I'd call your decision to post this a mistake only in the sense that it was, as you said, probably best reserved for when you'd have more time to devote to the comments section, and perhaps when we've made further progress dealing with more urgent and addressable issues, such as the MCA, Gonzogate, FISA, etc.

However, I would not at all consider it to be a mistake in the sense that such issues and positions would be inappropriate in your blog, which they are not. Even though we disagree on this matter (although, as always, I remain open to being convinced of being wrong--this is not one of those topics on which I am all but unalterably convinced, such as, say, the right of habeas corpus, or the rights guaranteed by the 1st and 4th amendments, among others), I fully respect and appreciate your having strong feelings about it, and welcome the opportunity to debate this and other matters on which we might not agree.

I welcome--as do I'm sure most commenters here--contrary opinions that are well-cafted and presented--especially by those who strongly hold them--and vigorous and intelligent debate about such things--especially when it's respectful. It's how smart and informed people stay smart and informed become more so. (And note the absence of trolls in this thread--perhaps it was beyond their capacity to dissemble.)

I also think that this thread served a purpose in that it allowed some of us to FINALLY disagree with you on something. It's always a bit unsettling to agree with others so often, and the occasional disagreement tends to keep things "real", for lack of a better term (growing up Jewish in NYC makes one tend to feel somewhat ill at ease without the occasional spirited argument--I'm sure you know what I mean, having lived in and practiced law in NYC).

Btw, I'm watching the repeat of Keith Olbermann on Countdown right now and he just mentioned your name and diary on the missing WH emails. I sincerely hope that he has you on his show fairly soon. I'm getting tired of people like Richard Wolfe continually talk about how the Dems will eventually cave in to the WH on war funding, and the rest of the Imus regulars he tends to have on his otherwise great show (well, I could also do without the American Idol nonsense and other trivia, but I guess the format of his show requires it).

I imagine that with your upcoming book you will be making the rounds of some of the better-known chat shows (e.g. Russert, Rose, Hardball) However vast the faults of these hosts and shows, appearing on them does give people a platform that they otherwise might not have--even Kos and Armstrong have appeared on some of them--as Air America and Democracy Now! only reach a fairly small left-oriented audience. The more people of your caliber appear on such shows, the more inroads our side makes in shifting the Overton Window to our side--and away from the other's--and in keeping these shows and hosts honest (to the degree possible, at least).

The house that BushCo built did not go up in a day, and will not go down in one either. This is going to be a prolonged and intense process, and today was just one part of it, albeit an important and effective one. But anyone who expected the Dems' victory in November and subsequent successes and efforts since taking over to quickly cause the downfall of this administration didn't understand how this works.

Like a Vauban fortress, this administration had constructed a vast system of interconnected defenses that were not going to be taken down overnight. That was only likely to happen after a prolonged seige, with each defense being brought down one brick at a time. Each brick brought down made the remaining ones that much less solid. We've been seeing this chipping away since the election, we saw it today, and we'll see much more of it.

Eventually, a tipping point will occur and a whole series of defenses will come crashing down, seemingly suddenly, but in reality only after being slowly and steadily undermined (a term that literally derives from efforts to dig tunnels under fortresses and pack them with explosives, to bring them down from below) by hearings such as today's, as well as less well-celebrated and publicized ones. But we're not there yet, which is why they still appear to be intact and impermeable. They're not--it just seems that way.

I only say this because there seems to be an impression among some opponents of this administration that they are simply beyond anyone's ability to hold them accountable and take them down. I myself sometimes fall prey to the temptation to indulge in such thinking. I mean, after all the crap that has come out against them, and even with Dems controlling congress and holding all these hearings, they're still substantially in place, with vast powers, still snubbing their noses at the rest of us and doing as they please. Surely, it is tempting to think--as I sometimes do--they're simply impermeable.

But they're not. No one is. It's just taking longer than we'd all like to take them down because of the vast defensive infrastructure they've built and precautions they've taken to defend themselves against what they knew would be an eventual and likely intense attack. But I firmly believe that even their very impressive fortress will eventually fall, under this current attack. Sooner or later it will be so weakened that it will come crashing down. That tipping point is not here yet, but it's coming.

Look to the fall of the Soviet Union for a previous example of how this works. To those who weren't looking closely enough, it appeared to be far more solid than it actually was during its twilight phase. I believe that BushCo is now well into its own twilight phase, and full darkness is rapidly approaching. To paraphrase, it is--if you will--approaching its last throes.