...everyone should be aware of this exchange from NPR's "Diane Rehm Show" earlier this week:

- - - - - -

REHM: It’s my understanding that the National Intelligence Estimate — that now at least two months overdue — is going to suggest that adding troops is the wrong way to go, that it’s not going to improve the situation. Why has that NIE been delayed for so long? And was it deliberately delayed until after the election — after President Bush’s speech last night?

VIN WEBER: I don’t know. I doubt it. I mean, I don’t often buy into conspiracy theories in Washington. There’s too many reporters that uncover those.

REHM: Do you question that John?

JOHN PODESTA: Well, you know it was due in August. I think when they want to get something out, they get it out. And when they want to have more review, they have more reviews. So I think at this point that the Congress demand that that NIE be completed and provided to the Congress.

- - - - - -

Is there a single sane person who doubts that the entire Bush administration is prepared to do and say ANYTHING to achieve its goals? That it believes ANY means are justified to achieve its pre-conceived ends? That their ideology allows them to lie, subvert the law, stall, obfuscate, and generally do whatever the hell they want to do? That they will continue to do this until and unless they are out of power?

The only remaining question -- when will the real patriots in this country finally assert themselves and END this administration's reign of death and destruction? Will we have to wait until January 2009, when the next President takes office, or (please God, let it be so!) will it happen sooner?

Obviously, it must be HERSELF. So, as the old saying goes, we know what you are; now we're just haggling over the price.

"The Pentagon tells the Times that former secretaries are entitled to a transition office and staff in order to sort through their papers." THEIR papers???

Here's a question for some historian out there -- when and why did it become the case that an officeholder (elected or otherwise) owns or otherwise controls his/her papers? What was the logic behind this? In ANY other employment venue, the employer owns and controls job-related documents -- not so, obviously, for government employment!

The evolution of so-called "Presidential Libraries" is probably entangled with this phenomenon. But how does the theory about Presidential papers extend to cabinet secretaries? Why should the Sec. of Defense have rights to control "his" papers -- he's an employee of the federal government, so all Americans are in essence his employer.

Sorry if this is a naive question, but I'd really like to know! (The simple answer will probably be, Congressional laws and Presidential executive orders cobbled this "system" together bit-by-bit over many years.)

...probably in condensed form, compared to being spread out during 4 to 6 PM edition.

First segment is absolutely priceless -- Cheney is overbearing, condescending, dismissive and obnoxious. In other words, a perfect SNAFU -- situation normal, all f****d up.

Wolf Blitzer must have an awfully long fuse -- I'd be unable to avoid exploding in the face of this particular "gentleman", were I unlucky enough to be in the same room with him.

It's on CNN right now -- 4 PM eastern -- the interview is to be spread out over the next 2 hours of the "Situation Room" program hosted by Wolf Blitzer.

It's called "Good Cop, Bad Cop" -- with only one slight change -- now it's "Good Cop, VERY VERY VERY BAD Cop".

Kind of takes the shine off the making-nice facade Dubya tried to erect last night, doesn't it? Does this surprise ANYONE? It shouldn't. The only surprise might be how briefly Cheney allowed the afterglow to last. How many hours after the SOTU speech was it -- even 12?

Sad. Sweet words last night notwithstanding, Bush/Cheney have NO interest in real discussion, consultation or cooperation with any Congress.

My earlier kind words for Sen. Voinovich are hereby retracted -- he caved, and failed to support the measure rebuking Bush's Iraq escalation. He may, of course, support an even weaker gesture of disapproval, but I'm disgusted with George's lack of spine today.

For the record, here are the Republicans who did NOT follow Sen. Hagel's lead:

Richard Lugar (Indiana)

Norm Coleman (Minnesota)

Bob Corker (Tennessee)

John Sununu (New Hampshire)

George Voinovich (Ohio) *SIGH*

Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)

Jim DeMint (South Carolina)

Johnny Isakson (Georgia)

David Vitter (Louisiana)

I propose that constituents from each state "represented" by each of these Profiles in Courage should flood their respective offices with strong messages of disapproval.

(Apologies for doing it twice, but I'd posted this to another War Room item earlier today and it's much more appropriate here!)

According to news reports this morning, Ohio's George Voinovich, now our senior Senator since the defeat of Mike DeWine, has joined a growing number of at least 8 Republicans who back a Senate resolution against Dubya's Iraq "surge"!

Best news I've heard so far today -- I'd suspected days ago that he might join other Republicans-with-a-brain and ditch Bush's misguided plan. Some might accuse him of simply sticking his finger into the wind, following the polls; that may be true, but he did show real evidence of a conscience as Ohio's governor in the 1990's.

I'll assume it's a real conversion until proven otherwise -- but WHATEVER caused it, let's be GLAD! Now, all we need is that delegation of senior Republicans going to the White House, as they did in 1974, informing Nixon that he was finished during the Watergate scandal.

History may be repeating itself in a very real way, very soon.

You gotta see War Room today if you think Salon is neglecting Webb's GREAT Democratic rebuttal to Dubya's SOTU address!