By this late date, it must be unmistakably clear that the Bush Administration lies so constantly, so thoroughly, so deeply that anyone who willingly serves it--much less trades on their service--has made a conscious decision to forefeit any presumption of honesty on their part.

I understand that principle of trying to treat individuals as individuals and giving them the benefit of the doubt. I also understand that a lot of folks tried that with members of the Reagan Administration, and what we got in return was first Newt Gingrich, then the Clinton impeachment, then the stolen 2000 election, and everything downhill since.

Zelikow has no credibility with me, because he's a big boy, and he decided long ago that actual credibility was something he could do without. He had "heckuva job" credibility, and that was just fine with him.

So be it.

Linear Chaos:

Of course I am going to be considered a troll on this site because I am not a frothing at the mouth true believer useful idiot lefty OR righty who is still naive enough to believe that the system isn't rotten to the core and in need of Article V. I don't buy into partisan games (wedge issue traps like the non-issue that is abortion), or buy into the "lesser of two evils" nonsense, or play blind cheerleader for some CFR member who also happens to be running for president. People on either side don't like when you hold the mirror up to them and don't like having their cozy little reality questioned, so they dismiss you as a troll, kook, etc. Just like the MSM does with any candidate that talks about real issue like Gravel, Kucinich, and Paul (Not CFR, I <3 Huckabee, Who is ron paul?, I really am a uniter and hate not leveling with people while I ignore Ron Paul and don't reach out to his tranpartisan campaign when I had the chance and choose to tow the Establishment line and marginalize him Obama).

Chaos? Yes.

Linear? Not so much.

Linear Chaos lets it all hang out with his John Birch Society tattoos and all:

Here is the difference between the parites:

Ron Paul said it best, a truly transpartisan candidate unlike Establishment shill and CFR member Obama:

"There are two parties in Washington, big government liberals and big government conservatives. The only thing difference between them is what they want to spend money on."

Yes, the liberals want to spend money on making the world world work for everyone (building bridges, rebuilding New Orleans, universal health care, creating a non-carbon economy so we can avoid global warming, etc.) while the conservatives want to spend money on turning multi-millionaires into multi-billionaires, bridges to nowhere, and spreading wars to the ends of the earth.

They're practically identical!

For a bit of a reality check on just what a far-right nutjob Paul is, check out:

Sara Robinson at Orcinus:
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/06/trouble-with-ron.html

and

David Niewart at Firedoglake:
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/06/08/ron-paul-vs-the-new-world-order

Not to mention his DW-Nominate scores:
110th Congress (through July 7):
http://voteview.com/hou110.htm
TEXAS R PAUL 67 380 0.824 434.000 (most conservative member)

109th Congress:
http://voteview.com/hou109.htm
TEXAS R PAUL 255 895 0.715 440.000 (most conservative member)

108th Congress:
http://voteview.com/hou108.htm
TEXAS R PAUL 170 808 0.790 441.000 (most conservative member)

107th Congress:
http://voteview.com/hou107.htm
TEXAS R PAUL 128 715 0.821 443.000 (most conservative member)

Get the picture?

I'll take non-linear order any day of the week.

By emailing you without being asked, Glenn.

Of course, at this point it looks like pure damage control. But at least they're on the ball enough to realize it's damaging, and that damage control, rather than denial, is what's called for. And once folks start doing the right sorts of things, even for not the best of reasons, the often come to see the deeper rightness of what they're doing.

Now, when are they going to have you on to discuss these matters?

Linear Chaos:

Hey, get this, did it ever occur to you liberal/left true believer out there that BOTH parties are full of liars and cheats, and that BOTH parties are corrupt?

See, for example, the Bush Dogs campaign at OpenLeft:

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=917

Keep cherry picking whatever you need to cherry pick in order to demonize the right while wearing blinders and sanctifying the left.

Neither Glenn nor any of the long-time non-troll regular commentators here does anything remotely like that.

Keep pretending like all of Washington is not part of the same ESTABLISHMENT and that there really are differences between the two PARTIES (and on more than just non-issues like abortion).

The differences are starkly real, as measured, for example, by the DW-Nominate metric, which shows a far higher degree of partisan polarization than during the 1970s. The problem is, (a) the Democrats do not yet have a large enough majority and sufficient party unity for this to make an effective difference in policy, and (b) Republicans now are so much worse than they were in the 1970s, that the Dems vast differences with them only get them half-way to decent.

Still, it's a damnable lie that the parties as a whole are indistuishable. To the contrary, there's virtually no crossover on the large scale. On the macro metrics (DW-Nominate, or Progressive Punch scores) the Democrats are on one side, the Reps on the other.

Glenn:

Public? Surely you jest.

Indeed!

It's just Casual Observer's Noel Coward-like wit.

I was beginning to have my doubts....

Back in 1997 or so.

Paul Dirks:

But but but......

Purple Fingers

Purple Reign go bye-bye!

At least it's just Allawi they're trying to stick us and the Iraqis with. Imagine if Chalabi were still their go-to guy!

Such is "progress"!

Oh, where is Manucher Ghorbanifar when we really need him?

Ollie North?

Fawn Hall?

Pumpkinator:

Sorry, Paul Rosenberg ...

... but of key import in polls is what has happened since the last poll was taken. A hell of a lot, including frivolous Dem investigations, have happened since two of the three polls were taken, making their results moot.

And your evidence that

(1) The investigations have been frivilous; and
(2) The public is turned off by them?

Would that be:

(A) Zilch,
(B) Zippo, or
(C) Nada?

Pumpkinator:

Be careful when you weigh in on a topic you know nothing about.

Pot. Kettle. Yadda, yadda, yadda.