A democratic president will not be any better than a republican president.

Have we already forgotten our lessons from what the Pentagon Papers revealed (beginning with Kennedy), and FDR allowing and lying about Japan and how we entered WW2, and the Johnson/Gulf of Tonkin incident? All democrats! And that's just what we know about! I predict we'll one day read all about the likes from B. Clinton and his wars.

We need to quit being "good democrats" or "good republicans" or "good green party members" or "good libertarians". We need to begin by being "good Americans" by continuing to support the fair and brave columnists and bloggers who dare to speak out against the neocons/government.

Has anyone investigated the CIA's "black money"? No doubt that's just as unpopular as discussing 9/11!

Elizabeth Edwards' piece you rave about was almost bold. But why is the "media blackout" on Biden more important than the media blackout on Ron Paul? Why does she not even allude to Dr. Paul like she does of the other republican contenders for the presidency? Ron Paul just got 16% of the vote in Pennsylvania, for crying out loud. Dr. Paul's ideas on our economy and health care and foreign policy are equally as importnat of Biden's. Media blackout is alive and well with Mrs. Edwards. Isn't it easy to spot bias in others' work.

"Do you people actually think the "Talking Heads" get to decide what goes on the air? Serioulsy you can't be that naive... -- odog11"

"Hardly. Its of course the editors and producers who actually 'decide' what get's broadcast."

Editors + producers + government = Project Mockingbird type "reporting".

Of course!

And where does the money come from?!

Glenn writes of Carney, "A month ago, we received word from him that he wanted to talk to us and convince us not to do the ad campaign."

This is fabulous and thank you so very much for continuing to write about FISA.

Ever think about a campaign against these Blue Dogs for supporting the upcoming $108 Billion more for the Iraq war? Several MSM outlets are reporting it will pass. But maybe that's simply the MSM's spin.

I understand the negative connotation of "conspiracy theory", tinfoil hats and all. Simply because something is "obvious" doesn't negate the possibility for a conspiracy theory. If "backroom conniving" isn't secret, what is? Just because someone gets caught doing something secret doesn't mean there wasn't "a plan or agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal or subversive action." That's all a conspiracy is. Can't we just "call a spade a spade"?

And what about the CIA's Black Budget ($1+ Trillion dollars) and how that may influence our elected official's votes. Oh, no doubt that's just a crazy conspiracy theory. Even though it's obvious to some.

"...the GOP's central strategy of transforming our national elections into small-minded, juvenile gossip fests has no better friend than our establishment press."

And has no better friend than the public who continues to read, believe and regurgitate all the nonsense around the proverbial water coolers. There's nobody to blame but "us".

I think the "Attack the media!" is probably the best way to help/cure America's habit of respecting much of the MSM. As popular as the internet is for reading the real news of the day, there's still much fear and suspicion around it, too. Thank you Glenn for being one of the important news sources. As depressing as some of your posts are (like today's) what you write always teaches me something vital.

"The only way Democrats will be able to get their message out is to wrest the control (or to at least diversify ownership) of the MSM away from the Republican control. And I would say this is something they will have to do as soon as they take control of the government."

This is an awful idea! Even if it were possible, which it's not for a variety of reasons and besides, it's not the Republicans who control the media, it's a bad idea because the media should be UNbiased, not biased the way you happen to like.

We should concern ourselves with politicians who want to truly uphold what remains of the Constitution and to restore it. We need to support "better" politicians no matter their party. Too bad our biased media pays little attention to those politicians who respect liberty.

Will the money be spent ONLY on advertising against the Blue Dog democrats or will it also be used for promoting democrats (or republicans?) interested in maintaining or reinstating civil liberties?

I hope the funds will only be spent to target the "bad" politicians. Otherwise, how will this PAC be any different from all the others?

I hope someone can answer this before I donate.

Thank you in advance....

I'm not sure what can be done besides filibuster, which is of course unlikely. But what CAN be done by the next US President is to encourage the House and/or the Senate to "overturn" this retched FISA bill and reinstate our civil liberties provided in the Constitution. It matters not if this "sunsets" in 2012. To my knowledge, Congress can just as easily undo a bad bill as it can create one.

But I'm certainly not holding my breath. It would take a real leader for real change to push for this whether it be from a member of Congress or the President.

LillyRose, and anyone else who saw the candidates speaking at AIPAC: Did you see Obama's lapel pin?! It was a combo pin of the US flag AND the Israeli flag! Now that's patriotic!

Sigh....

It used to be that the conservatives were the ones concerned about saving our Constitution and civil liberties. Now it's the "far left" or "progressives". Any ideas how and/or why this has changed?