Could the WaPo headline writers be channeling the real thoughts of the elite? After all, fighting words are not protected speech, so maybe they'd really just like to shut Edwards up?

Similarly, the reporter used a "brass knuckles" metaphor - again, brass knuckles are an illegal weapon used in illegal assault.

This language is disturbing and really quite revelealing, no?

Aside to WT: Whod'a thunk that even with all that time you spent on the front lines of Vietnam protest that you really were a warmonger?

-- Jim White

First off, that was one brave confession you made at the head of your post. Very commendable, really.

Lest any of you forget, I'm a warmonger too, and a liar X's about a hundred, in the world of Bucky. Such as it is.

And San Francisco is Bagdhad by the Bay!

Proof you leftards are allied with the Islamofascists!

The kind of bipartisanship we need, in fact, would require the few remaining people of principle within the Republican party to lead the charge for impeachment and imprisonment.

Given that the Republicans have marched in lockstep I can't think of any Republicans of real principle.

Perhaps you could name one or two?

reddit has new vid up showing definite hit to her by bullet.

also CBC news reported that earlier this week, Television stations were banned from political rallies (and Bhuttos).

Raw Story is also reporting today that it was the Pakistani Police Chief who denied an autopsy on Bhutto.

Not looking like random act to me. ISI involvement.

Having been shown beyond any reasonable doubt that they've been utter failures at running government at all levels (be it due to corruption, incompetence, dishonesty, or untenable ideology), the public is abandoning the policies and even ideology of the far right and is shifting back to the left--i.e. the proverbial pendulum swinging back the other way.

What these flabby old corporatist wheezebags are trying to do is stop it somewhere to the right of dead center, where they like to imagine themselves to be, where they think it belongs, where they dishonestly claim that the country wants it to be, and where they hope to control it and make it serve their interests, not that of the country that they claim to love and speak for.

This behavior is motivated by both panic and opportunism.

Panic over the prospect that true progressives might once again control the government (or at least have real power in running it, not only at the presidential level but in congress and the courts) and be able to push forth progressive policies a la FDR, Truman and LBJ, which would obviously (in their minds) hurt their corporatist and neoliberal imperialist interests.

And opportunism in seeing a chance to co-opt the mounting rejection of the right and its ideas and policies and present themselves as the true antidote to the past 7+ years, and not those crazy and irresponsible socialist hippies on the left. I.e. the Chalabis of US politics.

This is all so obvious and transparent to anyone who's really paying attention, that it almost seems redundant and silly to point it out. Of course, not everyone IS paying attention (which is true across the political spectrum given how many cultist supporters of ALL candidates and positions we are seeing right now), which is why, sadly, it does need to be pointed out.

The antidote to 7+ years of far-right neo/social conservative militarist imperial corporatist dominance (and I would argue that it's more like 13 and perhaps even 27 years if you go back to Gingrich and Reagan) is NOT center-right neoliberal corporatist dominance. That's like going from heroin to methodone. But that is precisely what these people are trying to do.

On the one hand they want to prevent progressives from taking over, because they'd obviously try to end policies that benefit these corporatists and promote ones that would hurt them, and on the other hand they want to exploit this transitional and unstable period to get back in power (as opposed to being merely partners in this now crumbling right-wing coalition of the far right and corporatist center-right). Panic and opportunism lie at the cold heart of this "movement".

It's all so transparent, and silly. But since it exists, and not everyone sees what's really going on here and might buy its BS, it warrants a response, and reaction.

..glenn, you made it clear what you thought about Bloomberg's possible candidacy and who would benefit..somehow I missed it.

My bad.

It is a worry. If the Establishment powers-that-be feel threatened enough by an Edwards candidacy

--I've thought all along Edwards was the best choice at this point. We need radical change to clean up Cheney's mess. Clinton won't do it. Neither will Obama, who, whatever else you might say about him, has been in the deep pockets of ADM for a very long time. And that's pretty much all I need to know about him. This bullshit about post-partisanship is just that. Until Obama is ready to bite the hand that's fed him, I have no use for him--

then Bloomberg will run, the the GOP nominee will win. Probably McCain.

But it'd sure be fun to see it all shake out. And, who knows? Things might not go the way the oligarchs prefer. They don't always. 'course, there's always cheating. The GOP's very good at that, and the Dems are going to have to watch out for it everywhere.

For those trying to ascertain the effect of Bloomberg on the independents, or where independents as a group (if the can be said to actually be a group) trend, you might want to take a look at one of Paul Rosenberg's diaries at Open Left.

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2978

Can't tell you the number of times "Clans" and many other famously paranoid Dick stories have come to mind the last seven years. And, I would argue that while the "paranoids" make up the faces of our "leadership" in Congress, the "Manes" have taken control of the asylum...