David Ensor on CNN cited sources that accurately described Joseph Wilson regarding the forged Niger documents; bloggers I don't recall have alleged Cheney-Libby meetings about Wilson subsequently in March.

Man, when Salon does original reporting, boy do you drop bombshells. I very much enjoy that you've (apparently, at least) shown all your work.

I don't agree that this is Swift-Boating. There's no question that George Allen is racist and thus unfit for higher office. The evidence before this article was already plentiful, and he has not said or done anything since his alleged awakening that convinces me that he has any real new grasp of history or change in attitude.

Maybe I'm optimistic, but I hope that this new information convinces at least some voters who hadn't already been turned off by his past demonstrations of white supremacy--or his policies, more than sufficiently objectionable in themselves.

Bush pulled more votes from Florida-registered Democrats than Gore. In 2000, Gore and Bush were indistinguishable; you can't find a single significant difference between them in the 2000 debates. Gore didn't just make his share of mistakes; he depressed Democratic turnout by seeming like no alternative to Bush, he refused to campaign on Clinton's popular record, he never asked Clinton to campaign for him (thus failing to carry either Arkansas or Tennessee), and once the chips were down he utterly failed to fight for the Presidency that was rightfully his.

You're bitter? I'm bitter at this blame-Nader myth that has become entrenched political wisdom. At least Walter Shapiro has the discretion not to assert it as an undisputed fact.

For noticing what Walter Shapiro actually wrote about and giving him credit where it's due. O you Shapiro critics who accuse him of endlessly pimping for HRC, how does this post fit into your narrative?

Please explain why you think this, Ms. Walsh.

I'm unable to find an actual argument in the article related to its headline. That Reagan made the (white) nation feel good about itself and displayed incurably sunny optimism seems to me very thin material for finding a positive upside to his presidency.

A postscript: I find the lack of hyperlinks to explain the hedgehog and fox references at the end disturbing, even a bit snobbish. I am superficially aware of Isaiah Berlin's celebrated essay, but if I weren't I would be thoroughly confused and at a loss how to enlighten myself.

Because your teaser text implies some kind of opposition to it where there is none. Her entry and associated links specifically discussed the inappropriateness of calling Hillary supporters for McCain angry, hysterical women.

I had already emailed Obama and called Hoyer (getting the usual unsatisfactory responses), but I finally put my money where my mouth is and donated $100 through the ActBlue page. Thanks for all your work on this, Glenn!

stevio, you can email Obama's campaign: here's the link--

http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/contact2

Here is another number to contact Hoyer's office:

202-225-4131

Ms. Walsh, who received the most votes from registered Democrats in Florida in 2000?

Also, do you think Nader cost Gore Tennessee? Or Arkansas?

Finally, did Nader stop the Florida recount? Or was it five Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices? Did he certify the fradulent Florida results, or was that Katherine Harris?

Gore cost the Democrats the Presidency in 2000 by appearing virtually indistinguishable from Bush during the campaign, by not asking Clinton to campaign for him, and by acquiescing to the stolen election. Blaming Nader is a bad joke and lazy thinking, going along with the received wisdom of yellow-dog Democrats.

... Justice Ginsburg, however unintentionally, has given Obama more time to have the Lieberman-Graham bill passed (see today's Greenwald) and render this entire lawsuit moot.

That was a very nice overview, thanks.

And thank you, Karl Rove, for the permanent Democratic majority.

I think "centrist" is a bad term for these Democratic senators. It of course perpetuates the nearly-useless one-dimension theory of political outlooks, and on health care in particular Nelson is flat-out regressive. Bayh is regressive in a lot of ways. Calling them "centrist" suggests they're reasonable moderates. (But you've heard that before, I'm sure. This is just for the record.)

Also, you (and NPR's "Morning Edition" today) are distorting so-called "procedural" votes. For practical purposes, they're substantive as well. If you know that a measure has 50 or 51 votes and your voting against wouldn't stop it, then voting for cloture and then voting against the bill is a fig leaf. Opponents will just highlight the cloture bill as you voting "for" it, and frankly they'd be right.

And no wonder this is the direction of the readership considering the increase of terrible articles like this.