This was supposed to be in reply to Flufferwink above, but I am incapable of checking boxes.

Posted at July 2, 2008 4:25 PM in response to Well Known Liberal Blogger Shot In Washington, D.C.

FYI: 17th and Euclid is Adams Morgan, not Columbia Heights. CH has enough of its own crime problems without having to take responsibility for things that happen in other 'hoods.

Speedy recovery for Mr. Beutler!

Posted at July 2, 2008 4:24 PM in response to Well Known Liberal Blogger Shot In Washington, D.C.

Oh boy. I really, really, really hope that Webb goes on the evening talk shows to rebut the McCain camp's claim. I love it when Webb busts open a can o' verbal whupass.

Posted at July 1, 2008 2:14 PM in response to McCain Campaign Accuses Obama Camp Of Coordinating With Webb To Attack McCain

To be fair, McCain is better speaking extemporaneously than he is in prepared speeches. Obama is better with the prepared speech than he is in other formats (though, one problem is that he sets an extraordinarily high bar because of his oratory skills).

That said, I think the best part about town halls is that I can't imagine McCain would be able to make it through ten of them without some sort of blowup. Everything, from the exchange they had early in Obama's Senate career to things McCain has said on trail, suggest that Obama really gets under McCain's skin.

Posted at June 4, 2008 12:16 PM in response to McCain Invites Obama To Series Of Weekly Town-Hall Meetings

For those who are more wikipedia-versed than I, please note that someone has scrubbed Kessler's entry again on the grounds that the info comes from a website? Heh?

Posted at March 17, 2008 7:59 PM in response to Newsmax's Kessler Scrubs Reference To His Obama Factual Blunder From His Wiki Page

"in which she seemed to suggest that Obama's race is responsible for his success in the campaign."

That is a very generous way to describe what Ferraro said. By the way, Ferraro is now saying that she is sorry that people thought what she said was racist, and is very offended by how people have responded to her.

Are these people living in a parallel universe?

Posted at March 11, 2008 5:41 PM in response to Obama Camp Hits Hillary's "Refusal To Denounce Or Reject" Ferraro

Hey, could you please point out to me where the Obama camp criticized SNL for using Armison to portray him? Oh, and where he has "pushed his 'blackness' as a reason to vote for him? I'd like to see evidence of that, too. Thanks.

Posted at March 11, 2008 5:07 PM in response to Top Obama Adviser: Hillary Must Remove Ferraro From Campaign

It's not just "an awfully risky gamble," it's stupid. In terms of traditional commander-in-chief credentials, McCain has them both beat. Why on earth would you highlight that?

Not to mention I just wish Clinton would stop poisoning the damn well. I'd prefer her to just actually take her ball and go home if she's going to pull crap like that.

Posted at March 6, 2008 6:32 PM in response to Hillary: McCain Has Crossed "Commander In Chief Threshold"

Right, Greg. The campaign didn't sanction it, just like it didn't sanction Shaheen's comments, the two staffers forwarding around the Muslim smear e-mails, Bob Johnson's comments, or the memo about how Obama's support for Israel is suspect (though, it appears someone on the Clinton campaign is again floating a similar/the same memo). It is unclear whether the campaign sanctioned Bill's comments comparing Obama's South Carolina wins to Jesse Jackson's.

Oh, and if we look at each one of these instances individually, without any context whatsoever, they mean nothing! And anyone who dares to put them all together and suggest a pattern is playing the race card.

Posted at February 25, 2008 2:59 PM in response to Hillary Spokesperson Wolfson Strongly Denies Campaign Officially Pushed Obama Turban Pic

1) Neither plan offers universal health care (and neither did Edwards's). They offer universal coverage. There is a big difference.

2) Both plans do, in fact, offer universal coverage. The only difference is whether the plan mandates coverage.

3) Obama's plan does not exclude 15,000,000 from coverage; rather, the 15,000,000 is the estimated number of people who, for a variety of reasons, would end up not being covered by Obama's plan absent a mandate. This is because, while some of the 15,000,000 would probably be insured through such things as Medicare, it is estimated that a large number of people would choose not to participate in Obama's program.

These are facts and they are discoverable by any who has an internet connection and the ability to read.

There are good arguments both for and against a mandate. "Is it possible to keep costs down if you don't have full buy-in?" and "Is it good public policy to require people to purchase insurance from private entities before having cost controls in place?" are two of them. "Obama will deny us universal health care" and "Clinton will put people in jail or is otherwise evil" are not.

What really bothers me is how so many people who like to blog and chat on the intertubes fall into the same intellectually lazy patterns as the MSM they like to decry.

Posted at February 15, 2008 7:14 PM in response to New Obama Ad Declares His Support For "Universal" Health Care