I just sent an email to Harry Reid's office via his website, as you requested.

&

Salon did have for some time a reporter in Iraq, who was not embedded. I haven't seen any stories from him for awhile now, but when I did, they were often pretty hairy.

http://search.salon.com/salonsearch.php?search=Phillip+Robertson&breadth=salon

I can't imagine what it would take for Salon to have someone there now, given that even the old-timers from the NewYorkTimes, etc. are leaving. And they have so many more resources.

explaining stages 3, 4, and 5 of postmodernism. Reading this blog could almost be a graduate level seminar... if only work did not intrude.

Also, did you notice the small typo in your comment to Tiberius? I might tweak it a bit: annoyone, just to make it more trollishly generic.

The reason there is no right-wing equivalent of Bill Moyers on PBS, is that there is no right-wing equivalent of Bill Moyers. Period.

It does make a difference when one uses "whore" to refer to one's self, rather than another person. Just like any other self-deprecatory use of language or humor...

Just imagine if Imus had used his coloful language about himself. Would it then have had at least a small grain of humor?

Or if the commenter who got me started (since I'm the one that interrupted that thread to gripe about gender-specific epithets-- and I'd do it again), had been writing about himself, rather than a right-wing, so-called journalist?

Somehow... neither of those example seem to carry as much meaning as your two working-life examples. I can't imagine Imus being able to do "self-deprecation" with humility, and in that case, irony would not carry the day.

[I'm old enough that my earliest jobs never included having to pee in a cup. And now, I'm old enough that I would really find it humiliating.]

Thanks for confirming my impression of Maher as a non-racist sexist. I also agree that he was booted from PI for a logically defensible remark.

However, I'm not so sure about his defense of Imus not also being a defense of his own sexism... can't really resolve that one.

Che Pasa:

In one of his columns, Paul Krugman noted that Bush, the less successful son of a more successful father, seemed to take/seek advice from other less successful sons of more successful fathers, e.g., Kristol and Kagan. (I don't know if Perle fits into that same category, but probably not.)

For all of his acting as if he doesn't much care what anyone else things, my hunch is that Bush really does want to go down in history as a more successful "War President" than his (more successful) father. (And I suspect both Kristol and Kagan may covet a similar kind of recognition.)

Ain't gonna happen.

History will eventually grant Bush-- and Kristol and Kagan-- the recognition he and they deserves, though.

...while watching Moyers' documentary that I didn't already know, most notably about the significant reporting of Landay, Strobel, and Walcott in covering the run-up to the war. Astonishing! Almost makes me wish I didn't live between NY and DC; I might have seen more of their work. And thanks to lexis/nexis, I can go back and look to see what I missed... when I find enough time.

Apparently, it isn't just the politicians and the media who live in a bubble on the east coast, but also those of us who have presumed to think we have the first and best access to information. T'aint true. And now we know.

Both Russert and Beinart were revelatory (and to be commended for at least appearing when others would not). Although both were defensive about their roles, Beinart seemed unrepentant, and Russert perhaps slightly more open to doing things differently in the future. (We'll just have to see.) He did acknowledge that mid-level employees were the ones who more often will speak truthfully. Perhaps he'll use such background sources more fruitfully in future.

The best thing I can say about Moyers' work, in this case, is that he and his crew have produced something that makes it possible to understand what began as a complicated story without dumbing it down (even if they did leave out some things that Paul R. wished they hadn't).

Dr. EyeBall:

There was mention made of that fact... and you can still see the program. GG provides the link in his post. It's well worth it.

Again, this person does not exist... or if he or she does, they are hiding their light under a bushel.