Thanks. I needed that.

Yeah, me too..

Strange day online yesterday..

Last week the House Democrats put some iron in their spines on telecom immunity. And the internet community rose up with some $ to pressure bring the Blue Dogs to heel.

Today, I read in Glenn's piece that most Americans do indeed care about the Fourth Amendment--and its backed it up with polling data.

Now I've just finished reading nine pages of outstanding posts. I haven't felt this optimistic in months. Folks, we can beat the bastards.

I liked one writer's suggestion that Time's Man of the Year should be Baron Munchhausen. But after his tireless work in defending the Fourth Amendment, I think Glenn should be the community's Man of the Year.

Yeah, you're right; it is a stroke of genius, that quote.

But I'd advise immediate copyright because it'll be stolen pretty quickly in this wild west digital universe.

I found John Cole's term for the Bear Sterns rescue package quite humorous and I think you will too..

"The Invisible Handout"..

But back to the main point; why would a news magazine publish obvious propaganda and falsehoods as Glenn has proven? They know they will be caught at it.

-- bucky1

1) They typically don't get caught in any way that matters (See: Klein, Joe).

2) It is the fact that they mis-lead that matters. Why they lie is not relevant except to any management that decides that it matters. I wouldn't hold my breath.

Personally, I hope Time goes belly-up. It is a waste of paper.

Time is People for people who think they are smarter than the average demographics of People readers. It's time all people stop reading Time and turn only to People, where they'll get the same level of information and accuracy without any pretence to relevance.

I'm outta here before we debate bacon addiction or talk Jewish or Christian heroin?

Stay sober and not too somber. Let's not flop in a mud puddle on a sunny pretty day.

Who has silly garb, has cleavage, and snoops on our phones .... Or has the stupid looking Donald Duck or Elvis umbrella won't matter in the final analysis.

It may rain on the spy funeral day? Thanks ondelette. I heard it.

Every thought comes from some other source. Nothing is new?

`

Take your delight in momentariness,

Walk between dark and dark-a shining space

With the grave's narrowness, though not its peace. Robert Graves.

Calabresi's article is just another example of the incessant mutual circle-jerking that characterizes the relationship between Time magazine and the Bush administration.

Little imagination is required to see Bush's fingers planted in Stengel and Calabresi's noses while they are being led from lie to lie around the White House.

Fawning, sycophantic examples of jackbooted goosestepping can only be matched at Fox News.

Spare me Megan McGargle (AKA Jane Galt).

It's one of several reasons The Atlantic is now crap. Except for Big Media Matt, it's fish wrap

I didn't even bother to read your post.

I saw McGargle and fanned you. If she says something smart someday, I'll check my watch.

I'd wager that People is more accurate in its reporting than Time. Time doesn't fear getting sued for libel because their subject matter doesn't warrant it. People, on the other hand, probably vets their information like real reporters would, because the consequences of getting it wrong is a giant lawsuit.

[The "News"] industry obsesses on the most vapid, inconsequential chatter. They ignore the stories that actually matter. And then they claim that Americans only care about vapid gossip and not substantive issues -- and point to their own shallow coverage decisions as "proof" of what Americans care about. --GlennGreenwald

Ingenious. How do they do that? Why can't I get away with grifts like that?

Among it virtues, The Atlantic has one disfiguring vice. It's become Time for the elites of the Imperium. (Full disclosure: I've long been a subscriber, though I'm from being what you'd call a card-carrying member of any elite.)

I've mentioned it here before, but way back at the beginning of the disgusting Iraq debacle, they had a long article on torture in an age of stateless adversaries and asymmetrical warfare. Torture may not be doable, opined this article, except in certain -- cough -- desperate circumstances, but it's most certainly thinkable, and we think you ought to think about it.

Christ, I said to myself and a few friends, the bastards are torturing people, and they've decided to soften us up for the revelations which will surely come. The fix, we decided, is in....

These fuckers are everywhere, except maybe at The Nation.

As a diversion worth taking while considering "the bank story" and other problems (like flimsy national magazines), watch again (or for the first time) W.C. Fields in "The Bank Dick."

Fields' monologues, as he talks about the mine shares deal, are priceless.

It is, without question, his best film - truly a salve for gloomy times.

Pity America's poor opponents of terrorism. In recent weeks, the papers have been full of stories of suicide bombers in Pakistan, continued terror attacks in Iraq and the increasing influence of radical elements in the Middle East. On Thursday, the State department released a report documenting Iran's plans to acquire nuclear weapons. And to judge from the reaction in the country, nobody cares.

A quick tally of the terrorists attacks in the United States since 9/11 suggests that the majority of Americans are ready to trade their constitutional right to criticize and condemn terrorists and terrorism itself, in exchange for the decreased likelihood of being attacked. Polling consistently supports that conclusion, and Congress has largely behaved accordingly, granting strict anonymity at the highest classification level to all members of the government who are fighting terrorism.

Opponents of terrorism are in a state of despair. "People don't realize how damaging it is to a democratic society when people are afraid to publicly speak out against terrorism," says Mike French, national security counsel at the Protect America Union.

Or do they? Bill Meetsoch, a fireman from Cincinnati who wishes to remain anonymous because he fears terrorist reprisals for speaking out, sums up the feelings of Americans. "I have nothing to gain from speaking against terrorism and everything to lose. Why paint a target on my chest?"

These sentiments were echoed by a Congressman who would only speak off the record because they are not officially authorized to speak on this topic. "This isn't complicated people. Get to work on time, come home, bring your Mom dinner, watch TV and then go to bed. Lather rinse repeat. And most of all, mind your own business. Oh yeah, and also buy stuff and get scared when we raise the threat level."

For now, however, opponents of terrorism will have to continue to argue that the danger lies not in how terrorist attacks are being used now, but how they might be used in the future. "We must speak out against terrorism now. Ignoring the situation won't make it go away, it will only get worse." says the PAU's French. So far, that argument hasn't convinced the people.