Does anyone remember, about eight years ago, there was this skinny little guy running for President who kept insisting that he was going to shake up things in Washington? Does anyone remember how - despite his father having been President - this guy kept insisting that he was an outsider, not one of the Washington elite? Does anyone remember how he promised to be "a uniter, not a divider" and to bridge partisan political divides?

Does anyone remember how he got nominated?

Having run Senator John McCain's campaign for president, I can recount a textbook example of a smear made against McCain in South Carolina during the 2000 presidential primary. We had just swept into the state from New Hampshire, where we had racked up a shocking, 19-point win over the heavily favored George W. Bush. What followed was a primary campaign that would make history for its negativity.

In South Carolina, Bush Republicans were facing an opponent who was popular for his straight talk and Vietnam war record. They knew that if McCain won in South Carolina, he would likely win the nomination. With few substantive differences between Bush and McCain, the campaign was bound to turn personal. The situation was ripe for a smear.

It didn't take much research to turn up a seemingly innocuous fact about the McCains: John and his wife, Cindy, have an adopted daughter named Bridget. Cindy found Bridget at Mother Theresa's orphanage in Bangladesh, brought her to the United States for medical treatment, and the family ultimately adopted her. Bridget has dark skin.

Anonymous opponents used "push polling" to suggest that McCain's Bangladeshi born daughter was his own, illegitimate black child.

FBI head Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify Sept. 17 before the Senate Judiciary Committee. John Conyers has a list of anthrax case questions.

“Important and lingering questions remain that are crucial for you to address, especially since there will never be a trail to examine the facts of the case,” wrote Judiciary Chairman John Conyers Jr. , D-Mich., in a letter co-signed by two subcommittee chairmen.

Among the questions they want Mueller to address are whether White House officials initially pressed the FBI to show the attacks were linked to al Qaeda or Iraq and why another government scientist, Steven Hatfill, remained a suspect in the investigation. Judiciary Committee Democrats also want Mueller to explain why Ivins retained his security clearance after becoming the prime suspect in the attacks.

Link at my sig. I hope Glenn covers it - I am still waiting to see a detailed response to the FBI's "scientific proof".

Glenn, this is another great post.

Sometimes I think US readers should print out posts like these from multiple online sources and go sell them at the mall in a DIY newspaper format.

Think about it: you take the best of Greenwald, Atrios, TPM, HuffPo and others - heck, it would be a quality weekly paper! You could easily print off 10 double-sided pages and sell it for enough to cover printing costs.

Of course you would want to ask the writers' permission, and put in a little disclaimer such as: "All original writing reproduced here remains copyright of the authors. See the Links section for original URLS."

Just a thought FWIW. I imagine this might sell well during the election campaign. Heck, you might even build up a business model!