You write:

Former Congressman Harold Ford appeared at the Netroots Nation conference yesterday, argued that Bush officials shouldn't be held accountable for crimes they committed while in office, and then insisted that Democrats shouldn't be expected to defend civil liberties and Constitutional rights because "the Constitution doesn't poll very well."

"the Constitution doesn't poll very well."

In direct quotation marks.

But the Digby cite link you provide opens with this:

OK, so welcome to the main exhibit hall, where we just had a debate between Markos and Harold Ford. (who defended the Congressional vote on FISA by basically saying that the Constitution doesn't poll very well. I'll elaborate later.)

Wherein he asserts that, in his opinion, Ford was "basically saying that the Constitution doesn't poll very well." (quoting Digby, not Ford)

That's the kind of low-hanging fruit wingnuts can glom right on to with which to diss Glenn Greenwald as some "disingenuous radical leftie with a transparent agenda."

Just because you do (undeniably voluminous) good work, bro', doesn't grant you a pass with respect to the assertion of bogus quotes. Sloppy at best. And counterproductive. This particular issue is just too damned important, constitutionally fundamental.

What? Now, every time you offer up some quote, I gotta go off chasing it down to verify its precise cred each and every time?

Also, I think it worth noting, in light of Article II, Section 2, e.g.,

The President "...shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."

Is simply says "offenses." No distinction between "criminal" and "civil" -- just "offenses."

Couple that with the widespread citation of "federal preemption" (which is right there in the 2008 FISA Amendments, BTW -- H.R. 6304 Section 803(a)(1) - (4) ), it would appear to matter not that civil cases are typically pretty much state-level.

Given Bu'ush's jones for pushing everything to the firewall, it would not surprise to have him claim that his pardon power extends to shutting down civil actions as well (to the extent he can't get Congress to Do the Dirty for him) in addition to pardoning himself. There is no legal recourse against abuse of the pardon power, and only one limitation on it use:

"...except in cases of impeachment."

Oh, I see, My Bad.

Since we're On The Side Of All That Is Good And Right, we get wide latitude when it comes to exactly quoting shit that didn't get said verbatim. 'Cuz we know how to interpret What They Really Intended, and our noble ends justify our expedient means.

BTW- whether Ford once allegedly elsewhere said ""F*ck the Constitution! Like any of my constuitions [sic] could actually read the document" is irrelevant to my point.

Nice.

Thanks for fixing it. While mistakes are of course inevitable, some are relatively trivial, some are not. Errantly quoting Ford as documentably saying "the Constitution does not poll well" is in the latter category, given the seriousness and contentiousness of the issue.

You can get as pissy as you want. Losing sight of the fact that I want your views to be respected, that's all.

OK, I stand rebuked and will now STFU after this reply.

"you insisted that Glenn's error was, in so many words, a ten on a scale of ten."

That's your interpretation, not mine. I'd have pegged it maybe a 5 or 6.

And let me extend an apology for my irascibility today. Just that, in a debate overpopulated with hyperbolic assertions and inaccurate quotes, it's a sore point with me. Too much noise, not enough signal.

Laws and Ethics ......

Are for the poor ..........

_______

I call it "The Shit Sandwich Theory of Life."

The more bread you got, the less shit you gotta eat.

Great comments.

The MSM press have become co-opted over my 62 year lifetime largely as a result of morphing into an integral part of the vertically integrated corporate infotainment megalith, with leading "reporters" and "commentators" becoming simply relatively wealthy entertainment stars who -- to the extent they have any original, coherent thoughts -- identify principally with the lifestyles and interests of their less visible masters -- and who must, lest they be cast out from the glittery halls of corporate/government power and access.

I call them "Court Composers." Utterly beholden to their Royal Patrons.

Yeah, now, in the wake of your observations, I wonder whether my assumption that Bu'ush will have to order pardon pens by the carton is valid. Maybe the MSM and the next administration just won't give a shit, and, as a bonus, not being pardoned means you can still claim the 5th in the event of any insolent nosiness.

See

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5378080

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24042054-643,00.html

http://www.slate.com/id/2194933/

Rumor now circulating that "Americans-are-whiners" Phil Gramm, who has been working as a exec/lobbyist for USB, may have helped John and Cindy McCain shelter money in USB. Might help explain his departure from the McCain campaign, moreso than his recent arrogant dumbass statements. If that turns out to be documentably true (and, of course, gets MSM news "legs"), McCain will be toast.

Enter perhaps then Mork Romney to save the day.

Interesting.

They're trying to dance past the lesion McCain just had removed from the upper right side of his face. But, I know that look. Ugh. And melanoma, once it returns acutely, typically takes you down fast. So, just for the sake of argument, what will be the Gooper Plan B if it is in fact melanoma aggressively returning?

Mork Romney?

The return of The Bootie Bandit Ghouliani?

This kind of crap is gonna go on incessantly right up to election day. They're gonna snipe at him ongoing with every little twisted parsing of every word spoken or implied -- or not even uttered.

Shiekh bin al BaraBlackOsamaHusseinSymbolBama is an Inexperienced Liberal Radical Muslim Koran-Loving Bible-Hating Athieist Socialist, and I have the emails to prove it.