Glenn, I accept your arguments as a cogent and well-argued position. I come to a different conclusion on the facts, and I think that you mostly try to criminalize policy differences.

Now I'm truly and honestly curious: what conclusions are you drawing from this laundry list of documented moral and legal atrocities?

And do you not agree some of the underlying policies are simply criminal to begin with?

But in this political season, there are candidates for you to choose from, who really do appear to oppose the entire "political class." Assuredly, Barack Obama is not one of those candidates.

Oh, I think most here are over what little puppy love was felt for Obama. That hardly makes him unpalatable.

Why do you, and your readers who are like-minded, not support a candidate who truly believes in a wholesale alternative to the current "political class"?

Perhaps because there is no such thing? That Ron Paul is, in his own way, no less frightening than John McCain? The Ralph Nader is, quite honestly, a clown past his prime? Neither of these worthies have creditability or capability to alter anything within Washington, either policywise or in the underlying dynamic.

Let's be honest: there always has been and always will be a "political class" that thinks itself removed and unaffected from the rest of the world. A single election will not change this and certainly won't introduce an entirely new order to things, either within US 395 or outside of it.

However Obama has made great strides in forming and nuturing a movement that stands a better chance of nudging things onto a slightly-less disasterous, slightly-more sane path. McCain and the rest offer nothing equalling it and really nothing worthwhile to offer. Hence the continued support (slightly tepid than before but still there) for Obama.

Now, pray explain how insisting the statutes of US law be applied equally and at all times constitutes "criminalizing policy differences". I sense you genuinely mean that and aren't just reading off a cue-card.

I'm quite serious here. Explain your thinking.

I for one welcome our Chinese Communist overlords.

"We don't think the public needs to know that." - WaPo.

What we are seeing reflects recent poll numbers regarding the likelihood of having a President Obama next year vs. President McCain.

If a Democratic candidate is elected (Barak Obama), then naturally the Washington Post, and every other mainstream media outlet will suddenly become the most vigilant watchdogs of personal liberty and rectitude in the history of the US. They will be on guard for even the slightest stretch of the truth and apply the most rigorous standards of conduct, integrity and respect for human rights, within the US and abroad. They will also demand clear, 100% successful results in Iraq and Afghanistan within five weeks and will suddenly remember that Osama bin Laden has not been caught (FoxNews will start a “Days Free” counter on every newscast) nor has the anthrax mailer been identified.

Of course, if we have President McCain, there will be no media watchdog. Instead we will retain our current media lapdog, since “John McCain can’t be held responsible….”.

With all recent days American "news media" high repeats of Barack Obama's tours of ME and Europe somehow being "troubling or question raising" GG here giving more evidence of egregious American "news and punditry" and how very self deluded American "news and views" outlets are regarding American Exceptionalism.

Brian Williams,"renown NBC News anchor", telling us how Iran should be worried because USN attack aircraft carriers are leaving or indeed now out of the Persian Gulf. Worried about what? Any working "news tilt/slantometer should be kicking in on this. Note: it is called the 'Persian Gulf' for a reason and also not called the 'American Gulf' for same reason. Yet B.Williams suggests that Iranians are really pushing the Americans and had better get in line or else!

One can easily imagine if the Iranians were floating some big attack aircraft carriers off American east,south or west coasts or off Alaska or Hawaii the howls that WashingtonDC and the coporate tethered American "news and views" media would be taken up with.

American Exceptionalism and the blatant hypocrisy that it is infested with find berth in American "news" media easily and repeatedly.

As GG again reveals above this American hypocrisy is in full bloom.

Shameless and without much or any sense of integrity.

The rather obvious response is that, "Obama will get us closer than a losing Nader or McKinney ticket." But isn't that the very cycle of compromise and caution that Glenn Greenwald is criticizing? The status quo ante of "the political class"?

I've already gotten my reply from Glenn, who I understand wants to maintain some political reality, and who wants to succeed in his political goals by getting a (presumably successful) candidate Obama to be more forceful on his civil rights and security issues. Move Obama back to the left, without losing the election.

But when Obama goes in the OPPOSITE direction, further right, is there not a point at which Greenwald and his readers would say, "Enough. We might lose this election, but we demand a party platform that does not maintain the status quo of exceptionalism that we see in political-class organs like WaPo. We'll vote Green Party unless and until the Democratic Platform is to our liking..."?

Because Gawd loves this country and Republicans soooooo much, they are actually doing His work. We are exempt from all law because America is Gawd's country. Sickening. How do we wretch this country from the hands of genocidal policiticans who think nothing of murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent people? Answer: We can't. We are a barbaric nation run by barbaric people for barbaric citizens. We should be treated like Germany during WWII. We are the enemy of the planet and all those who inhabit Earth. At this point, I would welcome an invasion and occupation in order to free us from these 'patriots'. We obviously cannot be trusted with the military might we have amassed and should be banned from having a military. You don't give a loaded shotgun to a spoiled child at a picnic. At least I don't.