that Bill Moyers is on PBS tonight with "Buying the War." Check local listings.

(as they say.)

It's the most important meal of the Constitution.

Somebody should commend you for your brilliant post, and it shall be me.

I was snorting as I read your words-- but it was milk, forcefully, through the nose.

Posting too far out to be read, but I wanted to chime in my approval for any changes that make for more civility yet keep the passionate, informative, and enlightening exchanges part of what makes Salon what it is.

Recently while on vacation, I was only able to read the original articles but not access any of the letters afterwards (my host's connection would time-out before the letters would load) and it diminished the experience of reading Salon significantly. I realized how much I look forward to the "conversation" with other posters afterward. It was like seeing a really provacative movie and then not being able to discuss it as you're leaving the theater and strolling down the street.

I've had the same nauseating thought. One thing that might yet save the day if Lieberman switches over is the possibility of principled Republicans willing to do what's right. Principled, or at least up for re-election.

It took a moment on The Google but it was worth it for the reference. LOL. Bushie sure puts the "potted" in potted plant (and the "sham" in shamrock too).

just before the 2004 election speaking of poll numbers:

Quoth he, "you may end up with a different math, but you're entitled to your math, I'm entitled to THE math." (emphasis added)

So too, it seems, Rove has HIS history.

And look at how well he knew his math?

that her answer was perfectly clear and appropriate in the context. What else can she or should she possibly say? And brava to her for her restraint and class.

I will only add how I detest the sudden urgent prodding and insistance on an answer from the MSM questioners. Have they EVER prodded and insisted on an answer from GWB and his ilk in any real way? Oh, but NOW they're "investigative" journalists? Puleeze.

That they had to scrape the sides of the 60's/70's-Dean-Martin's-Roast style "safe" comedian barrel just adds to Colbert's stunning achievement last year. Not to be invited back (and not to choose a comtemporary of Colbert) is sweet vindication.

Dear Mr. Grieve,

I respectfully propose that you and your colleagues and we readers of whatever political stripe vigilantly refuse to use the word "surge." Of course, the quotation marks are meant to suggest that we disavow the word and what it refers to, but it still keeps it in the fore, and "surge" is their word. We know the game of argument and persuasian is half won by those who frame the issue and determine the rhetoric.

Let's call it what it is: escalation, increase, utter madness, etc.

Friends write truly inspired holiday newsletters each year. We can't wait to hear from them.

One year, they wrote their letter as Mad Libs, as in:

"Barry had an _______________ quarter at his company this year. Everyone had said it would be ________________ but it actually turned out __________________. At the ground-breaking ceremony, he got to meet the ______________ governor and was surprised at how __________________ he was in person..."

etc.

I like your newsletter. Very much.

Peace,

David Strathairn. Just Google his name and trust me.

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!

courtesy of House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi:

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

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.

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.)

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.