You and others often make the claim that if the telecoms are given immunity we will never be able to find out what was being done because the lawsuits will be closed off. So, let me ask a naive question: Why can't the next president just reveal what happened? I can imagine the Bush administration is terrified about some of their secrets coming out. I imagine Obama, for example, could reveal some of them, some of them the administration may conceal (e.g., shred)beforehand, and some may be protected even if the next president wanted to reveal it. In which of those categories does this spying activity fall? Could Obama or whoever tell us what happened?

I saw a headline yesterday that said "Wright flap hurts Obama." What Wright says can only hurt Obama if it becomes a "flap." Have you seen the headline "Hagee (or Paisley or Fawell) flap hurts McCain"? Of course not, because there is no "flap" because no one is talking about it. The Chicago Tribune gave a great deal of space today to the "Wright flap." No mention of McCain. Even the left/liberal/progressive bloggers have stopped talking about it for the most part. So, all that is left in the media discussion is the "Wright flap." And it will continue that way all through the fall unless the media is forced to address the imbalance.

I think one point is missing from Glenn's defense, although I imagine he would mean to include it. It is somewhat hypocritical to respond to name-calling with only name-calling and then decry the right-wing's and media's focus only on the name-calling. But I think it is entirely appropriate to respond to the right's personality-based attacks IN PLACE OF engaging on the issues with personality-based attacks IN ADDITION TO engaging the other side on the issues.

I think this is particularly true, and I think what Glenn has said many times, if the personality-based attacks highlight the emptiness, hypocrisy, or deception of the other side.

As another commenter mentioned, I think Obama will do a much better job than the last two democratic candidates at responding to attacks, and, at times, he will be able to respond in a way that does allow him to rise above them and make them seem more petty.

But as others have said, Obama cannot just be reactive to such attacks. He must go on the attack as well, and highlight the hypocrisy of McCain in no uncertain terms. As he has been doing, he must repeatedly connect McCain to Bush and to the Republican morass. That will not only neutralize some of their tactics, it will also reveal the real character of the right.

We have seen many cases in the past where a corporation has tried to shut down criticism only to find that the story about their attempts to suppress the story receive more media attention than the original story would have. Are the local media in Carney's district picking up this story of Comcast's "cover-up"? They should, and it may blow up in Comcast's and Carney's face.

As a complete aside, it should no longer be called the "straight talk express" or the "just talk express." It should be called the Double Talk Express, and each time McCain throws out one of these flip-flops or inaccurate statements Obama should come back with "Oh, here comes that Double Talk Express again."