... the most acidly sarcastic thing I've ever read. (At least this morning.)

Keep it up, Glenn. Keep chugging that righteous Viagra. (That's meant as a compliment.)

I've been saying for years that Bush embodies all the traits of the stereotypical super-villain; megalomaniacal, cunning, ambitious, jealous, secretive, given to silly outfits and small animals, and utterly amoral.

At least he spares us by not being a talking killer.

Get rid of him. He picked the losing side.

Throw the rabies out with the wrathwater.

It's time for you to explore the real-world meaning of the term Independent.

Perhpas there's a small island somewhere that's longing for a Democracy Of One.

You picked the wrong side. You actively campaigned against the winner. Elections have consequences.

You will not be missed, Joe.

Now they are simply retyping the left's talking points. Or is it just copy and paste?

Maybe that's it. Their sniffing the virtual paste from their computers.

Ahhh, it all makes sense now.

Since we are entering unchartered waters for much of what is happening, I am sure of only this:

1) We, the taxpayers, are screwed for quite some time.

2) The fix for this is going to be disastorous.

3) The US economy has been hobbled for at least 5 years.

4) President Obama is being left with a mountain of shit to deal with.

5) War crime trials for the Bush Gang is still a fantastic idea.

Yes, let's drive a wedge between Apple and AT&T. That sounds pretty easy. You start.

sent from my tapped iPhone

Glenn, I'm a big and long-time fan. I love your writing and stop in everyday. Even Sunday, when you usually don't post. With this video post you are falling into the trap of appearing to think that the story is important because it HAPPENED TO YOU. This is the narcissism of the talking heads in the MSM. The video you presented wasn't particularly illuminating or interesting. You seemed to think it was making a point which it wasn't. You filmed people going into a party, who didn't really want to talk to you about the party.

And? So?

Why should they talk to you? They don't know you. They are going to a party. Sure, some nefarious deal-making was going on inside, but you didn't show that. You were showing slightly-drunk partiers on their way to get much-more drunk.

Please do not go down this path. Keep writing and doing the radio interview thing. Please do not start putting yourself in the stories and in front of a video camera. Because...

YOU DIMINISH EVERYTHING YOUR SAY, WRITE, OR THINK WHEN YOU DO THIS.

This is just advice. Take it or not.

Will anyone bite?

Is it possible to put this genie back in the bottle, Glenn? Can these rulings be counter-acted with legislation?

How can we ensure that this never happens again? Assuming Obama is elected, of course.

Can we un-shit this bed?

(That is meant as an entirely serious question.)

The perfect moniker.

I believe another country needs to press War Crimes against the US or a US citizen. It can't be done domestically. And I don't think that's a tool we want to invent for the GOP against President Obama.

Anbody in tight with the rules of another country? Show of hands?

Charlie Rose lives and tapes in NYC, where I happen to reside. For all of the Big Apple's leftward-leaning politics, there is a large, monied, and very influential segment of the population that cares greatly about the US staying in Iraq; forever. Because if the US has an army in Iraq, Israel is considerably safer from foreign invasion.

Sure, terrorists attacks will still happen, and the Palestinian situation will remain unsolved, but there will be absolutely no fear of Syria, Egypt, or Iraq attacking with an army.

Charlie Rose is a sociable guy. He goes to lots of parties, and runs into lots of people. I'm sure he's not immune to a coordinated effort to influence his guest list. For these kinds of seminal, landmark shows (which only roll around about once a year, anniversary-like), it wouldn't be too hard to jiggle things.

Just a respectful observation. And a little inside knowledge of how things work in the un-real world.

Your sharp, steaming-hot reason cuts like a knife through the bullshit, Glenn.

Just because something IS a law, doesn't mean it SHOULD be.

Keep on keepin' on, GeeGee.

(I'm still convinced that a connection will pop between the admin's illegal wiretapping and the Spitzer affair. All it takes is one l'il ol' whistleblower...)

Spitzer misbehaved, should be punished fairly, blahblahblah.

And, yes, it seems odd that if only one party is paid for the sex it's a crime. But if both are paid, it's porn; as long as someone is watching. Or not watching. (If 2 people schtup in the forest and no one is there to watch, is it still porn? Deep philosophical questions.)

But talking conspiracy theory here for a moment, couldn't this possibly be the first case of blanket wiretapping being misused for political purposes? Not the Fed wiretapping; that was surely with a warrant, and everything done by the letter. But could the first off, pre-Fed, have come from driftnet wiretapping? The very kind described in the WSJ today?

There are many different ways to crosscheck all the different things that would turn up in massive wiretapping operation. Surely it wouldn't be that hard to crosscheck all the calls made to known brothels or such with all democratic politicians. Something is sure to pop up. So to speak.

This is just the beginning of this whole affair. And I'm probably wrong, but I just want to introduce the concept.

But the title of your book is weak.

You asked for title suggestions and received some fantastic ideas; sharp, funny, triple-edged, and clever.

I'm sure the contents will be wonderful, and that's what matters. But you surely could've picked a better pitch.