There’s a widely-shared perception out there that goes something like this: When America does something, it’s right.

It’s an important concept to grasp, because America has done things that are wrong, even criminal on a massive scale. Yet when we look at those things, we judge them to be right.

The invasion and continuing continuing occupation Iraq, against the will of its government and people, would be judged a crime if done by any country but the United States. And it’s not that we are insensitive to criminal behavior. We easily saw that Iraq was wrong to invade Kuwait in 1990, and Soviets doing Afghanistan in 1980. President Bush condemned Russia for its actions in South Ossetia last month, saying “bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century.” Even the guy who who did the big wrong, the one who ordered the criminal invasion of Iraq, can spot criminal behavior when the Russians do it.

But he’s operating on a solid and widely accepted premise: When America does something, it’s right.

Whoever this guy Montana Headlines is is having a nice time with me because I compared the Bush Doctrine to the crimes for which Nazis were hanged after World War II. There’s even something larger at stake, a Nuremberg Principle, which is the idea that if an act is criminal, all that follows that act is criminal. Therefore, Nazi and Japanese officers were judged to be culpable for war crimes committed in the wake of their invasions even though they were hundreds of miles removed from those crimes. Japanese generals were hanged for atrocities committed by soldiers in the Philippines even though they didn’t even know the atrocities were going on. They started it all, and were therefore judged responsible.

George W. Bush launched an illegal invasion of a sovereign state based on false evidence and a massive propaganda campaign. As a result of that invasion, hundreds of thousands of people have died, millions more have fled the country, and 4,000 American soldiers have perished too. He is personally responsible for every one of those deaths.

There’s a high principle at stake here – the Nuremberg Principle: When a crime is committed, all that follows rests on the shoulders of those who committed the crime. George W. Bush is a war criminal, and ought to face justice.

Maybe that’s why he bought land in Paraguay – he’s planning on hiding out when the charges come down. South America has long been a hideout for war criminals. There’s no extradition from Paraguay.

Footnote: To complete the circle, Nuremberg itself was farcical because the Allies only prosecuted crimes committed by Germany and Japan. If the U.S. or Britain did massive bombing of cities with no military objective, then such an action was justified because … we did it. When America does something, it’s right.

So Governor Schweitzer made what appears to be an insider’s joke when addressing trial lawyers. Not my kind of humor, but then I didn’t think Tropic Thunder was funny either. What’s interesting is now how the right has reacted, but rather how they react lockstep, as if they all gather around a fire the night before and decide to write about something (among other activities). Check this out. And, this, this, and this. And never out of step, this one.

They’re so predictable. They tripped over each other racing to embrace the remarkably average-yet-pretty Sarah Palin. They all pretend that John McCain’s walker is really a fighter plane. When needlers began to make fun of Obama as a messiah, they failed the originality test and jumped on board.

The lipstick-on-a-pig fiasco was interesting not because it told us anything about the candidates or had any deep significance. It merely demonstrated the power the right has to control news – they all shout in unison. Here in Montana, where we don’t matter, right wing blogs tend to do the same thing.

It’s kind of boring.

Two news items of note:

1) Obama raised over $66 million in August and drew in over 500,000 new donors. Let’s hope they have a clue how to use this money. The huge influx comes from reaction to his acceptance speech, but also to the nomination of Sarah Palin by the McCain people.

2) An anti-Palin rally in Anchorage drew 1,400 people, the largest political rally in the history of the state, says Mudflats, an Alaska blog. Of course, national news focused on the Palin rally held earier that day, which drew about a thousand people. National media people don’t exactly do the burrowing thing. They miss more than they cover.

Sarah Palin is having an impact on the campaign. She’s the focus on the Republican side, as the moribund McCain pushes his walker from one scintillating event to another. But she is also energizing the opposition. She’s a powerful polarizing force. She’s Bush in drag. I wonder if the people around McCain punched that in to their calculator when they chose her.

If you have a few minutes, go to the SNL web site to see the Palin/Clinton sendup from last night. I cannot embed it here, as it runs automatically and anyone coming here for two weeks would get it, want it or not. But it’s a riot – Tina Fey nailed her from the Minnesota-like Alaskan accent to the high-pitched condescension. Amy Poehler as Hillary has some great lines, but doesn’t channel Clinton as Fey does Palin.

There was a time when I was awake at 10:30 on a Saturday.

I’ve been watching quite a bit of CNN and MSNBC during the day recently. I very seldom do that, preferring to read the Wall Street Journal and scan the Internet for news. I have to say that it gives me a better understanding of why public opinion cuts the way it does. There’s very little red meat ever discussed – it’a all about what he said and how she reacted – interspersed with interminable commercials and murders and car crashes. It’s no wonder that most of their viewers are “LIV”‘s – low information voters.

But that’s America. We’re kind of a dumb place – poorly informed citizens surrounded by a shallow media. Journalism is pretty much dead. The Republicans seem to understand this – they don’t even try to broach any issues. They are just manipulating images. Sarah Palin is perfect for them – shallow, pretty, snotty. She’s good footage. She’s an easily exposed liar as well, but there’s no exposure. None of it matters. It’s images alone that will carry the day.

If the Obama people don’t learn that lesson, and soon, they are sunk.

This schtick is so old that I’m embarrassed we fall for it again and again. It happened when the media finally looked into George W. Bush’s being AWOL from the National Guard. It was a legitimate story, and it was also refreshing that our timid national media was finally doing some legwork. But Dan Rather got busted for citing a document that turned out to be forged, and the story died. Rather, for being uppity, was fired.

Media people after that refused to look into the AWOL story, and Bush skated.

The Republicans are experts at media management – they use their noise box – they can throw out an incredible amount of flak. The tube today was full of noise about how Palin was somehow vindicated and now untouchable. But for a brief while, it looked like media was doing its job. Now with the screeching, “the speech”, which was an affront to us all and full of lies but supposedly “hit out of the park”, media is again intimidated. They are afraid of being called sexist, and Palin, who seems to have a closet full of skeletons, will skate.

It’s our own fault. We walk into a trap. We have no one to blame but ourselves – the Republicans, who pummeled Kerry with the Swiftboat campaign, are no one to fool with. These are experts at manipulation, and the media, easily intimidated, are no match. Democrats seem to jump bare-assed into this pool every four years, all concerned about being dignified and above the ordinary knife fights. The only saving grace is that they might take a commanding majority in the senate, and that they might use that majority to stop (gulp) ‘President’ McCain. But that depends on election integrity. For so long as our ballots are counted in secret, exit polls will continue to go awry, and there will be surprising and unexpected Republican wins, and doe-eyed media analysts who can’t for the life of them figure out why exit polls can’t get it right.

But allowing Democrats to defend us is like sitting atop a bowl full of Jello. I don’t doubt that Harry and Nancy will be back, and the concessions and cave-ins will continue.

Things aren’t looking so good right now. I fear for the country – we’re rudderless – a minority party in charge, a majority party too weak to do anything about it. We’ll continue our drift into right wing paranoia and madness.

This link arrived by email from a reputable source. It seems fair and balanced – Anne Kilkenny of Wasilla,Alaska, tries to give credit where due. But Palin comes off as kind of a thug – she fires old hands and experienced people and then hires people who are loyal to her first, Alaska or Wasilla second. She seems to have built an network of cronies around herself. Didn’t I read about these kind of people in business management classes? Beware the empire builders, we were told.

In this regard, she seems to have things in common with another VP I know about. I doubt she’ll be running covert ops out of the White House basement, but you never know. From what Kilkenny says, she’s very, very smart.

National Enquirer, fresh off its victory over John Edwards, now says that Sarah Palin had an affair with her husband’s business partner. The McCain camp is threatening to sue, of course (bring it on), and is relying on the Enquirer’s lack of credibility as a journalistic source in disputing the story.

After all, that’s the strategy that worked for Edwards.

The Daily Show last night ran tape of Karl Rove, Bill O’Reilly, and Dick Morris, each pre and post-Sarah Palin. The comic effect was intense – each said exactly the opposite of what he had said before to accommodate the nomination. Palin has forced them to abandon previous rhetoric in order to adopt this rough and opportunistic woman who has abandoned her family for her career. For one thing, they’ve had to embrace choice in the face of an unwanted pregnancy.

Republicans now have to change course on talking points they have been using for twenty-eight years. But they do it, they do it on a dime, and with straight faces. Is there a better example of the craven hypocrisy of these political opportunists? The only thing that has mattered to them, Reagan to the present, has been to get a hold of the reins of government and to ram their policies down our throats – to change the tax system, to adopt an imperialistic foreign policy, eliminate civil liberties, reduce the standard of living of working Americans and create a highly segregated class-based society of haves and have nots.

These are not popular positions. So they hide behind a populist platform. To get hold of power, they’ve had to adopt cheesy slogans and embrace ideals they don’t care one way or the other about. Abortion is one of their opportunistic policy positions.

One would think that when they are caught in open contradiction, they would at least blush a little bit. But they don’t – they carry on as if Bristol Palin’s right to choose had always been their policy – it would be comical if not so devoid of shame.

Jon Stewart closed on a serious note last night, worth repeating. His guest was Newt Gingrich:

Stewart: One serious issue that I do want to address is sort of close to my heart: the issue of teen pregnancy. They have said this was Bristol’s decision and we should honor that. I have a daughter. The reason why I think it’s fair game is that Sarah Palin is on record as saying that she would veto abortions for women even in the event of being raped. So what she is in essence saying is “Respect my family’s ability to make this decision, and elect me so that I can keep your family from having the same opportunity”.

Gingrich: No – what’s she saying is that you and she can have a policy debate about whether or not Obama’s defending infanticide by abortion doctors was appropriate in the Illinois legislature.

Stewart: No no no – I’m going by her words … no abortion even in the case of rape.

Gingrich: Obama’s position in the Illinois legislature is one extreme, her position may be the other extreme. That’s a policy debate.

Stewart: But, when it comes down to her family, she says “respect her decision”.

Gingrich: Respect the privacy of her daughter, which is very different than …

Stewart: No – she said ‘Respect Bristol’s decision’ – that was their press release. It was Bristol’s decision. That is another word for choice.

Gingrich: And Bristol’s decision was to keep the child because in Alaska today she may have choice …

Stewart: I’m just saying that if she was president that choice would be removed from the family and the government would make it.

Indeed. The point is that Republicans frame the debate and will adopt any posture or stance that advances their cause, and the legions that they are manipulating apparently will fall in lockstep. The trick is, when it comes time to change that position, the legions have to follow again, lockstep. And they apparently have done so.

To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed; to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while take account of the reality which one denies – this is all indispensably necessary. (Orwell)

I listen to Dr. Laura Schlesinger when I can – I mostly agree with her, and have high respect for her on those issues where we are not in agreement. I understand her position on abortion and working mothers. Being on the other side of that debate is not a comfortable place. She has bedrock values on her side. In a perfect world, there are no abortions, and the working Mom is unnecessary.

Real life a little more gray. Just on abortion, she doesn’t accept that people drink, do stupid things, that women place too much faith in men, act impulsively, and the result is little darlin’s and ruined lives. And regarding working mothers, young Americans have very high expectations – they want that dream house very early on, the SUV and entertainment center, and having all that requires a working mom. I wish it were not so. They are too absorbed by material things – we all have too little time for family and care too much about ‘stuff’.

Since time immemorial, women have opted for abortion. If Roe v Wade is overturned, that will not change. I wish it weren’t so, but it is so, and I think it a huge mistake to outlaw abortions. In Dr. Laura’s perfect world, each baby would be wanted and planned for and would have a mothher at its side. But people aren’t like that.

So I take issue with Dr. Laura – she doesn’t deal with people as they are, but rather as she wishes they were. Her standards are unattainable in the real world.

But Sarah Palin is not your typical Dr. Laura caller – the woman knowingly had five children, one with Downs Syndrome, and has made a conscious decision to put the family on the back burner, to turn the baby over to surrogates, to expose her pregnant daughter to the worst kind of public attention. She’s ambitious – it’s the power of the ring.

Dr. Laura probably would not approve. And in fact she doesn’t.

addendum Jay mentions below that health care and housing costs have more to do with working Mom’s than dream houses and entertainment centers. I’ll accept that. Regarding surrogate caretakers for children, it was my experience with my kids that the hired help didn’t begin to care as much about the kids as I did. You can’t buy parental love. I’m politically incorrect, I realize, but I think them to be the hard facts.