Thank you for that info. I'll definitely follow that series.

For the past week, I've been listening to the unabridged audiobook of Gore's tome. (Read by Will Patton, who does a great job.) How anyone can call it "annoying" on any front is beyond me. I find the book brilliant, and Gore a great writer. He lays out his thesis in considered detail, with incisive, intelligent points. He knows his history, civics and philosophy, and can articulate them in a way that is clear and understandable. He's the teacher I only wish I'd had in high school.

Also, one of the things that seems to infuriate the neocons the most - his use of quotes from other writers past and present - is one of the things I find best and most fascinating about the book. Each time he comes up with a gem, it makes me want to go out and get the work he's quoting. My Amazon list is filling up with stuff to read now! I'm also budgeting money from my next paycheck to buy five copies of the book to give away, because I think it's an essential book for any American concerned with the loss of rationality in our country.

Now I'm just waiting for my copy of Glenn's new book to arrive. Like the earlier poster, I got an email saying it's delayed.

Thanks to you for the thoughtful reply to my reply.

We are definitely in agreement on the state of the media. The point I was trying (perhaps clumsily) to make is that if Glenn were only talking about the MSM-blog fight, I might agree that's it's time-wasting. But that's not all he talks about. Glenn does a lot of analysis on many other matters, and occasionally lets us know what's happening, in his opinion, on this particular matter. Thus my feeling that those who aren't interested can always skip over.

But even so, even if that were all Glenn posted about, I think it would be worth the space. There are many blogs, some with a wider scope than others, and it seems to me that this issue is worth talking about. The news media holds such enormous sway in our country, influencing everything from voting trends to hairstyle trends to the very nature of how we communicate, that keeping an eye on the MSM's vagaries in response to the new technology that threatens them is, in my view at least, a worthy subject.

I do agree with you that national media has locked out ordinary people for a long time now. But it's been getting worse and worse over the last couple of decades, to the point where senators spend all their time digging up money for campaign ads instead of attending to the constituents that might want to talk to them. When it gets to that point, where the goodwill of the MSM actually changes the way our government is run, than it's something that must be watched closely. There's an unholy alliance in our country going on, and few people have the resources to go head-to-head with these guys.

Except that now there's the internet. Yes, lots of dross is around, but that's what happens with freedom of speech - everybody gets to talk, and now there's a forum for it. It's a good thing, I think, and one of the inevitable consequences is that the old dogs will growl at the new pups. Pointing out their hypocrisies helps to put into perspective everything else that comes from them - if they're so hot to whine and moan and fabricate in retaliation, how much value can we attribute to the "news" they report? Personally, I find this kind of post, especially from someone as thoughtful and reliable as Glenn (who always provides links in order that we may look and decide for ourselves, unlike the MSM who expect us to just take their word for everything because they're "legitimate" journalists), to be very helpful to me in deciding who and what to listen to, and how much respect to accord to whom.

Hitchens' also states that "Sunni insurgents" is a polite way of saying "Al-Qaida"

Yes, indeed. As if the only Sunnis who might be resentful of the war are the members of al-Qaeda. Typical Hitchens drivel.

Oh, man, I think I'll stick with just those two. I gotta draw the line somewhere, or else my whole paycheck will flow out the door. Besides, tiberius and shooter242 will provide enough points to get out a good amount, judging from the last couple of days' worth of trollery.

prompts our society to be horrendously cruel. What irony that we see killing a pet who is in terrible pain as mercy, and yet extending that mercy to another human being is considered a crime. Animals deserve more compassion than humans, go figure.

My best friend, who is a nurse, and I have had this discussion, and she has agreed to be my medical proxy in case I am ever in such a situation. I chose her over my family and other friends because she is a brassy, ballsy woman who will definitely not take any crap from anyone who would try to countermand my wishes. We've even worked out a code system in case I am unable to speak. I trust her completely, and know that she'll stick to her promise.

The fiction that somehow the state owns people's lives and can thus determine what they do with them is cruel and inhuman. We have the right to life, yes? Guaranteed as one of our rights in this country? It's about time that we were also given the right to determine our own time and place of death. Dying is our birthright by nature and the Divine, whether we like it or not. The Buddhists say that we are always dying, every minute. Pretending we can stave it off by legal or medical means is just childish nonsense.