Glenn,

I found this post over at a Draft Mikey website.

Is this an attack on civil liberties, or is this a chance to improve an already creaky system (like Social Security cards) that is taken advantage of on a daily basis. It is funny when you consider that everyone that is born in America immediately gets a Social Security number, but this other form of identification using biometrics would be a bad thing because it would reduce civil liberties?

The person writing the post goes on to trivialize what the ramifications of this biometric system true implications might be.

For some reason my link didn't show up in my post about the Draft Mikey website. Here you go:

http://www.uniteformike.com/2007/12/31/draft-mike-bloomberg-for-president/greenwald-proves-the-point-for-why-bloomberg-for-president/

Great analysis Glenn. This issue should hit home to everyone who believes in free speech. Frank Zappa's famous 1986 appearance on CNN's Crossfire is not a perfect parallel to the issue at hand, but it does help to illustrate the argument for free speech.

Here's the link:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8ISil7IHzxc

If I wanted to watch a couple of guys make out I would rather it be Jake and Heath. Jesus Babbling Christ! Obsequious? Chris Wallace did everything but fellate the guy on National TV.

It was commendable of Chuck Todd to go on the record with you and he deserves praise for having the stones to be interviewed by you.

Why did Chuck Todd continually reiterate that "if you could guarantee me trials would NOT be potlical" he might be in favor? Or something to that effect ... I will have to listen again. He always gave oblique criticism to all of his colleagues in the TV press corps when he stated that this would turn into a nightly debate on television! Hahahahahahahah That was rich. By appearing on Morning Joe, and engaging in said speculation, he is in fact feeding that beast himself! Is Chuck, in some unconcious manner, asking to be saved from himself? Isn't he also missing the larger point you were trying to make about the adversarial nature of the press--or the lack thereof--is conspicuously absent with respect to the Bush/Cheney lawlessness? Of course the cable news shows will turn this into theatre. So what. We have plenty of tough, ethical prosecutors who would be guided by the rule of law. The cable news channels will do what they do but the people subjected to war crimes--many of whom may well have been terrorists or war criminals themselves--and the American people, deserve justice. Isn't that the cornerstone of our justice system?

While it is true the bosses made this decsion, KO lost this one. KO criticized O'Reilly and his fact free reportage. O'Reilly attacked GE, thus out-maneuvering KO. O'Reilly understands how the corporate media works and used it to his advantage. He is no longer attacked by KO and Jeff Immelt is no longer attacked by O'Reilly.

KO won every battle and still lost the war. Sound familiar? It happened to the US in that little conflagration way down yonder in ... KO got pwned by O'Reilly. It's not fair but this is the nature of the corporate beast that is our establishment media.