fightthetheocracy! said

"The MSM would be the most affected by the kind of America that the republican base wants to live in. We need to remind them that for their own survival they need to confront this kind of pandering and they need ot tell the rest of America, no matter how much scrutiny they come under. Most Americans don't know how much freedom they will lose if these people get their way.

See. I think that part’s wrong. At the end of the day, or even the century, the MSM cares not one whit about journalism, which used to at least resemble truth. They would only be “affected” to the extent of which form of lie they continue to tell and which form of truth they continue to withhold.

The practice and profit margin of the MSM will remain the same. As their ownership and role is well in place, so also shall the same be in place in the coming theocracy.

Glenn,

Lest you sound entirely disinenguous, you need to correct your assertion that Obama does not support the Bush Doctrine, when it seems pretty obvious that he does:

"And that's the flaw of the Bush doctrine. It wasn't that he went after those who attacked America. It was that he went after those who didn't."

Pointing out a flaw in the way a certain applicator applies a doctrine is not the same as rejecting the doctrine entirely, which is what it seems you would like to believe or intimate, or both.

The funny thing is, that point (Obama's alleged opposition) is not even required support for the focus of your write-up, which is not about the validity of the Bush Doctrine, so much as it is about the failure of our next potential commander in chief to have even a rudimentary understanding of it.

Come on, now, do the right thing, here. You can't attack the disingenousness of other journalists and then become them at the same time.

I am beginning to think that part of the Rovian based McCain campaign strategy with regard to Palin is that they want her to screw up, more and more and better, endearing her to a big part of their Dobsian and homespun base.

"Aww, poor thing, she's trying so hard to make it in this man's world."

She, however, I do not think is as complicit in this matter so much as an easy mark.

I am pleased that the thing failed to pass.

I wish I could be proud of the Republicans (for the first time in forever) for doing this out of principle and not pandering - but I don't care - it works.

I hope it, or nothing remotely similar, ever passes.

Ever.

Thank you.

Excellent.

As usual, and as the truth often does, it hurt my mind to read it, but thank you, all the same. After all, of "the truth," it has also been said, "it can't hurt."

Wtf.

You expect me to believe and buy that the IDENTICAL kind of wallstreeters responsible for the crap here, do not also exist in each of your countries?

You expect to believe that no one over yonder across the ponds did not benefit from the gang bang back here, this side of the pond?

Really?

Get a clue.

And then, cry me a river, while you're at it.

Y'all sat back waitin' for the despicable Amurikans to bail ya'll out, and when the puppets failed to perform as expected, you started reaching into your own pockets to take care of your own.

Keep diggin' - you're gonna need it.

LMAO!!

The winner for best single sentence in a post on the WAR...is:

"As I noted at the time, those claims had no basis in reality."

Thanks.

Yep, that's what I said, even over here at Salon.

Throw the goddamned book at her.

And the next one, too, and the next, and the next.

Because.

Because only until each and every one of us and you has someone you love listed on one of these silly, meaningless, unbeneficial, counterproductive registries will we and you wake up and say "enough."

Until that time arrives, every politician at every level of government in every jurisdiction in the land is going to continue to write more new and pointless registration laws for the singular sensational benefit of vote gathering. And no one, no one, no one is going to say a thing to stop them until someone has a reason to.

The jury is back: the laws are meaningless, and worse. But yet, the show goes on, day after day, the Emperor clothed.

Throw the book at her, her and everyone else, too.

I wonder if it was a hard decision for you to consent to any involvement with Fox News at all. I don't want this to come off the wrong way, but it almost seems hypocritical on your part - giving them any credence at all by consenting to an interview with one of their employees.

It may have been a longer road to the truth, but I think you should have told them "no, you are not a news show, you do not report the news, I am not interested in assisting you in the dissemination of your untruths."

(At least, if nothing else, however, it provided more worthy fodder for another of your excellent posts, thanks.)