The rats flee

One of the more maddening features of the Bush presidency is that a lot of very smart people (and no, I am not being sarcastic) in the media have seemed for a very time not to get what was happening. They're sometimes critical of individual things Bush does, but overall they seemed to miss the fact that there was something rotten at the core of this presidency, and to dismiss anyone who suggested there was as "shrill" and "extreme."

So I think it's significant that the recent testimony of former Deputy Attorney General Comey prompted former Bush apologist David Broder to write this during an online question and answer session:

The president clearly thought and acted as if he were above the law, or could bend it completely to his will. What happened was sickening, appalling on all the levels you describe.

Also, it prompted the Washington Post, Broder's employer and an outlet that has long enabled Bush's excesses by excusing or dismissing them, to editorialize:

Why is it only now that the disturbing story of the Bush administration's willingness to override the legal advice of its own Justice Department is emerging? The chief reason is that the administration, in the person of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, stonewalled congressional inquiries and did its best to ensure that the shameful episode never came to light.

I wonder if we're seeing a sea change in the media, one that might in turn lead Democrats to more vigorously pursue, and the public to support, actual consequences for the simply inexcusable behavior of this simply inexcusable administration. A bird can hope.