... pans out at all levels.

There's a local radio show here in Vermont called True North. It is hosted by somebody named Paul Beaudry. I've never listened to the show, but while listening to Amy Goodman's show (yes, they both play on the same station), I hear promos for it. They go something like this:

Narrator (in a voice used in monster truck rally commercials): "Dispelling the myths of the left is dangerous work, but Paul Beaudry is just the man to do it..."

Since reading your earlier posts about how concerned the right is with its/our masculinity, I can't help but laugh out loud every time I hear this spot. Thank you!!!

... wouldn't miss it.

I am sure George Bush believes his faith in God and all that goes along with that faith is sincere. But that doesn't necessarily make his faith genuine. What we've seen from fundamentalists of all stripes is the willingness to pick and choose those pieces of belief that support their world view and their ambitions. In vetoing the stem cell research bill the other day, Bush had this to say as he was wagging his pen:

"Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical -- and it is not the only option before us."

Yet this is the same man who can feel quite comfortable with his decision to invade Iraq, killing thousands of civilians in the process. This blindness to his own hypocrisy certainly supports your contention about a "Good vs. Evil" mentality. But it also demonstrates Bush's inconsistency in applying his beliefs, and makes it easy to assert that his faith is a sham. How can it be genuine when he so easily puts aside faith-based ethics when it suits his purpose? In fact, it is the "Good vs. Evil" mentality that best supports this kind of illogical, inconsistent reasoning.

...will continue to insist that impeachment is off the table. Is there anything more important than preserving our democracy? Apparently protecting their jobs is more important to Pelosi, et. al.

Glenn,

This is an excellent post, one that is actually inspiring, because it reminds us of what we CAN be.

I'd add one other factor in the decline in America's standing in the world: our nonchalance in the face of global warming. When the environment didn't appear to be overly threatened, the world could look to America's wealth and materialism and see a goal to strive for. That is, while there was a big gap between the American standard of living and most of the rest of the world, the rest of the world could strive to match America's wealth. But now, when it is clear that the Earth has reached its breaking point, America's unwillingness to make any sacrifice to slow the unrush of climate change has to be seen for what it is: indifference to the suffering that will be caused by a hotter planet. Combined with the aggressiveness of the imperialistic neoconservative administration, America now appears only interested in itself and the rest of the world be damned. Why would they have a favorable view of us?

... protesting the Vietnam War could get you killed. Just ask the students at Kent State. War protesters are inherently more principled and courageous that people who support the war but let others fight it.

Given how the far right categorizes anti-war activists as "traitors" and claims they "help the enemy," is it too much of a stretch to imagine that the government under Bush is already illeagly spying on them? I shudder to think of the abuses Bush and his cronies would make of this power if it was legally granted to them.

... so I could cancel my subscription.

Time Magazine -- and really any corporate-owned media -- simply has no credibility. I would trust the claims in the advertisements on its pages before I'd trust its so-called journalists.

... our government is resembling organized crime. Actually, it IS organized crime.

Every time I get a fundraising letter from the Democrats, I return it with a note that says, "Get a spine. Then maybe I'll support you." If everyone did that, maybe the message would sink in.

... but can't Harry Reid's leadership in the senate be challenged by his colleagues? Can't he be replaced as majority leader? That there appears no effort to do so implicates all the democrats in the senate in his disgraceful leadership.

... that religious people get such a bee up their asses about a few atheists.

... he'd be the guy who sets the house on fire, then acts like he's a hero because he called the fire department and pretended to worry about the house's occupants.

... jump to rash, irrational conclusions they would be liberals. It's in their nature to see the world in black and white... anything complex baffles them, and therefore requires their condemnation.

... when one of these blowhards gets so bitchy in response.

... we'll assume the smear campaign was orchestrated by Al Gore... who was smeared far worse than McCain, and by the press itself.

Glenn, I think your point is well taken, but the real lesson from it should not be that what Obama is doing is wrong, but that what Huckabee did was fine. Why criticize Huckabee for standing on his Christian roots. What else has he got to stand on? Politicians are free to make any argument they want to about why they should be elected. Despite how the media portray us, we voters are not mindless zombies. We can evaluate the candidates claims and vote accordingly. If you want to criticize Huckabee, there's plenty to criticize in the issues he pursues.

Rosen's essay sheds a little light into the dark corners of the beltway media. Take it or leave it, but lighten up on the criticism. Those of you who expect a short online essay to address every ill in political reporting are somewhat unrealistic, don't you think? No wonder we liberals can't get anything done. We would rather savage each other than work together.