Ah yes, democracy and elections in Iraq. Bush's top story indeed. And what is happening here in the "homeland"? Secret spying on Americans. Propaganda passed off as news. Outing a covert agent for political gain. The list goes on and on. 3 more years of this guy?

From: Cheney, Dick

To: el Jefe (POTUS@whitehouse.us.gov)

Subject: Doctrine Draft - please sign immediately and distribute internally only. Make sure this is marked "no leaks".

The Bush/Cheney doctrine

The desire for transparent governance must be balanced against the constitutional responsibility for a government to act in the interest of the safety and prosperity of American citizens. When citizens are given unrestricted access to knowledge of what government is doing at all times, the threat of political and ethical backlash restricts that government's ability to do "what is necessary within the law" to protect the security and prosperity of its citizens.

Creation of public policy should therefore be completed in a manner that allows invited participants to offer honest assessments without fear of this counsel being made public.

Domestic federal investigation procedures determined to be in accordance with the law as defined by the Justice department and White House counsel must be allowed to proceed without public knowledge, and in cases of extreme political sensitivity these procedures may occur without the knowledge or consent of any other branch of government.

Foreign affairs must appear to be conducted with sensitivity not only to domestic sensibilities but also to the cultural norms of countries abroad. Information about US policies must be restricted in accordance with what is deemed politically palatable both at home and abroad.

If in doubt, remember our motto: "to seem rather than to be".

Hey! Do you remember, during the debates with Kerry, when a guy in the audience asked a question of Bush about the Patriot Act? I don't remember the exact wording, but the question was something about how Bush could justify the erosion of domestic civil rights. While I don't remember the question, I sure do remember the (non)answer. Bush went all "awww shucks" and said "I hope you don't think I'm doing that". It would make a great VideoDog clip is you guys could dig up that little Q and A and post it over the today's story about the NSA spying on Americans without a warrant.

The question that I think should be on the lips of every reporter, the question that should be asked about just about everything the president has touched, is: Mr. President, are you corrupt or just stupid?

Bush usurping Lehrer on the day's lead story, would not be unlike Jimmy Olsen berating Perry White for running with the wrong front page on the Daily Planet. For Bubble Boy, truth, justice and the "American" way, means lying about the Iraqi meatgrinder, about torture, and dodging straight questions about his Administration spying needlessly on law abiding Americans.

After struggling with "My Pet Goat" at a critical point in the nation's history, he now wants to play at being a senior sub-Editor. Don't be surprised if screams of "Copy!" are heard echoing from the West Wing on a slow news day.

My guess is that Blinky the Bubble Boy thinks the top story of the day is whatever his handlers tell him it is. And, seeing as how borderline retarded this man is, it wouldn't surprise me if he has no idea that he signed an order for the NSA to illegally spy on Americans. Most likely, Darth Cheney issues these orders, and has his young ward sign off on everything without telling him what he's signing.

Mr. Editor,

I saw Jim Lehrer's interview with G.dubya and I thought Bush was going to pout or cry after Lehrer's comment that the news about government spying on American citizens was on all the front pages. What a baby is Bush,as soon as he hears something he doesn't like he tries to bully or deny. Same as Limbaugh,Falwell and O'Reilly will do. They are all cry baby screamers, bullys and whiners. What a bunch of losers.

Now, that they are less able to intimidate, they are finally cracking and falling apart as O'Reilly so obviously did when he could not dominate and intimidate Mr. Glick whose father died during 9/11. We need a lot more like young Mr. Glick who handled O'Reilly in a calm quiet manner and did not allow himself to be pulled into a screamfest. O'Reilly and his temper tantrums are so childish and reveal him to be the incompetent that he is.

Its hilarious to read how you far-left journalists still do not get it. The front page of the New York Times does not dictate what the main news of the day is. I, for example, begin my day with Littlegreenfootballs.com and frontpagemagazine.com. You liberals no longer have the absolute power you used to. The reason why the American people will unanimously support the criminal prosecutions of the traitors at the New York Times is because YOU DON"T MATTER.

If there were ever impeachable offenses, George W Bush has committed a mulitiude of prima facie examples.

These are sad and perilous times when I am more afraid of my government than I am of unnamed terrorists.

Where is the FREE PRESS?

President Bush is doing his job, protecting the country from the same people who murdered 3000 Americans on 9/11.

I understand that you have to feed the dogs. Salon readers and PBS listeners will undoubtedly have their panties in a twist over this, since they believe the same spin coming from the NYT.

What I find interesting is not the predictable pap you are feeding, but what is missing from your commentary;

1. any discussion of the way the NYT misconstrued how the President exercised his authority with discretion, to permit rapid exploitation of the extremely time-sensitive phone information obtained in the capture of top Al Queda leaders. In other words, he simply followed the same purpose authorized by the time-consuming FISA court process that allows for domestic surveillance of Americans engaged in international crime.

2. You also gave the Times a pass on how the President shared his use of this authority and exercise of NSA surveillance with top Congressional members of the oversight committee, some of whom now profess to be "shocked, shocked" or unavailable for comment.

3. You made no mention of the curious and curiouser "coincidence" of the timing of the NYT story, after being held for a year, just in time we find to match the lead journalist, Jim Risen's new book on the same subject. And the historic vote for a new Parliament in Iraq, the success story for the bravery of 25 million people who celebrated their freedom to vote by showing up in droves, despite threat of being blown up by Al Qaeda.

Tell me, sir: Would you and your gently Salon readers be equally brave? Would you go out to vote if you were not sure the police could say that you and your kids were safe from being blown to bits for that privelege? Would you want the police to have the ability to catch the bad guys who blew up your neighbor for going to church, to the mall to shop, or to work? Would you be willing to trust your President and the Congress who sit on the oversight committee to use their good judgement to catch the madmen who have said they want to kill you and your kids just because we dont believe in the same God the same way the madmen do?

You have a moral responsibility to educate. You are failing. Some day you are going to look in the mirror and be ashamed for your silly word games. Lets hope its not after another 9/11, perhaps one that could have been prevented by use of the Patriot Act provisions so foolishly allowed to expire by the well meaning fools who pander to the ninnies who cant or wont remember what we are fighting for.

Kevin Shay, Carlsbad CA