Today’s NY Times carries three editorials indicating that for Bu$hCo, the icing is beginning to melt off the cake. The culprit? Public disenchantment with six years of lies, distortion, misdirection, secrecy, hardheadendness, greed and lack of concern about average Americans. It must be particularly gratifying to some that the management and editorial staff of the Grey Lady seems to be angry enough to devote 75% of its editorial space to discussing the malfeasance of the Bu$h malAdministration.

In the first editorial, the US Attorney scandal is revisited, with recitation of some documented facts:

In its fumbling attempts to explain the purge of United States attorneys, the Bush administration has argued that the fired prosecutors were not aggressive enough about addressing voter fraud. It is a phony argument; there is no evidence that any of them ignored real instances of voter fraud. But more than that, it is a window on what may be a major reason for some of the firings.

In partisan Republican circles, the pursuit of voter fraud is code for suppressing the votes of minorities and poor people. By resisting pressure to crack down on “fraud,” the fired United States attorneys actually appear to have been standing up for the integrity of the election system.

Detailing how one US Attorney, John McKay of Washington State, was pressured to investigate the gubernatorial victory of Christine Gregoire after two verified recounts, the Times notes that Mr McKay was interviewed by Harriett Miers for a Federal judgeship, and told he would not be placed on the bench because he “mishandled” the matter.

The editorial accurately notes that Republican claims of “voter fraud” by Democrats was actually a smokescreen intended to hide rampant voter suppression by the Republicans.

The United States attorney purge appears to have been prompted by an array of improper political motives. Carol Lam, the San Diego attorney, seems to have been fired to stop her from continuing an investigation that put Republican officials and campaign contributors at risk. These charges, like the accusation that Mr. McKay and other United States attorneys were insufficiently aggressive about voter fraud, are a way of saying, without actually saying, that they would not use their offices to help Republicans win elections. It does not justify their firing; it makes their firing a graver offense.

In the next editorial, the “MSM” in the person of the Times has officially taken note of Messers Bu$h and Cheney’s passion for secrecy and hiding the actions and functions of government from the public.

The Bush administration’s mania for secrecy has been dealt an overdue blow by the House. Significant numbers of Republicans voted with Democrats to reverse the erosion of the public’s right to know how its government operates. A package of strong open-government measures would repair some of the damage inflicted in the past six years on laws governing taxpayers’ access to federal records and presidential archives, while bolstering the standing of whistle-blowers to report abuses in agencies without fear of retaliation.

Overwhelming majorities were registered for the measures despite the White House’s threat of a presidential veto. We say bring it on. The majorities were vetoproof in size, and an override confrontation is just the medicine the administration needs for the hubris it has shown in enshrouding all manner of information.

Perhaps the Times has decided that Americans really do have a right to know what its employees, its elected officials, are doing.

The freedom of information law has been steadily undermined, to the point where agencies are blithely ducking their lawful responsibility and taking years to answer legitimate requests. The House voted to mandate initial answers within 20 days, and computerized tracking of pending requests. Another measure would effectively revoke President Bush’s 2001 executive order that allows former presidents and vice presidents to use their official libraries as mausoleums to bury controversial and historical documents indefinitely beyond public discovery. Who knows — if lawmakers stand firm against White House objections, historians may someday be able to plumb the full depths of the Bush-Cheney administration’s devotion to governance by murk.

The challenge of course will be getting these bills through the Senate, where the Democratic lead is much slimmer than in the House, and where treasonous Republican Senators don’t have to worry about re-election every two years.

The third editorial notes that, 5 and one-half years after the airplane attacks of 9/11, the Bu$h malAdministration has refused to take airport security seriously. While passengers are put through hoops, having to limit their carry on baggage, empty their pockets and purses for inspection, and remove their shoes, baggage handlers are able to put anything at all on planes, with no examination at all.

While enormous effort is focused on screening airline passengers for explosives or weapons before they can board a commercial flight, it remains shockingly easy for airport employees to sneak into secure areas and carry dangerous materials onto a plane without detection. That frightening truth was underscored by a flagrant breach of security at the Orlando Airport in Florida last week that was detected only because of an anonymous tip.

The breach in this case was a small-bore smuggling operation. A customer service agent for Comair, a subsidiary of Delta, and another Comair employee used their work uniforms and identification badges to gain access to restricted areas, where they stored a duffle bag containing 13 handguns, an assault rifle and a stash of marijuana near the departure gates. One of the men later retrieved the bag and took it aboard a Delta flight to Puerto Rico as carry-on luggage. Based on the tip, authorities pulled one of the men off the plane before it took off and, disturbingly late, caught the other with the duffle bag in San Juan.

This is in many ways an amazing story. The apparent ease with which firearms were smuggled onto an airplane and shipped to the plane’s destination is frightening.

The Transportation Safety Administration was quick to try to alibi out, stating that no passenger was ever in any danger, and they caught the guys, anyway. Of course, they caught the smugglers because of an anonymous tip, and as long as every single smuggling act is called in to the Feds without exception then the TSA might have a leg to strand on.

We hope they will be that lucky the next time. If the duffel bag had contained explosives the story might have had a different ending. The claim there was no danger because two Federal marshals were on board is pointless.

It is small comfort that the Transportation Security Administration says that no passengers were put at risk because at least two federal marshals were on board. Had the smugglers been terrorists, they could presumably have fired their guns or brought down the plane with a powerful explosive.

Having watched Bu$hCo for the last six years on has to wonder if the TSA was staffed in the same way FEMA was. After all, even Party loyalists have to feed their families, but once again, the political demands of the Republican Party have endangered American lives.