It would seem necessary to wake up some lawmakers to publicly counter this travesty.

Many of these so-called pundits are that because they like being smartasses, not because they are interested in providing any service to 'people'. One of many things that make Glenn so special is that he is completely devoid of any desire to be a smartass: He thinks - and he can! - and conveys his facts and analysis in as straightforward and clear a manner as is possible. He makes no claims that he cannot factually and analytically support.

I listened to the debate, you did real good Glenn.

In the 2004 CNN article you pointed to (re. weapons report) it is quoted:

Speaking on the campaign trail in Pennsylvania, Bush maintained Wednesday that the war was the right thing to do and that Iraq stood out as a place where terrorists might get weapons of mass destruction.

"There was a risk, a real risk, that Saddam Hussein would pass weapons or materials or information to terrorist networks, and in the world after September the 11th, that was a risk we could not afford to take," Bush said.

As you often make a point: This is not what they told the country to go to war. They told the danger was imminent (mushroom) etc. Why? 'Couse they figured that the 'real argument' would not cut it with the people. Was this just and fair or honest? ..? ..?

"..-- is it really any wonder that our political discourse and our political institutions are as fundamentally degraded and as broken as they are?"

Yes, unfortunately all our difficulties can be traced to basic shortcomings of our entire social system. Our press is just a part of it. Examining (and fixing?) it may be the best way to start a process of corrections and improvements however, since it (and blogging) is the only available method for observing the whole system - one cannot improve what one cannot observe.

I am glad you are working on it.

I have appreciated the link you provided to the Shadia B. Drury article.

The internet is the latest and best too yet that we have to counter the forces of grand inquisitors, and you are using it very well.

This (legal) language may be partly to blame. The first time I heard of this phrase I was disturbed: pleasure???

The cynicism in this nation is coming to a boil in this 'scandal'. The mindset does not include morality anymore: Given a set of laws, most people want to know "what's the most they can get away with". What the framers or congress has intended is irrelevant anymore.

My knowledge of history is limited, yet this looks eerily familiar: Empires seem to usually fall apart like this. It's almost "let a nation think it is the greatest" for some time, before too long it will self-destruct.

This is much like "being a good believer leads to heaven".

What better example is there for an all-intrusive, authoritarian, brutal, self-serving, non-caring, glorious regime than "God's Kingdom" ?

Bush and his followers are simply modeling their "movement" after "God's movements". To them it is a no-brainer...

I have not studied the candidates enough to have strong preferences, however one thing that comes to my mind is his support for Lieberman against Lamont. It is not easy to square that with "wanting to change the system etc".

Only if we could make it costly for major news organizations to disseminate smoke. Given the structure of things this is quite difficult. I can think only of internet as a possible venue, so here's a thought: "New York Times Hall of Famous Blunders" - same for the others. It may be effective to have all those blunders on permanent display in an entertaining and well organized format.

We are experiencing true beginnings of fascism in this country. Bush and Cheney are not the first ones who had those tendencies, but they have achieved the most success so far, and their time is not yet up. The historical examples suggest that, although the nation seems to be waking up, we are by no means out of danger (of experiencing a full-scale fascist period).

Super work! This reeks of guile and treason, doesn't it.

You may need security protection now - I hope not.

The original press was more like the blogosphere than the current MSM. The transformation was not very visible until the nation got stressed by terrorism. The 'net neutrality' is therefore very important for "today's free press".

I have lived in this country for more than half my life now (and I am a citizen), but I studied here only at graduate level; hence I don't have enough familiarity with the basic education here. I am stunned that these concepts would still be debatable after that much time IF PEOPLE WERE EDUCATED ABOUT IT DURING BASIC EDUCATION. I mean, I would have expected that stuff like what "commander-in-chief" is and is not would be as basic a fact for all citizens as ...??.. (I wanted to say habeas corpus, but then I remembered.) Damn it, I cannot think what rights (part of) the nation takes for granted anymore! When I think back about all the "freedom talk" I heard over time from all public figures, I feel like barfing.. I feel cheated.

Ktwdawg :

Education is top priority for people who care about other people. Tax cuts are top priority for people who don't care about other people. I guess some are in between...

(P.S. I share your sentiments.)