Recently I’ve noticed the following composition on a number of news program discussion round tables (not just on Fox News):

• Host
• A couple of mainstream national print writers
• A right-wing partisan blow hard

What’s wrong with this picture?
Even if you buy the argument that the journalists are foot soldiers for the “liberal media,” at least they attempt to offer objective analysis in the discussion. And this is supposed to be the counterbalance to the unapologetic right-wing spin offered by the fourth guest?
America’s media: fair and balanced.

Joshua Green has an article detailing some of Karl Rove’s past campaign shenanigans.
In one particularly clever episode, Rove is said to have secretly distributed campaign fliers which unfairly targeted his own candidate. The ensuing public backlash naturally went against his Democratic opponent, who unsuccessfully tried to deny his involvement in the incident.
Steve Clemons (via Talking Points Memo) wonders if a similar affair may be playing out in Tennessee. When a flier recently surfaced portraying Bush as a Special Olympian, several rightist groups immediately pointed fingers at State Representative Craig Fitzhugh (D). But Fitzhugh denies that anyone in his campaign had anything to do with the fliers, and claims that someone planted a few in his office trash can.
If Fitzhugh didn’t have anything to do with these fliers, who did?
UPDATE: Speaking of Rove, he spent two hours in the grand jury hot seat today regarding the Plame leak investigation.

This is disturbing:

FBI Agents arrested 20 year old Ivan Duane Braden of Knoxville Thursday after they say he planned to blow up the National Guard Armory in Lenoir City, and kill a Sergeant Major. He planned to do this Friday.
Agents say he also threatened to blow up a synagogue, wanting to get close to a rabbi and children.
A search of his house and car turned up pipe bombs, knives, Neo-Nazi literature and plans for a suicide vest to put bombs in.

How did I find this story? By watching a live Ashcroft press conference? Nope. I read it at SayUncle. But had Mr. Braden come from Iraq and had a picture of Osama bin Laden at his place, this story would undoubtedly be all over MSNBCNNFOX.
Is the threat that Mr. Braden posed any less dangerous because he is white?

Wouldn’t it make things a lot simpler?

Winning hearts and minds:

Seventeen months into a shadowy terror campaign that has killed more than 100 people, numerous Saudis express less anger at the insurgents than at the United States for its invasion of Iraq, the signal event that they say touched off the attacks inside the kingdom.
In interviews over the last week, the Saudis condemned the terror attacks, aimed primarily at foreigners, but called them a small inconvenience that has not forced them to make significant changes in their daily lives. By contrast, they expressed unremitting disdain for the United States.

The article portrays a prevalent anti-Americanism in Saudi Arabia, which to a large degree stems from the war in Iraq and our policy toward Israel. I’m led to two conclusions from articles like this: (1) Sooner or later the growing anti-Americanism is going to bite us; and (2) Saudi Arabia is in danger of melting down to radicals someday. In such an instance, it should be handy to have the U.S. military nearby, wouldn’t it?

Unlike John Kerry, Bush has never even talked about having US forces leave altogether when security returns. The US under Bush will likely be a permanent Persian Gulf Power, succeeding the Portuguese, Safavid, Ottoman, and British Empires in that role. At the moment, the US lacks a big permanent land base in the region, though it has a de facto naval base in Bahrain and an air base in Qatar. These are small countries that can host only small facilities. With 12 enduring bases in Iraq, the US posture in the Gulf becomes dominant for perhaps the entire twenty-first century. Being an Iraq power would bring the US into permanent and active diplomatic and military contact with Iraq’s neighbors, including Syria and Iran. In all likelihood, the Bush path of Iraq bases leads inexorably toward further US military conflict in the region.

I’d add Saudi Arabia to that list.