in the same way that Clinton wasn't a "real" President so any thing that was done to prevent him from functioning was "legal".

The Clinton's, while not angels, are victims, along with the rest of the country, of the same right wing that has been trying to reassert it's divine right to rule ever since Bush's granddaddy tried to stage a fascist coup in the 30s against the New Deal and was thwarted but not punished. They have never stopped trying, the illegal impeachment of Clinton being only the latest example (watergate was another, speaking of pardons). There are disturbing signs that even people with good instincts, and the culture in general, are being worn down by the best propaganda money can buy sustained over 80 years, with extra amplification during the last 30.

You said:

"By all means, wait to judge Obama based on his decisions and policies, not who he appoints to administer them."

I can't believe this is the same Glenn Greenwald I've been reading for almost a year! Did the fact escape you that Obama's cabinet appointments *are* his first decisions? Who he appoints to administer his policies will make all the difference in the world. Think Rumsfeld, Rove, Card, Ashcroft, oh my, how much clearer a picture do you need.

Obama had an entire universe to choose from; he's supposedly in sympathy with rising-star types like himself, yet we see the same troubling faces, the same elitist framework, only this time it's the left-hand version of the Council on Foreign Relations crowd, with Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger in the wings feeding everyone their lines.

I'd puke if I wasn't so scared. These people are crazier than the neocons. They talk delightedly of a world monetary system, one-world government, elimination of 80% of the population, grand theft of global resources for their own benefit-- the most despicable ideas imaginable. Why are we trusting a man who has been groomed by these Brzezinski-ites for 25 years?

I hope you'll join the rest of America as we exercise together in Obama's cheery civil preparedness camps, getting buff for our new positions as laborers rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure--roads, bridges, and schools-- because all our jobs are disappearing into thin air. (google Obama rebuilding infrastructure)

Yes, it's a happy day for the globalists.

Thanks for the update link for BooMan. I went there and read his ongoing debate with Glenn. BooMan is out of his league. He sounds like he's creating a rosy scenario to fit his rationalizations.

Also, he needs a primer on grammar.

Still, it is an interesting discussion.

Under the Clinton pardon, Rich would have been able to come home, but still would have had to separate himself from a bushel of money. With all the phony outrage -- or real outrage by silly people -- about the Rich pardon, he is now pardoned, but cannot come home. Happy now?

Now, Bush I pardoned criminals who would have incriminated himself. He pardoned the despicable Armand Hammer. Not a peep.

And after a faint protest, Iran-Contra was dead and gone.

Why exactly is it that the outrage continues against the Clintons? Here's my theory. It's more fun because you have to make up stuff to get outraged against. Whitewater morphed into a million imaginary scandals.

The whole experience is comparable to the experience of being forced to watch a day of cable news, or being beaten about the face and head with eels.

http://nytimes.com/ref/opinion/editorial-board.html

The New York Times Editorial Board

DOROTHY SAMUELS | Law, Civil Rights & National Affairs

A member of the editorial board since 1984, Dorothy Samuels writes on a wide array of legal and social policy issues. Prior to joining The Times, she briefly practiced corporate law with a big Wall Street firm, leaving there to pursue her interests in public policy and journalism. For four years, Ms. Samuels served as executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, the largest affiliate of the national A.C.L.U.

- - http://nytimes.com/ref/opinion/editorial-board.html

have no interest in reducing the population by 80%, why go out of your way to make them look good?

NYTimes, Wednesday, December 3, 2008, page A30:

http://nytimes.com/2008/12/03/opinion/03wed1.html

Editorial
The Next Attorney General

[...] Under President Bush, the [Justice Department] has been used to defend the indefensible, like indefinite detention and torture of prisoners, and to undermine rather than protect Americans’ cherished rights.

Mr. Holder [...] has been outspoken on the most critical issue facing the department: restoring the rule of law. In a speech in June, he described the Bush administration’s anti-terrorism policies as “excessive and unlawful.”

But senators should ask Mr. Holder to square those views with comments he made after the Sept. 11 attacks when he defended the Bush administration’s prisoner policies by declaring that “you can think of these people as combatants and we are in the middle of a war.”

Americans need to know that Mr. Holder does not believe that detainees can be held indefinitely without being brought before a judge — and that he would stand up for the Constitution when times are tough.

There are other aspects of Mr. Holder’s record that are of concern, starting with his role in Mr. Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich [...]

In addition to signing off on torture memos and depriving detainees of basic rights, the Bush Justice Department adopted legal positions that greatly expanded executive power. These policies must be quickly undone. The next attorney general also will have to get to the bottom of the department’s disgraceful record of politicized hiring and firing. The attorney general will need to ensure that the investigation of the firings of United States attorneys for what appear to be partisan reasons is thorough and credible, and that witnesses who have been defying subpoenas, including Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel, testify under oath.

There already are people — mainly Republicans — who say investigating these matters would be divisive. But the department’s integrity cannot be restored until the truth comes out and any wrongdoers are punished.

Many parts of the Justice Department must be pointed in a new direction. In the Bush years, the voting rights section worked against voting rights. The civil rights division too often sat idly by, or supported the wrong side, when rights were infringed. The antitrust division all but abandoned its responsibility to protect the public from the harm of monopoly power.

The attorney general is the nation’s top law enforcement official. The Senate must make sure that Mr. Holder is committed to the right kind of change in that job.

- - NYTimes, Wednesday, December 3, 2008, page A30