What I liked so much about Conyers’ letter was that it left no room for Mukasey to wiggle out of.

He either has to admit a government malfeasance that was not reported to the commission; or more likely, that he “misspoke” and was speaking about a “hypothetical” case.

Even if that’s true, it still leaves him guilty of (in Conyers’ words): “a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal government’s existing surveillance authority to combat terrorism.”

And that “fundamental misunderstanding” is from the person who is supposed to be in charge of the program. This should be a very big story.

Can they just ignore Conyers? Or will they just repeat their incoherent response and hope this goes away as everyone focuses on the latest non-scandal instead of this real one?

That seems the most likely outcome at this time-- give convoluted response in legal-mumbo-jumbo so everyone’s eyes glaze over as it becomes a topic only for lawyers well versed in the arcane minutia of surveillance law history.

Oh, my, not even the Republicans care if Osama is calling anymore.

Our telecoms will never cooperate with our government again. Or so they once said.

So, given a choice whether to protect national security or possibly pay more taxes – Republicans now say: screw National Security, don’t raise my taxes!

That conclusively demonstrates the dishonesty of their arguments all along – they never believed their own talking points.

Arriana Huffington has a post up regarding the paradox of the political center shifting and that right-wing views are now at odds with the majority of Americans. She writes:

”Yet, despite this seismic shift -- grossly underreported by the media -- the Right remains as powerful as ever when it comes to setting the national agenda and dominating the national debate.”

Brian William’s post is a perfect example of why it is still able to do this. The Right sets the agenda most effectively through the “liberal” media and “liberals” like Williams who, while wearing their “liberal” badges distributed by the Right, spew exactly the talking points the Right wants out there. In this case, it’s that Obama’s patriotism really is suspect.

Despite the Right’s dominance, public sentiment has changed. And while the Right may still control the agenda and the “debate” on National TV, their agenda is so far out of touch with reality that the public no longer buys into the drivel.

When you’re having trouble paying for your basic groceries or gas, and can’t afford health insurance, whether or not Obama is wearing a flag pin seems so trivial, so far removed from the real issues, that Williams’ and Noonan’s grave “concern” about Obama’s patriotism becomes laughable.

Yes, it’s all Rev. Wright all the time over at the “fair and balanced” network. They of course threw in one non-Wright story about a deadly shark attack for their “balance.”

No issues for them – just the hard-hitting journalism that “the people” demand. The public demands nothing but stories about Rev. Wright – they just can’t get enough of the guy. He’s the new Paris Hilton. Sorry, Paris.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/04/beyond-parody.html

Yes, the establishment media is “more than geared up to play its role in amplifying those petty smears” but the GOP and Team McCain are confident that those petty smears are a one-way street.

One perfect example is McCain’s refusal to release his wife’s tax returns just four years after Teresa Heinz Kerry received a “torrent of criticism” for not releasing hers. When she finally released part of her taxes she was then attacked for being the wealthiest spouse of any presidential candidate in history.

McCain and GOP are just setting back (after demanding joint tax returns from the Democratic candidates) confident that, unlike just four years ago, there will be no “torrent of criticism” for his refusal to release his wife’s returns.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_04/013558.php

Whatever happened to this?

"I think the Justice Department has an obligation to consider prosecution. ... This isn't a partisan thing of the Bush administration. This is a U.S. government secret program in a time of war, willfully exposed for no good reason by The New York Times." ~Bill Kristol, Fox News, 6/25/06

http://mediamatters.org/items/200606270010

Has Kristol ever responded to this statement since being hired by the “treasonous” New York Times?

That didn’t go over very well with the staff:

"My personal opinion is it's an appalling choice," a former veteran Times staffer said of Kristol's appointment. "Not because he's been wrong about so much, but because he called for prosecuting the Times for treason. You're entitled to your opinion, but, in all due respect, go fuck yourself."

http://tinyurl.com/ywppgg

Is it so frightening to Liberals that one of their own-The NYT-should have an espoused conservative on staff?

This isn’t about someone espousing a “conservative” viewpoint, it’s about incompetence and lack of professionalism exhibited in Kristol’s columns.

He is a hack. Even William Safire, the long-time conservative pundit of the Times, thinks so. He responded to Clark Hoyt’s column condemning the hiring of Kristol by saying about it, "I saw the excellent piece that the public editor wrote the other day, and that pretty much tells the story."

William Safire realizes it’s not about the expression of a “conservative” viewpoint, and he’s honest enough to admit it.