SuperJerk

So...someone confronting someone else on a news-themed talk show is bad television and should lead to the network's bankruptcy...and yet, Fox News continues to thrive. Oh, wait, the difference between this and Fox News was that the host knew what he was talking about, and gave the guest multiple opportunities to answer the question while the guest chose to just repeat the same talking points over and over (the opposite of how things usually run at Fox).

The funny thing was, Kevin James wasted all that time comparing Chamberlain and Obama, when Bush's reference was actually to William Borah (although it was intially Bush that incorrectly equated Borah's comments to appeasement). That's wasted time he could have spent blaming Bill Clinton for 9/11 or calling Obama a Muslim sleeper-agent.

"Where do they find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?" (Hey...I can't be the only one who watched a lot of Nickelodeon in the 80s.)

I'm not going to defend Bush on this one, though... http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/...-of-terrorists/ At first Bush aids admitted he was talking about Obama, et. al., but the White House later backed off the suggestion. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24647048/

Factcheck.org goes after McCain's budget proposals... http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/th...ain_part_i.html And his stance on taxes... http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/th...in_part_ii.html (I put that in bold because I remember Charles Gibson loading a question with this false premise during the last Democratic debate.)

McCain lays out vision of America four years from now under a McCain Administration. I'd like to point out that McCain has no realistic domestic agenda (he seems to hold to the notion that cutting taxes, regulation, and government spending will solve every problem), and neglects to mention that he will make an attempt through judicial appointments to overturn abortion rights.

I'm going to make a counter argument because I think Olbermann went too far this time, because to be honest, I thought he was putting words into Bush's mouth. President Bush was asked about a worst case scenario, and of course he's going to say what a horrible mistake he thinks pulling out of Iraq would be and the worst case scenario would be that America would get attacked again...Bush didn't make the link to electing Democrats, Olbermann did that on his own. And Bush was ASKED about why he quit golfing, and he didn't say he was making this big sacrifice, but just that'd look bad if he was doing that so publicly while soldiers were dying in Iraq. Olbermann basically took a normal interview with Bush and twisted it to make Bush look bad.

Since most voters probably have no idea who Reid and Pelosi are...exactly what policies are you referring to?

Edwards would be a great Attorney General. Meanwhile... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24618748/ I'd have felt better if they'd endorsed Clinton...their unwavering support for late-term abortions is hardly mainstream, and in my opinion this will hurt Obama more than it will help. Speaking of Mrs. Clinton...this is what you might call a psuedo-endorsement... http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/14/clinton/index.html

Good point. Republicans are going to get killed in November because of the economy and the war. Everything else is just trivia.

The Clinton campaign has reportedly rejected any kind of compromise on Florida and Michigan that's been proposed by the Obama campaign and the DNC so far. The Obama campaign could totally make this into one hell of a negative ad if they wanted to. "Barack Obama gave his word to follow the rules, and even took his name off the ballot. Senator Clinton's campaign was for it before the primary, but changed their minds after they won a primary her opponents weren't even part of. Does Sen. Clinton really care about Michigan, or is she just using us as pawns in her losing campaign? Obama: keeps his word. Clinton: breaks her word and uses us."

The demographics are brutal as well. Population, 2006 estimate 1,818,470 White persons, percent, 2006 94.9% Black persons, percent, 2006 3.3% Persons under 18 years old, percent, 2006 21.4% Persons 65 years old and over, percent, 2006 15.3% Population, percent change, April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006 0.6% High school graduates, percent of persons age 25+, 2000 75.2% Bachelor's degree or higher, pct of persons age 25+, 2000 14.8% http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/54000.html

Oh, how silly we were to think any question would ever get answered...

(Can we go back to quoting Walk Hard now?) I do believe in you...I just know you're gonna fail.

Since I don't expect consistency or intellectual honesty from the Clinton campaign at this point, it was morbidly amusing to see how the Clinton campaign tried to spin the results of the primary in, of all places, West Virginia as a crucial win. I hope someone in the media remembers to mention that only 28 delegates are at stake tomorrow, and that West Virginia is worth 5 electoral votes in November. Tomorrow's victory will somehow show that white people won't vote for Obama, even though he won primary victories in Wisconsin, Connecticut, Delaware, and Utah.

This is officially the first person I've heard of that didn't like it.

I'm embarrassed to admit I took my girlfriend to see "What Happens in Vegas" last Saturday night. Shame on me.

From Newsweek's Jonathon Alter: http://www.newsweek.com/id/136315 And a post-mortem on Mrs. Clinton's campaign from The New Yorker... Hillary Clinton's wrong course: When and where, it is not too soon to ask, did she go wrong?

Proving once again its a bad idea when cousins marry.

I know Jindal is considered a political wunderkind, but it'd be hard for the GOP to knock Obama for being inexperienced when you pick an even VP nominee with approximately the same level of experience. I'm not saying they won't do it, just that they'd be handicapping one of their own best arguments if they did.

"This was a particularly bad case of somebody being cut in half." And I guess they at least had the brains to put "Juno" in the best picture category.

I think if last Tuesday demonstrates anything, it's that Obama's weaknesses have been vastly exaggerated by the media. And despite being more popular than the rest of his party, McCain still cannot win. Here are ten reasons why: McCain's moderate positions on the environment, campaign finance reform, and corporate regulation alienates much of the conservative base. McCain has a quarter-century long Congressional career as a conservative Republican that can be analyzed for a gold-mine of pro-business, anti-labor votes. Contrary to the vast majority of Americans, McCain views the Iraq War as justified. Contrary to the vast majority of Americans, McCain views the Iraq War as winnable. McCain supports keeping the Bush tax cuts, even at a time when a popular case can be made that at least some of them should be repealed and despite the fact he originally opposed them. McCain has alienated anti-Hollywood cultural conservatives due to his own appearances in "Wedding Crashers" and "Saturday Night Live."” McCain's economic policy is centered around cutting government spending...an argument which is very hard to sell. McCain vowed during the primaries to try to overturn Roe v. Wade, instead of evading the issue the way recent successful Republican presidential candidates had done. Given the current composition of the Supreme Court, the theoretical achievability of this goal is quite high. This will cost him at least some sizable portion of the women's vote. During the fall debates with Obama, McCain will be on the loosing end of the JFK-effect. McCain can very easily be linked to a president with an approval rating of less than 30%. Individually, none of these things would cost him the election, but all 10 together make McCain's election the political equivalent of a kamikaze mission.

This was about 100 times funnier than any line I was planning to post.

I've said it before, I'll say it again...Hillary owes the party more than the party owes her. They handed her a Senate seat with a bow on top, not to mentioned stuck by her husband when he was more than willing to throw Democratic congressmen under the bus at any given opportunity with his "triangulation" strategy. All she's ever done is cost them a midterm election in 1994 and spend a Senate career cozying up to Republicans. Pretty good editorial piece demonstrating Hillary Clinton's total hypocrisy on the Florida/Michigan issue: http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper...in-the-end.aspx

http://www.270towin.com/ A little scenario I came up with. Great line from Countdown Wednesday night 9talking about the Rev. Wright strategy not working in the Louisiana House race): Olbermann: Rev. Wright...That's not going to work for the GOP, what will? Do you then switch back to the mutally exclusive lie that Obama is a Muslim or what? Rachel Maddow: Right...that his Christian pastor is so controversial that it makes us realize what a Muslim he is.