Photo once again, by Tom Tomorrow, who seemed to be there for all the Alpha-Dog Moments this week! Well done, Tom! (He also captured the Moore/O'Reilly standoff.)

Does anyone know where I can find a link to an archive of the Franken/Hannity matchup on Air America. Word has it that Hannity was pulled in, unscheduled, and was taken to task (meaning given facts and documentation!) for several of Hannity's continuous on-air lies. For example, he was forces to admit that he'd "misspoke" when he claimed that Howard Dean "told people George W. Bush knew about 9/11 in advance." Apparently, Hannity "misspoke" to that effect about 9 or 10 times.

Anyone have a link to copy of the interview?

UPDATE!: Here's the .MP3! Thanks, Jaime!

Surely I'm not the first to mention this, but it occured to me tonight that if John Kerry wins, we'll have our first African-American First Lady!

And it figures she'd be white.

Today, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning "Doctors without Borders" organization announced they are pulling out of Afghanistan after 24 years there "because of security concerns and frustrations with the U.S. military" as the situation in the war-torn nation continues to deteriorate (since we failed to finish one war before beginning another).

Additionally, here's some War News from just yesterday for ya, courtesy of Today in Iraq:

Suddenly the story I just reported on in the previous item becomes even more relevant!

Just reported by Reuters:

"Compassionate Conservatism" in action.

Not even sure what to make of this one. Following up on a story headlined "Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides" (as pointed to on the BRAD BLOG last month), Capitol Hill Blue, the self-proclaimed "politically agnostic" news site (the oldest one on the WWW) files a report today headlined "Sullen, Depressed President Retreats Into Private, Paranoid World".

The lack of named sources in the report is again troubling here, but the "newsworthiness" of a "Commander-in-Chief" being prescribed "powerful anti-depressant drugs" is at least as notable as "WOMAN NAMES BILL CLINTON FATHER OF SON IN SHOCKING VIDEO CONFESSION" as reported by Drudge back in 1999. Not to mention that had this story, anonymous sources or not, been about Kerry instead of Bush, you can bet your boots that not only would it be leading The Drudge Report today (with a SIREN!), but it would be splattered over the entire "Liberal" and Extremist Media.

Such as it's about Bush, however, it's been picked up nowhere else yet that I've seen today. I'm waiting for the White House release of today's Press Gaggle to see if anyone asks about the story. Though I have a feeling the "Liberal" Media may drop that ball as well. What a shock.

Here's the first few grafs. The entire story is worth reading however for those familiar with the "dry alcoholic" syndrome or otherwise interested in some stunning (if true) insider gossip about a White House in disarray:

(Thanks to Jaime for the tip on this story!)

Comments are frequently made on older blog items that may not be noticed by regular BRAD BLOG readers. I hope to do something about that soon (as soon as my busy schedule of late will allow anyway). But a comment came in this morning on the "Michael Moore Connects the Dots" item that I believe is worth highlighting here, since it may otherwise go largely unnoticed.

"Sam" commented to say:

Given the Right's smoke-screen that "the Military" supports George W. Bush, I think it's important to show what the real story is. That there are millions of Americans out there, yes, many in the Military, who are able to understand the brink of danger that this Administration has brought us towards. Folks who understand, as Bill Clinton said on Tuesday, that "strength and wisdom are not opposing values".

Thank you "Sam" for serving our country in both uniform and by speaking up in hopes of countering the deadly spin of the Right. If you have not yet visited Paul Rieckhoff's website, you (and everyone else) should do so! I highlighted his story some months ago here. He's another great American, one who gave up a cushy Wall Street job after the towers fell to serve his country, and who is not afraid of speaking out when he sees a "Commander-in-Chief" who is dangerously playing partisan games with the Constitutional (and otherwise American) Ideals that this country was founded on and which are being surreptiously frittered away under the cynical guise of "National Strength and Security".

It's not a fight for "National Strength and Security" that the Right is waging. It's just another cynical "wedge issue" being exploited in order to further divide this country, so that the Right might hang on to their power. And it's high time we put an end to such self-destructive nonsense in this country. Thanks, "Sam", for doing more than your part in that regard!

At a time when our country is at war in Iraq, and theoretically in the middle of a "War on Terror", shouldn't the positions of the only two parties we essentially get to choose from be fullied aired on the American airwaves so that the populace can make the most informed decision possible?

Surely the conventions now are produced and scripted to appeal to mostly one segment of the voting populace (the middle), but still it seems to me that the more Americans get to see of both major political parties --- even if they are striving to show only their best/most palatable face for four days --- the better the chances are that the people might have a better understanding of the real issues at stake at a crucial moment in our nation's history.

To that end, though the "breaking news" and "Fox News Alerts" may be at a minimum at the modern day Political Convention, it seems to me that the gathering itself, and the ideas presented throughout, ought to be "newsworthy" enough for the Networks to set aside 3 hours a night for 4 days every 4 four measly years even if it means a few dollars lost for their Corporate Parents and Shareholders.

News and Public Affairs has always been a loss-leader for the networks, but it was once the jewel in the crown for the nets, adding a certain prestige to these corporations who are, after all, making money by using our public airwaves.

In service to their country, and to their public, the networks ought to be airing these conventions whether they are, arguably enough, "infomercials" for the party interests or not.

Anything that can be done to aid the voting public in increasing their knowledge about what's going on --- ironically enough at a time when they are being fed more dis-information than ever before via the highly charged partisan media --- would be a service to our country. Even if it means a few dollars lost for the Corporations and their Share Holders.

The biggest "news" at these conventions has become how the "news" business is failing our nation in the name of corporate greed disguised as "news" judgement --- or in reality at this point, a lack thereof.

Yeah...it could happen.

In another stem-winder (yes, I like that word and one really only gets to use it properly every four years) tonight at the convention, a star was born: Barack Obama, running for the U.S. Senate, so far unopposed, from Illinois.

Here's just some of his mustard:

Expect much in the future from the man who will be our only African-American U.S. Senator in the next congress --- and only the fourth in the 225+ year history of this country!

In an earlier item here, after reading just the transcript, I gave the advantage to Michael Moore in the big Moore/O'Reilly dustup in Boston.

After seeing the actual broadcast, I'll stand by my original assessment. But I will add that Moore could have better made his case about Bush lying before the war had he remembered to mention Bush's false promise to use the military only as "a last option".

The fact is Bush promised time and again to do so. And in the process of that chest-thumping lie, found enough gullible (or cowardly) Senators --- including John Kerry --- to believe him at the time. They believed him enough that they were willing to vote for a foolish (and cowardly) resolution giving Bush a blank check to screw us over for decades and in the bargain send thousands to their deaths for, shall we charitably call them, dubious reasons.

That little historical fact --- the UN Inspectors who were on the ground, had complete run of the country, and had requested just another 30 or 60 days to complete their work --- is frequently overlooked by both the Anti-Warriors and the Bush Apologists. The latter by convenience, no doubt. And the former have so many Adminstration lies and deceptions to keep track of, it no doubt gets to difficult to remember them in the heat of being bloviated at. Especially on air. Especially by O'Reilly.

Moore was, however, smartly able to get the concession from O'Reilly that this war based on a mistake.

But to the larger point was this key exchange...One that is really at the crux of the entire anti-war argument of folks like myself. And one that I would ask any reader to consider well for themselves:

Never mind O'Reilly's false machismo there (I'm sure the U.S. Military could find a place for him if he really meant what he said about sacrificing himself. Apparently, the U.S. Army has just instructed a 67 year-old officer who served for 41 years to report for a physical like 5600 other "retired" non-reservists who have been informed that they may soon be called back to active duty in Iraq!)...But the real question is, would you sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah?

If the answer is yes, I'm sure there's a Recruiting Center nearby. And if the answer is no, but that you'd sacrifice yourself, well, again, I'm sure there's a Recruiting Center nearby and they'd be thrilled to see you!

But if the answer is no on both accounts, and yet you are either in favor of this war, or in favor of Bush this November, then you're either a liar or a hypocrite.

Perhaps if a few more lawmakers asked that question of themselves, or their kids (and that would include those like Bush and Cheney who both opted out of defending their country with their lives when they had the chance, and apparently haven't encouraged their own kids to sign up either!) we'd not be in this fine mess today.

America would be safer for it and a thousand more Americans would be alive to enjoy it.

So O'Reilly gives us his usual "Talking Points" at the top of the show, defending against unnamed "members of the press" who are critical of him for not allowing the speeches to play, choosing instead, as he says "to analyze" what's going on at the convention instead of just giving the party spin.

The crucial analysis he's offering live from the DNC Convention? A LIVE interview with important policy maker Ben Affleck!

Bad enough? You'd think. But after the interview, before throwing to commercial, O'Reilly says, "When we come back...We'll let you listen to a little bit of Ted Kennedy...if he shows up!"

"If he shows up"?! NOTE TO O'REILLY: Ted Kennedy showed up. He would be that guy down on the stage behind you speaking to the convention that you're not covering. Right now. While you are busy interviewing Affleck. Turn around and look out your window.

Asshole.

Republicans are feeding the homeless! Packing up supplies to send to the poor soldiers in Iraq! Visiting the Bronx!

That's right! From this week (the start of the DNC Convention) up until the RNC Convention (if they get that far), the Republicans are acting out their "Compassion Across America" campaign! (Yes, seriously, not making this up!) And the timing couldn't be more obvious better!

BRAD BLOG reader (and close personal friend) Desi sends in this point of light, from the The New York Times.

So how many folks think that Republicans actually know where Harlem is? Much less that they'll be able to overcome their fear of Not-White People in order to actually travel there. (Expect the "Compassion Across America" campaign to be in effect only during day time hours. If at all.)

Drudge leaks the transcript. There are several typos, so it's hard to know how accurate it was. But read up. I'd call it advantage Moore (based on the written, rushed transcript), but then you'd expect that from me. So read it, and you decide. O'Reilly makes quite a few damning admissions. Moore does it again. Should send the Foxies into apoplexy tonight.

(Drudge is also now running the same picture I ran in the previous item, at the link given above. I took the photo from the photographer's website...but Drudge has it mirrored/reversed for some odd reason. No biggie, but I suppose it's a nice visual metaphor for how Drudge happily reverses whatever he likes to show things as he wishes, as opposed to how they actually are. And the Extremists in the Media and Republican Party just eat it up without question.)

Photo by Tom Tomorrow, trailing Moore at the convention.

From his blog item on the meeting:

Should be a good 'Factor' tonight.