Ms. Paglia writes that she's content to wait to see how the "big issues shake out" in Palin's world-view (such as her pro-life stand, creationism, book banning, gay conversions, et. al.) She may not believe what she reads in the media but she should be willing to believe the very words out of Gov. Palin's mouth. Palin is on the record on all of these things and the leftwing blogosphere is not making it up.

I agree with you that liberals have not truthfully presented their reasoning for a pro-choice stand. Liberals are cowed on this issue, as they are on many issues, by decades of demonization by the right.

Liberals should be willing to say that they support the right to abortion, with some restrictions, because they believe that a grown woman's right to decide about her own body is more important than a blastocyst or fetus' right to live when the two rights are in conflict. Tough choice. Doesn't have the appeal of Manichean clarity--"life begins at conception." But it is truthful and can be defended.

It is time to stop "admiring the problem" of successful Republican attacks. It is time to devise a strategy that combines the Democratic Party's worthy instincts to engage on the issues with a hard-nosed and effective strategy to belittle the opposition. The strategy: Ridicule and belittle on the issues.

Here's my take on how to do it:

1) Attack McCain, not Palin.

2) Turn "maverick" into "reckless" with "bomb bomb Iran" and matched quotes on the importance of experience-- pre- and post-Palin's selection.

3) Deride McCain as unprincipled (this has the additional benefit of making him so mad the top of his head will blow off). Specifically, demonstrate that he has repudiated the central principle of his life: thou shalt not torture.

4) Ridicule how it is impossible to "turn the page" or "change Washington" when the same party is being returned to power.

Ridicule. Belittle. But do it on the substantive points above.

Gary Kamiya's catalog of reasons for the failure of American journalism where Iraq is concerned is accurate--but incomplete.

It used to be common to label journalists as "hacks" or drunkards or dupes. When the press was "yellow," it was justified. But what's happened since the rise of the radical right in the early 80s is the tactic of calling journalists liberally biased--to achieve political ends. These accusations are intended to hound journalists into second-guessing their role, hobbling their efforts, and undermining public confidence in this essential civic role. And it has worked. Journalists today are less aggressive, cowed by their corporate owners and frightened to speak truth to power. Eric Alterman has written most persuasively on this topic--read him at MediaMatters.org.

Why haven't journalists disputed this false accusation of bias? Because the "code" of journalists is to stay above it all, to let our stories speak for themselves. What we failed to see was the long-term strategy executed by conservative foundations, pundits, party operatives and candidates. And now, 30 years later, we find that Americans dutifully believe the media are biased.

As for liberals, we've failed to fight back furiously enough. Unlike conservatives, we considered ourselves above the political fray, capable of reasoned judgment. We even acknowledged that our opponents occasionally had a point. Our conservative opponents gave no quarter, acknowledged no points, never paused in the attack. We assumed the American people would dismiss the crazier assertions--but instead, they began to believe them. Liberals are mentally ill? Michael Savage says so and a few million Americans agree. Liberals are traitors and Joe McCarthy a hero? Ann Coulter sells a lot of books making the case. The National Park Service is the "world's largest grass cutting service" and ripe for elimination? Ari Fleischer thinks so.

And it's no wonder that these fantasies are believed…the dominant talk station in our area airs 16 hours of venom and vituperation every day. Listeners can treat themselves to Glenn Beck (9-noon); Limbaugh (12-3); a local host (3-5); Sean Hannity (6-9) and Michael Savage (9-12). It's a day-long progressive-free zone where the facts never stand in the way of character assasination, racism, homophobia and the deification of the dollar over all other values.

Because aggressive reporting results in those kind of attacks, journalists have chosen the safer path--of cowardice.