is it really so surprising that GWB seems to many not so much the betrayer of conservatism as its apotheosis?

Well, my point was neither to defend nor denounce conservatives, but rather to point out that the road to Bushism was not prepared *merely* by self-identified conservatives.

it's becoming nigh impossible to get sufficiently more outrageous than an actual Republican so that anyone but the most perceptive readers can detect the put-on.....

Surely you jest. Glenn's emailers are on to us all -- my maiden name is Walsh (no joke). Joan Walsh is probably my fifth cousin thrice removed. And I suspect you are my seventh cousin -- or my own Grandpa. A Greenwald family reunion would find most of his readership there.

stop the caterwauling and see what Mukasey can do in six months about mainstream obscenity.

Knowing that, Hatch refers to it as "mainstream obscentiy" even while acknowledging that this is what "most people" watch.

I beg your pardon? I wouldn't know pr0n if it hit me in the ass, er, face. And I am fully aware of just what kind of priority eradicating it should be for the DoJ, and all patriotic Americans.

"Is it torture to pull off a person's fingernails?"

It is an extreme obscenity.

If he hems & haws about waterboarding (say), then you should be able to explore what it is about waterboarding that differentiates it from the more medievil forms (maybe, less blood spilled).

Waterboarding is a mainstream obscenity.

Mukasey has pledged to aggressively prosecute both kinds. (See, you just have to know how to speak these people's language.)

Maybe I could have stomached practicing law had I joined an organization such as EFF.

I know retroactive amnesty would present a hurdle to this suit, but good grief, there are Fourth Am issues here aside from FISA. It is Con Law 101 that govt cannot get around 4th Am violations by contracting its searches to private actors, and no congressional legislation can immunize from constitutional violations. Tho I'm not sure what damages would then be (but if it becomes a civil rights case, if it can be, EFF could get attorney fees if they prevai). Or whether EFF would then have to add the DoJ as a defendant, perhaps even in substitution for AT&T -- but then this isn't something I've studied with any lawyerly hat on.

But one can be sure EFF has.

I'm probably the only holdout on the "Serious" etc. capitalized attributions: I don't like them.

[...]

I emphasize that none of this in any way blunts the force or curtails the clarity and brilliance of Greenwald's posts! I just wish he could write without wandering off the reservation of accepted style norms.

Personally, I think Glenn overdoes the capitalization for irony, but not when it comes to "Serious" v. "serious." (And I should add, part of the reason I am mildly critical of him on this point is because it is a tendency I have had to ruthlessly purge in my own writing.)

The Internet is establishing its own accepted style, Strunk be damned. Language evolves, and the online world has merely begun to greatly accelerate the process. It is only going to increase in its influence of style norms.

Please don't misunderstand: I'm his biggest fan! I just wince whenever he does the whole "Serious people engaging in the Epic Battle of Civilizations" routine because (as we all know) when you're on the Left, you can't make a single mistake or mis-step without it being seized upon by the opposition.

Well, I also like his "Epic Battle of Civilizations" trope. That's just a true reflection of the "right's" mentality. (I suppose it now incumbent upon me to identify where I think he overdoes the caps, but let's let that go for now.)

I really don't think of myself as being on "the Left," and don't think Glenn is either, as the 20th century understood that term. (Well, I always have been with the left on civil liberties issues of most kinds; libertarians usually are except for certain issues such as mandated affirmative action or busing.) His discussion of that labeling in this post and link to Steve Taylor shows how those labels have become nearly meaningless.

If Dan Riehl and Jeff Goldstein want to criticize me, Glenn or Atrios for capitalizing certain words for sake of irony, screw 'em. They are losing reader share online, and the nation is not with them.

More importantly on the subject of language, it never stands still. And these Intertubes have already changed norms, and will continue to do so.

Sneak away to an island? But I'm still (1) Irish, and (2) female!

I definitely think that the term "conservative" retains some meaning, and also agree with Paul that conservatives have a memory problem in that each succeeding generation of them tends to accept and embrace what their forebears fought against tooth and nail. But not always. The left has made mistakes, too. Further, it hasn't all been "progress," as for example when early 20th century Progressives aligned with garden variety social cons to prohibit beverage alcohol and certain drugs. William Jennings Bryan had issues with evolution, but was an economic "progressive." Not everything has always been neat, and still isn't.

And Jordan, some libertarians and Libertarians are simply lunatics. These days, some are indistinguishable from -- and actually are -- neocons and quite willing to see the expansion of the All Pervasive Security State. (There I go with those offensive capitalizations!) But you take libertarian enclaves like Reason or Cato, and they are mostly Greenwaldian, admire his insights, and adhere to pretty much the same positions Greenwald publicly advocates.