What an incredible feeling of disassociation I had hearing Amy Goodman repeatedly laud cASS Sunstein as the most often cited legal scholar in intergalatic jurisprudence history when compared to Sunstein's tired look, sound, and argumentation of why Bush lawbreaking should go unprosecuted and unpunished. This supposed great and wonderful legal scholar who must walk around in robes adorned with the fabric bearing words of the Magna Carta and Constitution emblazoned on them cannot muster the cajones to call illegal activity what it is because "it might lead to a divided nation."

What utter bullshit. Hey cASS, newsflash: we already HAVE a divided nation! Oh yeah, here's another 2x4 to your big, heavy, brain: And that's the way the Congress, Corporations and their lobbyists, and the Bush administration want it!

If he is what passes for unassailable expert legal example in this country, then we are done for. It is patently obvious from that interview that cASS was simply toeing the Obama line as well as that of the criminal Congress when Amy mentioned and he discussed the "fact" that pursuing criminal charges against the Administration would lead to "criminalizing public service" and apparently thus discouraging good people from serving their country.

God, pass the vomit bag. And get a goddamn haircut, cASS. You look like the slob you sound like.

However don't delude yourself that your opinions area majority opinion among progressive Democrats. They are not.

1) Who died and made you "King of Knowing What Progressive Democrats Think?"

2) Please cite your source which clearly demonstrates this "fact" you just made up.

3) Glenn cites almost everything he states as fact, which is a HELL of a lot more than you do.

I gave to his campaign. Others should too. Norm Coleman is pure and simple a snake in the Bush Administration swamp.

www.AlFranken.com

His arguments sounded like a lunatic raving in opposition to the things you write about.

If you watched the hearings today, it was an enlightening moment when Vincent Bugliosi (Prosecuting GWB for Murder) mentioned that all of the witnesses were coached prior to their testimony not to mention "George Bush" or any member of the Administration directly in the same sentence with "committing crimes." They were to substitute "members of the administration" or similar pseudonyms in place of individuals.

Talk about nothing but a dog and pony show....

I could have sworn that I heard John Conyers throw out Cindy Sheehan from the hearing today after she started yelling something in affirmation after some of Vincent Bugliosi's testimony....if anyone saw the same thing, let me know.

I sure hope someone interviews her and we get to hear her thoughts about the hearing if she was in fact there.

I think it would be very helpful for people to know who you ask on to the show, and which of those folks refuse. I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that 90%+ of those you criticize will be unwilling to come on the show because they don't have the balls to show how full-of-holes their arguments really are. If I were them, I'd run from you as fast as possible. (that's a compliment!)

Congrats and best of luck making this new radio edge a huge thing.

Glenn, I'm sure you've already done a bunch of brainstorming for guests, but if any of these aren't already on the list, I'd love to hear an interview with any of them:

1) Bruce Fein--was very lucid and convincing in his testimony today.

2) Al Franken--always humorous and entertaining and could use the support in his campaign against Norm Coleman.

3) Rep. Henry Waxman--forever crusading against the massive financial fraud, waste, and no-bid contracts of the past 8 years.

4) Jonathan Turley--nuff said.

5) Ron Paul--I would bet a discussion of his movement and what is going on with it would be fascinating. It's getting almost zero coverage in the MSM. His group rocked my state's Republican convention (Missouri) recently.

6) Bob Barr--He was also EXCELLENT in his testimony today and needs all the exposure he can get right now.

7) Ralph Nader--Love him or not, the guy is interesting and would make for a great interview, even if it were somewhat adversarial (ie, holding his feet to the fire about his stances and policy takes).

8) John Cusack--made an excellent MoveOn.org type ad and appears to be very lucid on the political issues of the day.

9) Bill Maher--nuff said.

10) Tom Schatz--Director of Citizens Against Government Waste--interestingly enough, he is pushing hard for Congress to allow drilling off our coasts, which to me seems antithetical to his cause as we've already seen the gov't give away billions upon billions of tax breaks and other spoils to oil companies since BushCo took office.

11+) Amy Goodman, Jane Hamsher, Jane Mayer, the McClatchy reporters who were against invading Iraq, Anyone from Fox News, Stewart, Colbert, etc.

I agree that any interview would need to stick to a few key issues/points. And anyone who has listened to Paul knows he can wander a bit. I think you will find, though, that Paul is a bit nebulous and lacking in detail when it comes to specifics about ending our military occupations. That's one thing I wish he would've been more specific about--his policy stands were never really fleshed out well, even though I agreed with most of them.

In any case, Glenn is MOST direct and keeps his guests on the straight and narrow when conducting such interviews, so I thought it went without mentioning, but good point nonetheless.