Drudge posted a link to your column. Clearly some of the comments are coming from independents who follow him on twitter.

I don't know how closely you have been following the news. In fact, people are carrying signs with swastikas to town hall events Pelosi has attended. You may need to get a better idea of the nature and quality of the political protest in evidence at these town halls ... it is not all one of a kind, it varies but some of it is extreme and should be criticized for what it is.

Beyond that you assert Pelosi should step down but make no argument about why: "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down." That it? Bizarre rants? Maybe you need to understand her experience at these town halls before you call for her ouster. At any rate, I would think you would actually make a case, unless you cannot.

Most people know that the Fox channel isnt the most objective news source on American TV. But in a pretty recent broadcast Amsterdam is so falsely portrayed as a city of crime, drugs and anarchy, that I had to show the facts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTPsFIsxM3w

in touch with his id.

Nobility in prevarication is in the eye of the ideologue.

In this frame, lies are things with characteristics just as people are things with characteristics. It's objectifying. Instead, look at a lie as an expression told by a person to others. If the expression is corrupted by deception, it cannot be noble.

"Coming on Meet The Press allows you to frame the conversation how you really want to" David Gregory to Mark Sanford

http://tinyurl.com/lhyw4u

David Gregory's letter to Mark Sanford is clear evidence that Gregory hosts a kabuki show where the viewing audience is lead to believe the newsman is interviewing the news makers in a context that has INTEGRITY. It doesn't.

This is the kind of revelation that must be acted upon in order to effect the kind of change we have been talking about in these pages, the kind of change Jay Rosen is interested in, the kind of journalism Walter Cronkite represented.

What do you make of this piece of journalism by CNN?

Sept. 11 families: Keep Guantanamo Bay open

http://bit.ly/O2uvS

Families of September 11 victims visiting Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Thursday urged the Obama administration to drop plans to close the facility and to restart terror trials there.

"I am opposed to the closing of this facility because of political reasons," said Gordon Haberman whose daughter, Andrea, was killed when terrorist planes struck the World Trade Center

[...]

"Our government's current executive order to halt the military commissions makes us foolish and weak, and invites more attacks," said Melissa Long, whose boyfriend was a first responder killed in New York. "What is fair and just is to continue the military commissions and punish those who have committed acts of terrorism against Americans, period."

Over the Bush and Obama years, Glenn has written hundreed of articles containing specific criticism of reporters and news media in general. How does his criticism match up with "The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect"

1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth.

2. Its first loyalty is to citizens.

3. Its essence is a discipline of verification.

4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.

5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power.

6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.

7. It must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant.

8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.

9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.

http://www.journalism.org/node/72

In order to answer the question, I (or someone) must study and report what I believe, based on the best evidence that I can identify. If I simply give you the two good opposing arguments, or quote two people on opposing sides then I haven't delivered the news really because I have not told the truth of the substantive issue I'm reporting on.

Policy opinions lend themselves to the "opposing view" style of reporting, for example the public option in health care. But what about reporting on US government's claims of evidence of Iraq's nuclear weapons, assessing the validity of the claims and national security implications?

Will there be another moment in our history, a more timely moment - beyond Russerts and then Cronkite's passing - that lends itself to the scrutiny of our news industry, and the changes we need for it to function in its critical role in our democracy?

In 2007, Jeffrey Goldberg was hired by David G. Bradley to write for The Atlantic Monthly. Bradley had tried to convince Goldberg to come work for The Atlantic for nearly two years, and was finally successful after renting ponies for Goldberg's children.

"Daschle is going to be confirmed no matter what is discovered about him."

Chaits's argument employs a linguistic trick. He uses "even-handedness" to mean how the USA assess each side's accountability, in sum, and whether we choose sides with the "righteous", which assumes the other side has no righteousness or not enough for it to matter to us and our interests.

But that is not the meaning of even-handedness, instead we are even-handed in recognizing where each side has not met its responsibilities and obligations and where it has unreasonably transgressed against the other and cuased real and excessive damages, frequently intended punitively.