I think we should start calling him Nuke Gingrich.

I don't think that KO is agreeing with BO on FISA, but he is certainly pulling his punches as Glenn's quote of KO early in the year about telecom immunity shows. And his interview of Alter was cowering. How can he let Alter say that the new FISA bill makes things constitutional again? I generally agree with Alter, but his responses this time were pathetic and uninformed. I think KO is actually a bit flustered these days with BO. He seemed off his mark last night. He did question BO's flag pin prominently displayed on the RollingStone cover. Was the pin a bit of cowering? But then KO for some reason and inanely says to the effect that "it doesn't make a difference". An absurd and disappointing piece by KO.

No posts by GG in 48 hours. Argh! I'm going through withdrawal.

Glenn, while I wholeheartedly agree with many of the points that you make in today's and previous posts, you frequently use overly strong and somewhat offensive language to make those points. For instance, in this post's update, you write the words "In a minimally rational world,". These words are unnecessary and could come across as condescending, particularly to those who would not agree with you. They are not part of what would be constructive criticism. While the words are understandable, to make more persuasive arguments I would suggest minimizing such asides and using words that are more commonly agreeable. While this could lead to possibly more droll and less entertaining to read language, it would do more to create a better understanding with those who you (and I) differ.

BTW, you are doing a fantastic job following and being active on this FISA bill issue. I read your blog daily (often hourly). I have pledged to contribute to the money bomb.

Very good post today, Glenn. The question is will Bush, Cheney, Rice, et al be held to account once they're out of office. We know nothing will happen between now and November except for possibly a feckless House Judiciary hearing on Kucinich's impeachment articles. If Obama becomes president he might have a justice department investigation conducted about the law breaking of the Bush administration, but will it amount to anything? Other than laying out again and explicitly the law breaking, I seriously doubt that Obama would want to pursue legal proceedings against any high level person in the Bush administration.

So if he doesn't do that, is it the International Criminal Court where the law breaking charges will be brought? Would the ACLU do this? Some other organization? Not that the U.S. would extradite any of the lawbreakers to the Hague (or wherever), but I guess there could be some sort of trial held in suspense until somehow the law breakers are apprehended.

I know. I'm getting way ahead of things, but what other avenues of accountability are there? This issue will never rest or subside substantially until there's some justice.

I'm donating but not as much as I originally intended. I'm concerned that too much money is going to target Democrats and that there won't be enough targeting of Republicans. I realize that this effort is not aimed at any particular party but is aimed at those in control of Congress which is assumed to continue to be the Democrats. However, Republicans are accountable as well for their votes and have been the primary force behind our government's destructive policies for the past 7 1/2 years. I don't think Democrats should receive all the punishment for the past years' tide of policies.

Libertarians have generally been closer to Republican policies, and I'm thinking some libertarians involved in this effort might be only too happy to be able to target Democrats. I don't want liberals to get suckered into an effort that may bring down Democratic leadership leading to even worse Republican leadership (at least by their standards since Reagan).

From the NYTimes article I do see that a Republican will be targeted regarding the Iran blockade bill. This is good, and I hope there is a fairness in future targeting.

Since this is just the beginning of Accountability Now, it's hard tell exactly how the money is going to be used. If it used wisely and fairly, then I will donate more.

Great piece, Glenn! The chumminess between the mainstream press and government officials has just been too much. Unfortunately, it's the press mavens who don't rock the boat (when it counts) that become the favorites of the corporations who own the media outlets. Just keep everything hunky dory and people will keep coming back for a pleasant evening of sunny news, and the ratings and sales will stay up.

It results in a dumbing down of our media. Though not the same but a somewhat related dumbing down (again, for ratings) is the ever growing prevalence of gorgeous looking news presenters and analysts, particularly women on cable. It's seems that every few days there is another stunner on the cable channels giving us the news or their opinion. We're not that dumb to realize what is happening. Great looking people may mean higher ratings, but of course it means talent is being sacrificed for looks. The great looking do not have a monopoly on news and punditry talent.

Sorry for digressing, but it's another gripe that I have with the media. I wonder if there's been a study on this.

1. The Palin favorability ratings reflect a disturbing state about the American populace when a mocking, highly partisan, and untruthful speech engenders favorable ratings for the speaker.

2. The Obama campaign is going to respond more strongly than the Kerry campaign did in similar circumstances. The Obama camp has reacted tepidly so far, but I think will come on stronger in response to the untruthful statements made by Palin.