I must say I am fed up with the arrogance that you and your colleagues in the news industry show in your treatment of any mention of impeachment. You state you know we, the readers, "care" yet you are quick to label Kucinich as "a lone congressman who's widely considered something of a laughingstock, especially when it's clear that action will never come to anything, just isn't especially newsworthy. (I cover it here mostly just because I know Salon readers care, and partially because I wanted to make that point.)"

It is newsworthy in the fact that one, the issue will not die the quiet death you wish that it would and two, because there are many people that beleive that overlooking this administration's actions will only serve to embolden future administrations to overlook and cook the evidence to serve their own needs.

You are a big part of the problem for those of us who knew from the beginning based upon a "preponderence of evidence" that this administration's action were unfounded and ill-advised. Yet you let yourselves off the hook both then and these seven years later with mentions of the 'conspiracy theorists and laughingstock nutcases' you dismissed and believed were wrong all along when it looks like we were right all along.

Personally, I believe we not only need to clear out Congress and the White House, we need to clear out all of you ELITIST, marginal journalists that refuse to speak truth to power.

The word 'disingenuous' seems to me to be used quite extensively lately when describing both journalists and elected officials as well in their treatment of the Bush administration.

Give me a Break! You all walked in lockstep with this administration and let common sense die in the process because you were afraid you would be disenfranchised by the people in power.

Maybe you should go back to believing in the worth of journalism when controlled by the population. There are plenty of other news organizations that are growing in repsonse to your inaction and I plan to support them.

All the prefacing done by the Pastor Rick about how the questions would be identical and McCain would not be listening in are questionable given that there were a few that were different AND very leading sounding. This could make your assumption that McCain was prepared for a debate and Obama was not seem a bit skewed.

The first quuestion is a good example, by asking Obama "Who are the three wisest people you know in your life and who are you going to rely on heavily in your administration?" McCain was asked only "Who would you rely on heavily in your administration?"

This allowed McCain to go directly to Petraeus and the war which was a theme for him throughout the questioning.

The pastor lead into Obama's question on abortion by stating "Lets deal with abortion. Then at length '..this is a very complex issue' which most would find a clue to expound upon the subject which Obama did and he followed with "Have you ever voted to limit or reduce abortions?" which he never asked McCain.

But, he did ask the quick abortion question and included the statement on how "people who beleive life begins at conception

believe that abortion is a holocaust" but no mention of the "complex issues". McCain was quick to say "At the moment of conception" and followed with a few short sentences on his long record. Pastor Rick just says "Ok, we don't have to go longer on that one. Ok, define marriage"

Most worrisome is how in question 8 about the union between a man and a woman McCain asked "Are we going to get back to the importance of Supreme Court justices or should I just move on?" To which Pastor Rick imparts "We will get to that" without seeming to realize the Supreme Court issues have yet to be addressed to McCain, only Obama. Whereby Pastor Rick asks McCain (not Obama) if the "Supreme Court of California was wrong?" in overturning Proposition 8, etc. Couriouser and couriouser.

I can't add more yet but that last one was very curious to me. Cindy and Sen. Graham and another Sen. were in the audience. Were they in the audience from the beginning and were they on live feed to McCain on the interview? I have yet to see McCain that quick on his feet. His answers were too perfect rebuttals for cynicism not to rear its head.

What a hoot! First he leaves his first wife for Cindy and then he "pimps" Cindy out to the bikers for votes by way of volunteering her for the X-rated beauty pageant.

I knew when McCain interjected into the abortion question if he could "get back to the Supreme Court question" and Pastor Rick said later that the FIX was IN. There were still 4 questions to come before that question should have been presented to McCain about the Supreme Court.

Sure enough, Pastor Rick had to admit on CNN that McCain was actually 'late' arriving and NOT sequestered as promised. Indeed, what I thought were all too pat and perfect answers by McCain were just that, ALL TOO PERFECT - because he knew what the questions would be ahead of time.

Talk about a purpose driven life. I guess Pastor Rick can leave his ethics behind if it means getting the Republicans elected. And, if not that, then McCain certainly showed his true ethics - never full disclosure.