In the early 1960's I took a course on political philosophy in the philosophy department. The text was a series of readings, "Communism, Fashism and Democracy."

One of the short pieces I recall was an essay "The Minority of One." It made the point that the strength of a democracy was that if one person was right, he would not be supressed, and the truth could win out. This is an argument for free speech.

Glenn's piece reminds us that we have to know what it means to stand for freedom and be able to take a stand whenever it has been violated. Our culture, which is informed by a vapid media, has allowed us to slide far from our constutional heritage and that needs to be fought with battles such as blocking the telcom immunity law in the next few months.

Some of the characters along the way are not our favorite people, but we trust in adult dialogue, openness, analysis, and the other tools of reason to be able to work through these issues. For all too long we have not dealt with the hard problems of governance.

Good governance is about creating the framework to work out good solutions over time.

Glenn,

I suggest that you print your response to JimPharo as an update to this blog on the main page. This shows your strategy of argumentation and why they get so upset when you use their own words against them. (this was/is the last letter on page 1 of the comments.)

Here is another strategy employed by a software engineer, an old timer, David Parnas. In a conference or a meeting, he would figure out the fundamental assumption of the speaker. Often this would not even be realized by the speaker. Then he would ask a question based on the negation of the fundamental assumption. It would blow the speaker out of the water. They wouldn't know where to start the answer.

In a way, that is what you did. You asked the question about whether or not the "journalist" was doing his job. You asked it by showing his fundamental assumptions by just displaying his "journalistic" product. He was unable to answer.

And other commenters on this blog that CNN is the one that edited the interview so they are in the game of entertainment, not thoughtful analysis needed for a democracy. Need it be said that CNN employs the King.

It is amazing to see all the people in these comments go off topic.

I was at the gym this evening and they have Newsweek and Time to read.

I couldn't get through Joe Klein's article on Hillary. All I could think about was how uninformed the american public is and the responsibilty of the media.

I recalled Glenn's earlier take down of Klein and I just couldn't stand what the pundits are doing to our country and our electorate.

By the way. This is Glenn's site. He doesn't know what will strike him as worth writing about.

Compare the work on one person to the large empire of Time. How much of what is in Time this week will be worthwhile in a few months, much less in a few years. Glenn's observations will be interesting for years.

And I need to thank the thoughtful comments. I often read a ton of comments. These are also helpful to Glenn as he creates his approach to exposing what is going on.

The web is indespensible. Keep up the great work!!

I sent emails to several senators today telling them to block telcom immunity in order to save our democracy. Here is the response from Senator Sherrod Brown

Dear Don:

Thank you for expressing your views on legislation that would provide retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in the National Security Agency's (NSA) warrantless surveillance program.

In December of 2005 it was first reported that President Bush had authorized the NSA to monitor communication between U.S. citizens and terrorist suspects outside the United States without first obtaining a warrant. Some telecommunications companies participated in this program and provided the government with access to phone records. Serious questions arose about the legality of this program and its compliance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA).Â

In August 2007, Congress passed revisions to FISA, which I opposed, expanding the authority of the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to conduct surveillance of foreign targets. Under this legislation telecommunications companies that assist the government in the future implementation of this program were granted immunity from criminal and civil action.

This legislation expires in early February, and Congress is currently considering further revisions to FISA. President Bush has requested that any further modifications to FISA contain retroactive immunity for any telecommunications company that participated in the program since its inception. While developments in technology may require modest modifications to our intelligence laws, I will oppose efforts to provide retroactive immunity for illegal wiretapping as it is inconsistent with our democratic principles. All citizens must have legal recourse when their rights are infringed upon, and companies must bear the responsibility for breaking the law.Â

Thank you again for contacting me.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown

You gave away the lead for a story that the main stream media should be waiting to jump on.

Lets see if one of these "hard working" "journalists", say John King, will get onto his blackberry and call his leads and settle this once and for all.

Or maybe Joe Klein could figure this out?

Who is the journalist who will solve the mystery of who smeared Mc Cain in South Carolina?

I am holding my breath in expectation.