a just, powerful, democratic Republic dedicated to justice, equality, the rule of law, civil rights for all its citizens, three co-equal and transparent branches of government, a free and independent press and an enlightened, egalitarian, intelligent, and well-educated citizenry would come and liberate us from this totalitarian regime we suffer under.

I'm ready with candies and flowers!

Don't forget the president's appointment as Administration Liason to the citizen group M.A.D.D. -- Mr. E. Vade Dui.

is McClellan still talking to us? Isn't his gig as the next Orkin Man due to start soon?

it sounded like "tellur that"-- a pronoun to denote the female gender, albeit quickly delivered.

Each morning brings a fresh embarassment to our nation from the utterances of George Bush. September 11th, I dare say, would be a "moment" each one of us might site as a "worst moment" of recent memory, but the drivel and babble Bush spouts is disturbing and not a little frightening in its disjointedness and contradictions. Really Mr. Bush? You'd been told that the White House where your family was had been hit and still it was more important for you to remain seated in that Florida classroom for a small eternity? Not even personal self-interest moved you to "frighten the children" by calming getting up and excusing yourself right away?

And then, the best moment of his presidency: "they've all been busy moments, by the way." Each time his adds, "by the way" to the end of a ridiculous detail or non sequitor only adds to the embarassment. It adds to the suspicion too, that beyond afterthought, it is a talking point that he'd missed earlier and needed to get in ("Mr. President, whenever you speak in public, remind the folks that you're always busy and hard at work."). Really Mr. Bush? A fish?

Can anyone imagine the answer from:

Clinton: "it would have to be an especially good Big Mac I once ate in Biloxi."

Reagan: "a terrific horseback ride on the ranch."

Kennedy: "won a really tough game of touch football at the Compound last June."

advanced by AC (and too many others) that government intrusion into our personal lives (via FBI files, illegal telephone wiretapping, and so forth) is an inconsequential non-issue when you have "nothing to hide" is astonishingly short-sighted. Let's grant that you're not engaging in anything the government considers illegal activity today-- there is no guarantee that the line between legal and illegal won't be redrawn tomorrow, next month, next year. At some point along this slide, you will find yourself on the wrong side of the line. And the power to redraw that line at will isn't in my hands or yours.

This is the crux of the argument, and it's reason enough to hold fast to the Constitution.

Amen. Amen.

that 49 out of 100 senators voted yes to this travesty of an "amendment" is chilling enough. That the vote didn't get the 2/3rds needed is cold comfort.

When I think of my own extended/blended family on both sides I think fondly of my (selectively closeted) gay relatives and fondly, if a little sadly, about several other, mostly older relatives who are just as convinced as the senator that there are no gays in our family.

You are correct and right to point it out. I guess I was jumping ahead.

Of course I stand by the spirit of my original disgust and incredulity. In my view, 100 senators should recognize that their job One is to refuse to write discrimination and disenfranchisement into our great Constitution. And the most important border these people should concern themselves with protecting is the one that separates Church and State.

Don't our elected representatives, the media, and far too many citizens remember the give and take free exchange of opposing, conflicting, co-existing, mutually supportive, intriguing, vexing, inspiring ideas? This salutory activity is one of Congress's primary reasons for being. And certainly it is the birthright and responsibility of every citizen. Good grief what a slogan nation this has become.

(and yes, I'm aware that, ironically, "slogan nation" is itself a slogan. Ah well.)

This was a fine article and I found Suskind's points cogent and illuminating (I've just finished reading "The One Percen Doctrine" and recommend it for its insight). However, I am dismayed to find even Suskind (and Salon) falling into the rhetorical trap of wrongly suggesting that foiling this latest bomb plot was somehow the doing of the US rather than the British. Here are just two examples:

"when we break up an attack, there's a kind of a scattering phenomenon".... [w]e may have broken up, clearly, a significant cell that was coming from London bound for America, but there may be al-Qaida operatives inside of America who remain a mystery to us."

Have I missed something? Was this indeed a collaborative effort all along between our two countries?

Sadly, no. Much as I anticipate the MSM and the Bush Administration shamelessly, subtly claiming that "we" thwarted the next 9/11 attack, I also fear that the Administration will miss cricial lessons that led the British to be successful this time: tireless investigation and judicious use of intelligence, surveillance and infiltration over posturing, fear-mongering, and military might.

courtesy of House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061006/ap_on_el_ge/pelosi_time_1

Bush called dips on space when he signed a new "National Space Policy that rejects future arms-control agreements that might limit U.S. flexibility in space and asserts a right to deny access to space to anyone 'hostile to U.S. interests...'"[which] according to National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones 'reflect[s] the fact that space has become an even more important component of U.S. economic, national and homeland security'." (WaPo 10/18/06)

So, now "the stars align" when Bush & Co. damn well tells them to align!

David Strathairn. Just Google his name and trust me.

I like your newsletter. Very much.

Peace,