New topic... I mean, post, upstairs.

Your gloating is both noted and appreciated. ;~)

Seeing people go point by point over the dry substance of mandates and caps and funding and risk pools is awesome.

Ditto.

And yet here we have characters accusing people who note the differences between the two parties as being paid agents of those parties.

As one who often notes those very differences, I can only sigh this time, since the Irony has been wrung right out of me. But that's only temporary.

For The First Time In A Long Time, You Will Not Be Voting "For The Least Worst". [I agree.]

Not to mention that aside from the duplicates, some of your reasons to vote for him are my reasons not to... and you still missed some of those.

When I read that story last week, my first reaction was a bit of schadenfreude... naturally, since I was one of those posting comments on Salon a while ago about why the Democrats should boycott Fox. (Actually, FoxCott.) It was right after Bill Clinton's on-air kerfluffle with Chris Wallace.

I wondered whether even the FoxNews devotees would eventually notice that they weren't getting complete coverage, given the absence of Democrats. Apparently, they have.

Perhaps it hasn't been a 100% boycott, but it's effect has been felt.

I think the real key was not trying to end all Democratic interviews on Fox, (particularly with those who can hold their own), but refusing to allow Fox to moderate/sponsor any of the Democratic debates. No one had to have a crystal ball to foresee what kind of "moderation" Fox News would have employed... In a one-on-one interview, the interviewee has far more power (if they'd only use it) than the contestants do in a (so-called) debate format that includes 7 or 8 people. So, a Clinton can get away with making an appearance that a field of candidates cannot.

And now, Fox is reduced to begging Democrats to appear... and just a few weeks ago, supporters of Republican Ron Paul were storming the streets in New Hampshire in pursuit of Sean Hannity. It doesn't get much better than that in the payback department.

But, the best part of reading that link last week, was reading another story shortly afterwards: that Karl Rove is now going to join Fox as a commentator.

Aha! I thought... they actually need an alternative to the "missing blonde white woman" meme (since their ratings are really in the tank), and they've chosen Karl Rove.

I think that means our team is winning. At least some of the time. And it wasn't so long ago we were winning nada.

The approval rating for Democrats in Congress has plummeted steadily since the American electorate gave them control of Congress in early 2007. Early on, ratings for Congressional Democrats were consistently near 50% as Americans had high hopes for their willingness to change the course of the country and place real limits on the deeply unpopular Republican policies.

I'm amazed these days when so many pundits will say that the American people are only now beginning to pay attention to the election...

There was a time when I believed that, but I don't anymore. Obviously, if not just Congress's, but more importantly, the Democrats' approval ratings have been in stead decline since the 2006 election, people were and are paying attention already.

Otherwise, there would have been no expectations to be dashed.

Unfortunately, you had the bad luck to have your questioned answered first by an anonymous troll. It doesn't always happen that way...

If you visit regularly, you'll get an idea of to whom to address your questions, when you have something specific to ask. There are some regulars who have identifiable areas of expertise. If you have time, one way to find them is to choose a few and read a few of their archived letters.

In general, the discussions here are very interesting and informative (and sometimes entertaining) and they weave several threads together throughout the day and evening. Sometimes, though, there will be something resembling a flame war, but even those are bit different here. Better vocabularies, mostly. ;~)

Please don't judge us all by your first experience. (Note that Glenn did respond to your questions.)

FYI... lots of folks are very sensitive to tone, which, unfortunately, can be easily misconstrued (or not!) online. You can use whatever tone you like, but if you want respectful answers, that's probably the best tone to use to ask, as well.

...who didn't get much value from the input of the other bar customers.

In fact, it was confusing. At some point, I realized that I might have been mixing up the reactions of the LA audience with those in the bar. It wasn't just breaking the 4th wall, but also adding a 5th.

I do appreciate the good feedback from the other commenters here, though, since I didn't get to see the debate (no cable), and it was especially heartening to read the comments from supporters on each side say that would wholeheartedly support whichever one wins the nomination.

My observation after reading/skimming many threads of the libertarian wars here, is that libertarians tend to lean Republican.

Arne and Armagednoutahere...

I don't think my funnybone can take much more. ;~)

* * *

And whoever was confusing BS with PW, not to worry...

Once things pick up over at Broadsheet or at Cary Tennis's column, BS will be outahere. PW hopefully will once again become engaged by whatever else has had his attention lately.