Oh, Buster Keaton! I had totally forgotten about that. The low speed "chase" on the locomotive in "The General" has got to be the most hilarious sendup of chase scenes ever made.

"The General" is a silent flick, made somewhere around 1920. It is remarkable that even before talkies Keaton exposed chase scenes (a la Keystone Cops movies) as tired.

Thanks for reminding me of a great movie.

Everybody with an intellect about the knuckle-walkers knows Obama did this because it will help him win. End of story. I don't see the point in spinning it; in fact, Obama might score a few points by admitting he went Machiavelli on this one. He should say, "I am reversing myself -- yes, reversing -- because we have the advantage here and we are not giving the advantage up. If politics have taught me one thing, it's that you can't do the right thing if you aren't in office. So I'm breaking my own rules, and I'll revisit campaign finance after I'm elected."

Campaign finance reform is hooey anyway. Anyone who thinks a member of Congress will voluntarily enact a law that lessens the chance that he will get re-elected is delusional. To me, the only hope is complete transparency. Make it illegal for any entity other than individuals to contribute to campaigns, and require that everyone who donates even a penny to a campaign has to register the amount of the contribution, which would then be posted on the internet.

I know some people think Dowd is witty and smart. These people need to get out more. The way she comes across to me is snarky and cheap, and every time I read her column I am amazed she is employed by the biggest paper in the nation.

It's not that Dowd is dumb. She is smart the way Rush Limbaugh is smart; that is, she knows her medium, her audience, and the gossipy side of politics. Her take is that politics is a soap opera, and she relishes exposing the petty jealousy and weakness of politicians.

But you know what? There are millions of people like that. Finding writers who can deliver a snarky take on politics is about as hard as finding people who want to analyze pro football. That is, it is harder to find someone who won't.

If you want to gauge Dowd's importance, ask if Dowd got fired tomorrow if her voice would be missed. Call it the Tim Russert test if you must. The answer is no. If I want to read columns trashing George Bush or Hillary Clinton I can go to any number of websites or papers. She adds nothing to the debate. What she does is makes it uglier.

Dowd is the weak sister contrast to another political columnist I greatly admired, Molly Ivins. Ivins also trashed GW Bush, but as a moderate-to-slightly-conservative Texan she brought it off so much more effectively. Ivins was funny without being cruel, sharp without being unfair, elegant yet willing to get her hands dirty, and I trusted her judgment because she was not the avowed leftist Dowd clearly is. Ivins passes the Russert test. I miss her very much. Dowd I won't read on principle. I'm tired of public literary humililation, which is Dowd's specialty.

I think it is ironic that Carlin recently won a Mark Twain award, because the comparison is rather apt.

Twain was a humorist who grew increasingly bitter as he aged. As a young man, Twain's satire had just the right amount of bite, but as he grew older, the curmudgeon kicked in and his humor declined. Twain hit his peak with "Huckleberry Finn," but his later works were marred by this bitterness.

It has been a while since I saw Carlin, but the last time I was put off by the strength of his disillusionment. You either get bitter or satisfied with your life as you get older. Bitterness can be tragic, but Carlin was too abrasive to evoke sympathy. I reached the point with Carlin where I felt if I wanted to watch an old man bitch about how much life sucks, I could go visit a nursing home.

His early stuff was great, though, and that's what I will remember him for.

I can't wait to see Rove and his lemmings fight back the tears as they watch the permanent majority dissolve into dust.

Maybe they can debate a philosophical question, since sophistry is all they will have to entertain themselves for the next decade: Can you dismiss someone as "coolly arrogant" without being coolly arrogant yourself?

His day is over. He knows it, we know it, and that's why he's whining.

Uncle Karl's only future is as a defendant. When Sugar Daddy's out of the White House, he ain't gonna be dodgin' no friggin subpoenas.

What astonishes me about Pelosi is this. Here we have a woman who purportedly has the smarts to lead the entire legislative branch of government and yet has no formed opinion on sexism in American politics. Is this to be believed?

I know politicians have a long history of faking ignorance regarding sensitive issues, but after a while it goes into the absurd. The highest ranking female elected official in America has nothing cohesive to say about sexism. That would be like Joe Lieberman waffling on the Holocaust.

Obviously she is lying. She has a whole lot to say, but doesn't think it expedient to speak her mind. She is another one of those don't-rock-the-boat Democrats who make me wonder if America is making a mistake if it hands them the reins of power come November.

If Pelosi can't be provocative on this issue, she can't be provocative about anything, so damn her to hell.