The New York Times runs a blockbuster exposé on its front page. Nobody else picks up the story.

There's more to this than just the refusal of the media to investigate themselves (though that's a big part of it). It also reflects their reluctance to credit another media source for coming up with a scoop that they didn't.

The brushing off of the Times' story is a mirror image of the Times' (and others') reaction to the ABC News revelations about the NSC and Bush himself approving torture. As far as I know, the Times hasn't written a single word about this story, which should have earned screaming headlines from them and everyone else. In fact, aside from bloggers and other easily-discredited-by-the-mass-media outlets, NOBODY has repeated, much less advanced, ABC's reporting. In the case of the Times, I haven't seen any letters to the editor about the fact that they've been ignoring what ought to be a huge story — and I know they received at least one, because I wrote it myself.

Ironically, the Times DID finally address the NSC torture story, not in its news pages, but in their lead editorial, which condemned the Bush Administration for it, and credited ABC News for breaking the story, in a tone that might make you think it was common knowledge. And to add to the disconnect, that editorial ran in last Sunday's edition — inside the same paper that had the military analyst story bannered on the front page.

Of course, this "not our story" mentality only applies when they want it to. If somebody (whether it's a newspaper, or TV news, or a blogger) runs a story like the ones about Obama and Rev. Wright, or Clinton at the Tuzla airport, suddenly everybody wants a piece of the action.

Tim Rutten says,

Since Andrew Jackson's time, our electoral victors celebrate by throwing the losers out of work -- not into jail cells.

What a trivial, uneffective response to the criminality of the Bush cabal.

You can't throw George Bush, or his ruling-class elite, "out of work." It's not a concept that applies. These are wealthy people who don't have a concept of work as most of us think of it. They've taken a break from their privileged lives in the private sector to further enrich themselves and their peers by manipulating our government and diverting billions of dollars of our tax money to the pockets of their sponsors and themselves. When they're through, they'll leave a shattered government and economy, and they'll be richer than ever -- and immune to the consequences of their crimes.

George Bush has hardly done a day of "work," as most of us define it, in his life. He's always been a member of the elite welfare class who, in good times and bad, somehow end up becoming even richer and more powerful. The same goes for the others at the top of this administration. They'll find new "jobs" as lavishly compensated wards of the right wing, rewarded for their service to the real rulers of our country.

What does Tim Rutten think? That all these top-fraction-of-a-percenters will have to take jobs at Home Depot?

Glenn Greenwald, and the posters on this thread, agree that the only just way to deal with criminality is through the justice system. What a tragedy it is that this is now a minority, fringe, position in what used to be, though never perfect, the most democratic country on earth.

Future generations will think we lost our minds, and our morality, as surely as other countries have in the past (not to be named here, Godwin's Law, you know) -- That's IF those future generations lucky enough to have the freedom to think independently at all.

Bud Selig has presided over a parade of terrible ideas, the first one being making himself Commissioner.

It's worth noting that the same idiot who stopped the game in 2002 in extra innings, resulting in a ridiculous tie score final, also came up with the idiotic idea of basing World Series home field advantage on the outcome -- meaning there can never be a tie.

So last night, said idiot was caught between both of those crappy ideas. The game HAD to go on to its conclusion. As a result, the starting nines were long gone from the game after a couple of at bats apiece -- while the guys who got in last came up to the plate five times.

After the tie fiasco, baseball should have dealt with the substitution problem in the All-Star Game. Why not allow players to re-enter the game if it goes to extra innings? That doesn't solve the biggest headache, though, which is running out of pitchers. In their zeal to get almost everybody into the game, you have situations like F-Rod, the Angels' closer, coming in to pitch to one batter, and then being replaced by Mo Rivera. You get to the end of the game, it's a tie, and guess what? You're fresh out of pitchers.

Given the chance factor in who wins a many-extra-innings game, it's extra crazy this year that the WS advantage hinges on it.

I wish they'd go back to the old way, just alternating years. And while they're at it, they could get rid of the three-division per league setup that lets sub-.500 teams sneak into the playoffs as wild cards.

Or just get rid of Bud Selig. On the other hand, we'd probably end up with the only person who could be more idiotic as Commissioner. Talkin bout you, Dubya.

(Yes, that's how it's spelled)

There's already a statue of Ralphie-boy in New York -- he stands outside the Port Authority Bus Terminal in Manhattan.

Ed Norton, still up for grabs.