Minimal reporting of governmental tactics in Minneapolis?

That's because the actions of the government over the past seven years render this weekend's precipitous activities of monitoring, disrupting and even arresting persons who had not actually protested anything yet little more than "preventive maintenance," while overzealous repression of protests themselves becomes just "what they deserved."

This is a government which George W. Bush has driven to eavesdrop and wiretap in violation of Federal law and the Constitution; to suspend habeas corpus; to detain individuals and hold them without charge; to torture those suspected (not convicted, suspected) of "bad" things; to openly populate the prosecutorial ranks with like-minded political hacks whose loyalty to the Leader is more important than loyalty to the Constitution; and to proclaim that those engaging in any of the above actions cannot and will not be prosecuted so long as a Bush administration lawyer wrote a memo telling them to do it. All while fostering a climate of irrational fear and demand for fanatical, unquestioning deference to such tactics.

Glenn and those seeking to report what's happening on the ground in Minneapolis are doing the country a great service, but the MSM's failure to peel any of the layers is unfortunately but certainly less surprising now that it would have been even eight years ago. Morally bankrupt, yes, but moral bankruptcy is old news where the government of the United States is concerned.

Objecting to what is going on in Minneapolis may be a moral imperative, but objecting effectively is more problematic.

How about at least registering a present and continuing objection to the travesty and immorality of George W. Bush's occupancy of the position of President of the United States? The crap we are seeing in Minnesota, and the fact that it is being treated like "business as usual" by the msm, is directly traceable to Bush and his minions' evisceration of the United States Constitution.

Sign Rep. Kucinich's current petition, seeking to present a million signatures to Nancy Pelosi on September 10, 2008 -- the eve of the anniversary of the event which Bush argues has rendered quaint and irrelevant the principles of our Constitution -- again demanding that action be taken to impeach this criminal.

Look, if you're reading this post you're probably already on a list. Make it worthwhile. Stand up for the Constitution.

http://kucinich.us/

In fact, as the Rethugs' Big Guns expectorated in Obama's general direction at their convention, the word "Consitution" was notably absent from their stated reasons why they want to retain control of the presidency. Bush didn't mention the word. Palin didn't mention the word. Thompson didn't mention the word. Giuliani didn't mention the word. Romney referred to the Constitution as a basis for attacking a "liberal" Supreme Court.

Obama went on record at the DNC in his speech, accepting the challenge of the Oath of Office to "protect and defend the Constitituion." The Rethugs have completely ignored that one, singular, constitutionally-mandated cornerstone of the President's oath to the nation. Seems marginally relevant to me.

And it isn't accidental. The Rethugs hate the Constitution, consider it inconvenient, quaint and irrelevant, and they are asking us to agree with them.

Who else has been wondering what the scene was like when Sarah Palin "gave in to public outcry" and rescinded her firing of the librarian who balked when asked to remove books Palin didn't approve of from the library shelves?

Do you suppose there was some kind of town meeting in the high school gym, and Kevin Costner's fiesty wife told her off with "Who's with Eva Braun here?....At least I'm not a book burner, you Nazi cow!"

Nah, it probably didn't happen quite that way. But that would have been cool, huh?

Palin is able to read a teleprompter on TV, including in front of a huge audience (at least a huge adoring audience). She has proven that, but only that, and her background as a behind-the-anchor-desk TV reporter makes that neither surprising nor suggestive of greater abilities.

But it also suggests that the GOP is shielding her now to control the soundbites. And to prime her for mouthing zingers, not substantive analyses. Any bets on whether they're trying to come up with something to be compared to Reagan's "there you go again"? Of course they are. And as Glenn points out, it will work for them and the Democrats should understand they're going to go that route, not the route of "reasoned argument".

Can Biden respond in a debate with "at least I'm not a book burner, you Nazi cow" right out of Field of Dreams? Not unless the reality of that little incident of power corrupting New Mayor Palin is established in people's minds first. What other obvious points of reference in Americana can be brought to bear?

Speaking of creating backdrops, who is winning that media soundbite fest right now? Palin's "when they take the styrofoam columns back to the movie lot" reference to Obama's speech backdrops, or the McCain campaign getting allowed a "no comment" for the astonishingly inept use of a photo of "Walter Reed Middle School" in McCain's speech? Come on, Dems, don't waste gimmees.