of Conservapedia's target verses?

They'll make a few alterations so it'll read something like

And Jesus entered the temple and began driving out those who were agitating for justice and so disrupting holy business between priests, acolytes and Imperial bankers. Jesus exclaimed, "You would make this house of business a temple of justice? Man, when I get done with you little socialists ...

For eight years we've been bemoaning the Dems lack of spine. Finally, when someone at the DNC shows one ... it offends your delicate sensitivities and gives you the vapors as you swoon with distaste on your feinting couch.

You call this stuff "spine"?

How about this for spine: refusing to increase troop levels in Afghanistan; stopping the expansion of Bagram cloaked with the sleight-of-hand that Guantanamo is being closed; genuine banking reform (see the earlier post On the government's owners); a legitimate debate on government secrecy, ala FISA, FOIA, State Secrets claims, etc.

That'd be a demonstration of spine. The rest of this stuff--certainly with respect to what many have posted here today--is only so much sorry misdirection.

I'm all in favor of applying disgusting political rhetoric and twisted political arguments to the purveyors of such tactics in order to demonstrate their hypocrisy and/or to neutralize those tactics.

I was really surprised about the Media Matters role in this. It puzzles me that so many of these progressive outlets cannot see their response for what it is.

This stuff like

One could expect this reaction from our nation's enemies, but it is unseemly and downright unpatriotic coming from American political leaders (MM's Chris Harris)

is just pathetic.

As you (GG) rightly note

Whether Obama is actually pursuing policies of peace happens to be an extremely legitimate topic of debate.

Even more than legitimate, it is absolutely critical that these policies be debated. This is as true now--not less so--as it was in 2002 and 2003 (but what do we have? More ink spilled, as it were, over this Nobel issue than has been used over the past eight years, certainly with respect to an Afghanistan debate on the merits).

Similarly, it is of equally critical import to beat the drum daily that this

leader ... is advocating, actively prosecuting and escalating, a major war that is killing large numbers of civilians with no plans to stop, while at the same time building prisons to house people who will have no due process.

Frankly, I really do not understand the reversal that outfits such as Media Matters has engaged in. And there were posts up at Daily Kos also, as I recall, similar in tone (no links because I ain't goin' over there).

Well, the good news is that Naomi Klein, The Nation's Kim, and others didn't all take this tack.

Karl Rove must be quivering with pleasure at the thought that his Enemies have adopted his tactics, convinced in his vindication that he understands comprehensively the petty, spiteful nature of humanity in a political context.

And that's nearly as depressing as the rest of this.

But Glenn posted anecdotal images of dead innocent children caused by Barack Obama not immediately withdrawing all troops from Afghanistan!!

I kind of thought they were horrific pictures illustrating what our efforts at "liberation" have wrought.

And I further thought these criminal maimings (and I'm assuming the children photographed didn't die) were caused by actual American weaponry--stuff like those nifty drones directed by someone in California who plays a deadly etude on his keyboard before taking a coffee break and complaining about the smog.

It's helpful, I think, to speak directly to cause and effect in cases like this rather than try to somehow elevate or otherwise soften the brutal reality that is American foreign policy. Using words like anecdotal simply mocks this criminality.

I just returned to see that we're well over 600 letters. Man, you'd think Obama won the Nobel or something equally bizarre.

Now look, bernbart

Rush on same page now ... Well Glenn has joined Rush and the right in complaining about Obama getting the Nobel prize.

Where is it written that one has to be in lock-step with another who has rhetorically (as opposed to actually) professed a shared political philosophy/outlook on a variety of issues?

You're as aware as the rest of us that GG writes at length about civil liberties and Obama's efforts at perpetuating the worst of GWB's abuses.

You've read the same posts the rest of us have read--the silence from the current administration regarding Bagram; the military's agitation for troop increases in Afghanistan; the utter lack of accountability and responsibility by the likes of Goldman Sachs; the weak-kneed response to Israel's continued expansion of settlements.

And that's just the stuff off the top of my head.

So we're to remain silent because Obama's a Democrat? Even though he (and Rahm, of course) consistently ignore Progressives while simultaneously demanding those same Progressives be quiet and toe the party line because--God forbid--we end up with another GOP WH and Congress?

What a preposterous false choice. And as long as people believe this, they'll always, always be forced to settle based on terms dictated by the very people who've created our problems.

You know--and here comes that cursed word--the elite.