Who knew Steve Jobs had so much in common with Sarah Palin? Or Michelle Bachmann or the others shouting from their Tea cups.

All of them despise the media for daring to shed harsh light on their crusades as they crush anyone in their way who might want to erect a few barriers of truth to confront their steamrollers

These hated troublemakers are the ones who insist on asking the tough questions and reporting the embarrassing answers and/or deceptions from those politicians and entrepreneurs who have gotten used to spreading their messages with no resistance whatsoever.

As the cliche goes, if the reflection is ugly, they want to break the mirror .  In Jobs’ case, when his corporate hands are caught in the IPhone 4 “Death Position”, blocking the antenna which causes the embarrassing loss of cellphone reception, he bitterly hurls attacks at the journalist pests, saying “…when you see someone get successful, you just want to tear it down”.

It’s really tough on a guy when his bullying and PR manipulation suddenly aren’t enough.  Just ask Palin, who at all costs avoids all but  sycophantic news situations these days and stays largely behind the bunkers with her  Fox Friendlies, where she can “refudiate” the “Lamebrain Media”.

Rep. Michelle Bachmann, another one rising on the Right’s risers sings an even harsher tune for her choir entitled the “Treason Media”.  And let’s not forget those Senate candidates Sharron Angle (T-Nevada) and Rand Paul (T-Kentucky) who are ducking further contact with anyone who might cause them to trip over their own oversimplifications.

The idea that the voter has a need to understand what the empty slogans and marketing ploys mean is anathema to the likes of Palin, Angle, Bachmann and Paul

That obviously includes Steve Jobs who has made it clear that inconvenient reporting is just not his Cupertino.

Let’s not forget every President from Barack Obama on back as well as every other pampered star in show biz, sports and the corporate world.  They tool come to resent the audacious riff raff who dare to challenge them. They’re just not used to such things, surrounded, as they are with groupies and drones buzzing around them.

They’re cannot tolerate nay-sayers,  only aye-sayers. . The problem is the path of least resistance inevitably is a path to sloppiness and even corruption which are then overgrown with coverup.  Any effort to clear it away is a threat.

This is dangerous.  Look no further than inside-the-beltway and out.

If anything we in media are too often too pliant or intimidated,anxious to look away when a “go along, get along” approach means less hassle from an administration or conglomerate that is more than willing to bully.

What we leave in the wake of our timidity is a vacuum, and hustlers who view it as a convenient opportunity to make big bucks or further their ambitions by filling the space with garbage.

As Americans we have a responsibility to be an informed electorate whether we’re choosing candidates or products.  The manufacturers and/or promoters of both have a responsibility to make sure what we’re buying is not packaged in fraud.  That’s where an effective press comes in, whatever its form, to quench a thirst for complete information.  Otherwise, all we’ll have to drink is Apple Tea.

Shouldn’t we remember that, by definition, clandestine agents like to skulk in the dark shadows, jealously guarding the secrecy of their creepy creeping?  So mightn’t we want to be just a tad suspicious about the clamor of publicity concerning the recent espionage game playing.

Suddenly, the spy biz has become show biz. About all we haven’t seen of that  suburban ring is  a program called “The Real Russian Housewives.” And one has to believe that Playboy and/or Hustler have been in touch with the redhead. I see a centerfold coming.

Of course, they’ll need to shoot it in Moscow, or somewhere, because that’s where the ring members are taking up residence, now that they have been deported, uprooted from being embedded in our bedroom communities.

Their charade could hardly be called “Deep Cover.” Given the superficiality of the ‘burbs, “Shallow Cover” seems more appropriate. And these moles were removed by the FBI, not the usual lawn care service.

But you know the whole story.  And there can be only one explanation for that:  it’s phony.  It’s gotta be made up.  It is either a concoction of the news networks, looking for something to over-cover when even the President Obama show seems to have gone on hiatus.

Or it was their desperate attempt to come up with programming to match the breathless Lebron-James- Goes-From-Cleveland-To-Miami-Duhhhh melodrama on ESPN.

It could well have been an insidiously clever plot on BP’s part to distract from their destruction of an entire region of the United States, their former colony.  I kinda doubt that explanation because that would mean they’re good at PR and what we’ve witnessed would suggest that the only ones worse are Gen. McChrystal and his crew.

My favorite possibility is that it’s just another ploy by the aforementioned redhead to get publicity. This is even bigger than Facebook!!  The woman is amazing.  Who knew there were so many ways to pout?

What’s really remarkable is that the two teams pulled this off before the trading deadline.  For those who are not sports fans, that’s a baseball reference, but you’re still probably wondering who this guy Lebron James is.

In this case, they pulled off a sensational swap…10 minor leaguers sent from the Washington Nationals in exchange for four star players from the Moscow Reds, along with who knows how many players to be named later.

Whatever, it has been great beach reading. It’ll be a terrific movie. Let’s call it “The Cul De Sac Capers.”  It’s so juicy the nervous producers and executives won’t even emasculate the script.  To those who would argue “You can’t make this stuff up,” I would say “Sure you can.”  It’s not that “Truth is stranger than fiction,” what’s really strange is that we believe a word of it.

The items would have appeared in the employment sections of the Moscow Times or Moscow News…in those papers because they’re published in English:  “Help Wanted.  Men and women to live in the United States.  Duties include doing whatever it takes to have children set up a life in comfortable suburbs, and make friends with officials.  Send resumes  and salary requirements (dollars, not rubles) to Vladimir Putin, at the Kremlin.” Talk about truly “Classified Ads”.

There was probably no shortage of takers, but they could have saved a lot of the moving expense if they’d simply run the same employment ads here in the US. If it sounds like a nice cushy gig, it is.  In this country,we call people like that “lobbyists”

One can’t help but wonder why the SVR, which is what they call the KGB these days, would spend so much time and money on gaining information that is widely available on the internet, and communicating  with equipment that is far less exotic that many IPad apps.

One can only conclude that in Russia, just like this nation, there are still a lot of cold warriors longing for the good old days before they became irrelevant…well almost irrelevant. They do pop up all the time on TV as foreign policy and national security experts.

It looks like a lot of these Soviet throwbacks still have their government jobs, just like their American counterparts.  Without a doubt, they have their own civil service protections too.  They are known as “apparatchiks” over there, here we call them “bureaucrats”. For too many of either, the imperative is to preserve the old rigid ways of thinking and doing things and of course, their positions.

This all surfaces at a particularly delicate moment in relations between the two superpowers.  It was just a few days ago that President Obama was caught on camera trying to kill President Medvedev by feeding him cheeseburgers. That is particularly suspicious because, as the White House acknowledges, Obama  was aware of this alleged spy caper.

We can expect some sort of retaliation from the other side. That’s what always happens in these espionage affairs.  So don’t be surprised at all if Dmitry invites his new best buddy Barack to sample Russia’s national dish.  If memory serves that’s vodka.

What this goes to show is just how similar we are.  Apparently both governments have their gangs that couldn’t spy straight.  And both have outsiders who try and worm their ways in so they can exert influence.

Of course, we shouldn’t take the similarities with lobbyists too far. So many of them come from the ranks of highly placed government staff and elected officials.  None of the Russian plants do.  That we know of. But that’s classified.

If, in fact, we do get to look back after death, Robert Byrd would probably be proud that his came on a day when the United States Senate was once again playing one of its most primal roles.

He had after all,  spent more than half a lifetime jealously defending the rules, peculiarities and turf of the Senate and protecting against almost any smart alecky attempt at reform.

He succumbed in the predawn hours of a morning when the Senate was  scheduled to begin exercising its Constitutional mandate to give “Advice and Consent”.  Using the current media construct, this is Day One of the hearings leading up to a vote on whether to confirm Elena Kagan, the President’s nominee to join the Supreme Court.

It’s pure Separation of Powers, the kind of stuff which would make Senator Byrd swell with pride.  Unfortunately these hearings are a showcase of another Senate tradition: bombast.

Day One is devoted to opening statements from committee members.  This is where they display an amazing talent to use a lot of words to say very little.

After each and every speaker gives a verbal homage to their “Dear Friend” Senator Byrd, and maybe even brush away a tear or two, they then get on to the partisan business at hand, in the inimitable way of the Senate.

It doesn’t take a clairvoyant to predict the speeches.  Democrats and Republicans alike are predictably embracing this opportunity to “examine her record” and engage in an “open discussion about issues”. Never mind that there won’t be anything of the sort, that’s what they always say.

The Dems are ready to embrace Kagan’s brilliance and accomplishments and maybe laud the fact she will bring a fresh perspective to the court since she comes  from “outside the judicial” monastery, because she’s never been a judge.

Never mind that she argued as Solicitor General before the same justices she’ll presumably be joining and never mind she hails from the same Ivy League monastery as every other one of them…she’s offered something new.  Or so the Democrats’ argument goes.

Republicans?  After the same “examine her record” and “open discussion about the issues” platitudes, they’ll raise “concerns”  about the very lack of judge experience the other side is “lauding”. (“Concerns” and “Lauding” are Senate-speak-roughly translated, they mean “Seeking partisan advantage”).

The GOP committee members will drone on about their “concerns” over “judicial activism” (same meaning) and “liberal agenda (ditto) and their demands the nominee give specific answers to their questions about specific issues.

All of this takes a whole day because even though long time committee member Joe Biden has rambled on to another setting, there is a whole set of members ready to fill his verbosity gap.  When they finally all have their last gasp they will have set up Kagan’s appearance Tuesday, where she will spend the rest of the week NOT giving specific answers to specific questions.  The twaddle will flap in frustration.

It can be mesmerizing (hypnotic) or mesmerizing (sleep inducing). It is fascinating to watch to see if something unexpected happens to turn this from the usual mush to some sort of surprise that matches the long past glory days of the Clarence Thomas hearings.

Through it all, perhaps Bobby Byrd will be looking on and smiling. Many of us mortals will be cringing.

Don’t you just love all the writers, like me, who find it necessary to add a “Full Disclosure”, which is supposed to provide absolute honesty about a potential conflict-of-interest?  Of course,  a really FULL disclosure would go something like this: “Full disclosure, this reporter is advocating this point of view because it will make him a ton of money”. Or “…because he is being blackmailed into saying it by someone who has pictures of him with a hooker”.  Or my personal favorite” “Full disclosure.  I have no earthly idea what I’m talking about”

This one will fall short of that (I hope, anyway) but it may surprise you: “Full disclosure:  Geraldo Rivera and I are friends of long standing”.  At least we have been until now, because I want to take issue with his Fox News appearance where he strongly criticized Michael Hastings for repeating the incendiary comments by General Stanley McChrystal and his aides that got Gen. McChrystal fired.

Geraldo contends Hastings and the magazine were out of line, that, given his access, there should have been “a cone of privilege (Geraldo’s words) that kept the bitter snarkiness about the President and the chain-of-command confidential.  “If it’s not on the record”, Rivera continued, “It’s off the record”, meaning, I suppose,  that these defiant statements should have been kept confidential because the smart alecks didn’t know better.

There’s something to be said for that, when you’re embedded with a unit on a battlefield, as Geraldo proudly points out he has been.  So have I and so do I, although I never broke the agreement to not reveal the troops’ position, like he did. The point is that the foot soldiers cannot be expected to be sophisticated about all the media rules.  Fair play requires they need to be warned ahead of time that what they say can harm them.

But we’re not talking about grunts.  We’re talking about the commander of Afghanistan forces…a four star general, and the people clustered around him at the top.  They didn’t get there immediately after falling off a turnip truck, although their dumbass remarks sure made it look like they had.

There’s also another Geraldo quote from the same interview that bears examination:  Making the point, I suppose, that we journalists, who are US citizens “…want America to win  the war”, he only makes half a point.  Of course, we all want our country to win.  And our contribution is holding the feet of our leaders to the fire.

We serve an important purpose when we expose, as Hastings’ article did, the huge breaks in the chain of command and the distracting infighting that most likely has caused the Afghanistan war to go badly.  The piece makes it very clear that the military guys were not doing what they’re supposed to do, which is to “salute smartly and follow orders”, unless, of course, you mean the one-fingered salute.

The story also validly raises questions about President Obama’s leadership as Commander-in-Chief, and whether he’s running a loose ship which is sinking.  So contrary to what Geraldo says that “This is a terrible thing this reporter did”, it was actually quite the opposite…a mighty good thing, in the best reporter tradition.

What we need when it comes to the faltering Afghanistan is a more complete picture of the reasons why.  In other words, what we need is even more full disclosure.