SuperJerk

The truth about hybrid car batteries (buried in an article that was anti-hybrid)... http://www.newsweek.com/id/138808 So...worst case scenario: your Prius will need a $3,900 replacement after lasting 350,000 miles.

CNN has a profile page for potential VP candidates: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/26/veepstakes/index.html They never nominate the same guy for VP candidate twice either. Three people come to mind that have lost in the Democratic primaries (LBJ, Humphrey, and Al Gore) and later went on to be the nominee, but they weren't nominated until they had been elected Vice President. George McGovern tried to win the nomination at the convention in 1968, but didn't compete in the primaries. FDR had been a loosing VP nominee before being elected president, and Al Smith sought the nomination in 1924 before being nominated in 1928, but that was a completely different nominating system back then.

NYU, here is what I already said about that. And this, too. In other news... http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2...run.html?page=0 Ready. Aim. Fire.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/...esidential-nod/

Back to the Hillary Clinton/Popular vote argument... If you count Michigan in your popular vote total the way Mrs. Clinton is doing, then she's ahead by 54,432 votes. 594,984 Democrats voted in Michigan. 328,151 votes were for Clinton and 237,762 votes were "Uncommitted." The last poll conducted in Michigan with Obama's name on it, the Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan Poll, had Obama at 23%. The previous 2 polls prior to that with Obama's name on them had him at 20% and 26%. Of the people who voted, 23% would be 136,846. Therefore, if Barack Obama's name had been on the Michigan ballot, he'd have gotten around 136,846 votes...82,414 more votes than he needs to lead Clinton in the total popular vote. If she wants to count primaries that everyone knew wouldn't count, then she should count ALL the votes, not just the votes for her. numeric sources: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#MI http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20...vote_count.html http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article...NEWS06/80112066 http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/12433986.html http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/m...poll_101007.htm

Is there really such a thing as a California Public School System, or is it (like in most states) a collection of independently ran districts that are regulated by a state department of education?

The contentment to attack the messenger instead of arguing with the message continues, I see. Well, NYU at least made an attempt to disagree with the content, except he got it completely WRONG. Bullshit. Not Obama. Not McCain. And so far, only Mike Huckabee has implied that Obama might get shot, though he'd never use it as a justification of political manuevering. No one , save Mitt Romney, has spent them much time rewriting their own past, and not like this, within the span of a few weeks. Hillary Clinton has rewritten her positions and her rules consistently since the Iowa Caucus. For example, Clinton is NOW arguing that the rules should be changed to make the winner of the popular vote the nominee (leaving out the inconvenient fact that the only way she could be considered the winner of the popular vote is if you don't count some measure the people who voted "uncommitted" as a vote for Obama). This was after arguing Michigan and Florida won't count, Michigan and Florida should count, caucuses shouldn't count, small state primaries shouldn't count, superdelegates should have the final say, superdelegates shouldn't have the final say, working-class white voters should count more than other demographics...you get the idea. And when asked WHY she stays in the race, she argues that primary season historically have lasted well into June (a valid point), but to illustrate her point she implies that she's doing it because something might come out about Obama causing the superdelegates to rethink their support for him, and reminding us that at one point in our history, the frontrunner was MURDERED as a justification for staying in. Don't fucking tell me you could say the same thing abut McCain or Obama, because they most certainly have not stooped to that level.

Olbermann's show is completely one-sided, but I think if you watch it with a skeptical eye, it s good way to see stuff covered you don't see many other places. I actually think he's over-reacting to the assasination comments. However, his laundry-list of ways Mrs. Clinton has destroyed her credibility is completely fair and accurate. This woman, running for president, has contradicted herself at every opportunity when it suited her.

Har har.

Since many of you don't know the first thing about what you're talking about, I guess I'd better be serious and weigh in. These needs to be said: Some schools are terrible. Some school districts are terrible. Some school districts are good. Some schools are good. I've seen both, and I've worked at both. The type of generalization that goes on when discussing public education is harmful because it over-simplifies complex issues both in terms of causes and possible solutions. It also usually gives private schools, which have almost unlimited latitude with how they deal with problems, a free pass it doesn't deserve. Private schools can reject or accept whoever they want, aren't required to provide special education services, deal with poverty or at-risk children, and can basically create the illusion that they are wonderful educators not because they are better at instruction, but because they are better at hand-picking their students and have more options in enforcing discipline. At the same time, there are many public schools that have their hands tied the same way many other schools do, and still graduate successful students. There are also schools that have had huge sums of money funneled into them, experimented with various strategies, and still manage to fall on their face because of incompetence or mismanagement.

Everybody wants to rip on Olbermann for saying it, but nobody wants to explain why he's wrong. Interesting. In other news... http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/23/dems.vp/index.html

Keith Olbermann tells us how he really feels about Hillary Clinton's "assasination" comment in tonight's "Special Comment."

Mike Gravel, Bob Barr, AND Tucker Carlson? I'd have never thought in a million years the Libertarian presidential nomination would be so sought after.

That's an excellent point.

It's true that being blind enhances your other senses. For example, NY Governor David Paterson is able to smell Hillary's bullshit. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/...ting-desperate/

Well, THIS is interesting.* http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...22/1052820.aspx * If "interesting" is defined as stupid, bullheaded, stubborn, and therefore completely in character for this campaign.

Oh, he's STILL gonna charge tuition? And wait a second...I just realized I don't know the exchange rates. This article was from a foriegn newspaper! SPEEK AMURICEN, DAMMIT!!!

Not so fast! http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/22/mcc...agee/index.html I doubt she cares. Hillary is basically Ted Kennedy circa 1980, right now. She knows everyone will blame her if she stays in and Obama goes on to lose the GE, but she's convinced he can't win anyway, so she has to whatever it takes and that means going to the convention. As long as she's marginalized by the public and the media, her opinion doesn't matter. Hey, anyone remember when I said a long time ago "Hillary Clinton thinks she's Bobby Kennedy, but she's really Ted"? More proof of that!

Does everything have to degrade into a "us vs. them" argument. Will Smith decided to be proactive and is helping kids (not just his own) get a good education. Good for him!

One of her spokesmen pointed out that the SDs don't actually count till the convention (which is true as far as I know). So, she could drag this out and hope some big scandal happens to Obama and causes all the SDs to change their mind in Denver. Yes, that's true. What I meant was that if she stays in past that point I was talking about, even though the superdelegates COULD change their minds, public opinion would quickly turn against her.

If Obama has the right number of superdelegates after the primaries are over and the Michigan/Florida issue is settled (and that's a big "if"), she'll pretty much universally be seen as a sore loser.

Newsweek's Alter goes through point-by-point why Clinton's popular vote argument is bullshit. http://www.newsweek.com/id/138109

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/22/oba...arch/index.html

Geraldine Ferraro has officially lost her FUCKING MIND. Asking Hillary Clinton tough questions = media sexism. Obama saying negative things about Hillary Clinton = campaign sexism. Saying someone only got where they are because they're black = legitimate political discourse.