Something amazing happened on the Sunday morning talk shows today. NBC/GE had the usual cast of Bush-Cheney sycophants (besides James Webb); but ABC/Disney allowed not one (which would have been surprising enough) but TWO non-GOP voices to appear with George Stephanopolous. For anyone overseas unfamiliar with the Pravda-like U.S. corporate media, this could mark a huge turn away from the Bush-Cheney administration.

Not coincidentally, a pretty good discussion of l'Affair Scooter ensued. The absurd noton of poor little Scooter as a victim simply did not fly; and two or three people openly scoffed when George Will tried to float the right-wing canard that Joseph Wilson lied that Cheney sent him to Niger. (The truth, again: Cheney directed the CIA to undertake the mission; the CIA, at Valerie Plame's suggestion, chose Wilson to carry out the mission. This is exactly what Wilson has said, though the chickenhawks would like to pretend they knew nothing because it makes Junior's 16 words not merely false, but a knowing and deliberate lie.)

The neocons desperately want to believe that Armitage's "admission" that he kinda sorta accidentally revealed Plame's CIA status ends the possibility of criminal wrongdoing; but I don't think it works that way. The analogy I keep coming back to is of a sperm fertilizing an egg, and the agg instantly closing itself off to all other sperm. The neocons want us to think that the instant Armitage told a civilian (Novak), Plame's status was public knowledge and she was no longer covert. But I have no trouble with the idea that a criminal conspiracy in the White House and/or Office of the Vice President to out her could have proceeded even after Armitage's "goof" -- at least until such time as Novak published his newspaper article and ruined her career.

Elephantman: "And in about eight hours of [testimony], Libby was uniformly truthful, it now appears, except for disputed snippets with Tim Russert and Judy Miller."

Omigod! I can hear Elephantman and Shooter242 together as criminal defense lawyers: "And in a lifetime that spanned many years, Ted Bundy was uniformly law-abiding and killed no one, except for disputed snippets with his several victims. And in a lifetime that spanned many years, Jeffrey Dahmer was uniformly law-abiding and ate no one, except for disputed snippets with his several victims." Really, you're too much.

In the meantime, you haven't noticed or responded to anything I've said, or that anyone else has said, or answered any of our questions. You just keep posting the GOP talking points over and over. Which, in case you haven't noticed, ain't flying here.

Another excellent article, Gary, followed by some solid letters so far, especially Julie Artz.

1. Let's call what we're talking about by its true name: American fascism (or neo-fascism).

2. You didn't mention the neo-fascists' greatest strength: a deeply flawed electoral system that mutes the power of America's most educated and least religious, and allows U.S. elections to be controlled by the least educated and most superstitious of its citizens.

3. 2006 showed that the way Dems can win in '08 is by splitting the reasonably sane fiscal conservatives of the Mountain West away from the irredeemable social conservatives in the Bible Belt/South. Let the South go (which is what Lincoln should have done in 1861).

4. I'd like to know what Camille Paglia, the woman who adores Rush Limbaugh, et al., thinks about your article. In fact, I'd like to know how any "true" conservatives would respond -- though as usual the Americans who most need to read this never will.

R Buller/Elephantman/J Simon: I listened to a lot of Rush Limbaugh's shows in the weeks leading up to the 2006 election. What I found most surprising -- and why I've rarely tuned in since then -- is that he's just a shill for the GOP. He doesn't promote "conservatism"; he just bashes Libs & Dems. Bush Jr. is Jesus Christ, Clinton is the Devil (yawn). It's boring.

And dude: Faux News has now gotten caught with not one but TWO smoking guns: 1) the leaked memo requesting pictures of Muslim joy at the Bush-Cheney electoral defeat last November (which Faux would then show as pro-Dem sentiment among "the terrorists"); and 2) Murdoch admitting he used his media empire to cheerlead for the Bush-Cheney War in Iraq (e.g., when Faux characterized half-a-million people marching against the war in New York in March 2003 as "a few hippies and college professors.") Faux is right-wing disinformation, not a news organization; even the red-state dummies are seeing it now.

In regard to right-wing bloggers, well, first of all, Salon's BlogReport includes many (most or all of whom do not permit reader feedback); but more importantly, have you LOOKED at sites like Free Republic? At Tom Reed's suggestion (not made to me specifically) I visited, and frankly was horrified by the right-wing militarist extremism on display there. (Alas, they did not print my suggestion that Laura Bush and The Twins go to Iraq to lead a media tour of the many wonderful unreported successes she says are happening there every day).

Which brings me to my last point, that the reason Air America cannot match Faux or Rush (or Ann) in terms of audience share is that "liberals" by definition are capable of thinking for ourselves, and therefore do not need an authoritarian figure to supply us with talking points or advice on how to talk to the other side (if you must). I/we just want the truth. Not propaganda (and not 24/7 celebrity news). Thus, BBC, CNN International and Salon are the true opposites of Faux, Rush & Ann. And I'm sorry if the facts do have a liberal bias.