Today, listening to my local progressive talk station, which inexplicably uses ABC for its hourly news, I heard some rather delightful and surprising 60-second blurbs about this faux "controversy." They paraphrased Obama's rather effective rebuttal, then played a key sentence or two, then played clips of McCain and Cheney both proudly and derisively using the "lipstick on a pig" metaphor. Accustomed, in this format, to hourly hogwash... (Rebublicans say earth is flat, some Democrats say it's round) followed by stock market/oil price reports, and comically portentous music that is, risibly, meant to convey both immediacy and relevance, I was utterly bowled over by the fact that they were actually doing a serious debunk of a Republican lie.

I rubbed my ears in disbelief, until I surmised that this was just some advance inoculation for the credibility infection they were about to contract from their fawning and hyped interview with the great Moose-ellini.

Sorry, trolls, but as with Bush Daddy with his "political capital" (which should never of course be taxed... we owe those richies for their genius) I think the McCainiacs shot the dwindling pellets from their little guns a bit early this time.

As O'Reilly is so fond of saying, "Is that all you got?"

(Reilly... your comment on the good Dr. Todd, sage and Casanova... too delicious for words.)

Now, maybe it's my fault for being so dag-nabbed cynical, but if these trolls mooning over Hillary are for real (and lipsticked pigs fly) I'm not so sure I was mistaken for opposing her.

If Hillary's supporters were so obtuse, dreadful, and stupid, well, give me a cigar and call me Monica, but I'm kinda glad they're gone. Of course, I don't believe a word they say... I'm more than usually cynical this long after cocktail hour.

But honestly, if someone had truly supported the Clintons, and lived through the right-wing assault against them, and could now be gloating about another right-winger flushing our gravely damaged country the rest of the way down the toilet with the same tactics, well, let the professionals figure that one out.

In the end, all we ever get in this country is the lesser of two evils, the greater of which being constantly extolled by the MSM, and, like the Naderites of 2000, these dear folk are just not getting this simple, albeit unpleasant, fact.

The righties, for all their (glaring, deeply disturbing) flaws, at least get enough oxygen to their brains to know the difference between enemies and friends.

The PUMA's, not so much.

Arne.. I appreciated the link, but amnesia (would it be ageist to call it Alzheimers?" is the glue that holds the right-wing movement together.

Where, after all, would they be, if they couldn't point out that Dems were pro-slavery in 1866, but a little less so after 1972? And we all know that if not for the DFH's, we'd have paved and striped Vietnam by last week or so. And I saw O'Reilly declare, smugly, that although the Surge was a gift from God, the war itself was now well-known to be a mistake, abetted by Hillary, et al. The Founding Fathers put "under God" into the (not yet written) Pledge of Allegiance. Joe McCarthy was a misunderstood hero. Reagan liberated the Concentration camps. The 90's boom was a product of Reagan and Bush......

I could go on, but there's that pesky 1000-word limit.

When you create your own facts out of whole cloth, not only are you never wrong, but the whole narrative holds together so nicely.

"The good end well, and the bad end badly; that's why they call it fiction." Oscar Wilde

While it often seems that the Republican party is a band of criminals, what's striking is the extent to which this is literally true. Indeed, having a criminal background, particularly if it involves executive abuse of power, seems to be part of the initiation rite into the Republican old guard. The key, of course, is to be unrepentant about it, and to work tirelessly to normalize the crimes one has committed.

Therefore the worst offenders of Watergate and Iran/Contra are eagerly brought back into the fold, to commit more crimes and spread more revisionist BS, and the oily and deranged Ollie North is just one example. Elliott Abrams, Otto Reich, John Poindexter, all guilty of crimes against the American people, and in some cases humanity, are not only not expected to pay any penalty, but are lionized and even given back their old responsibilities. IOKIYAR, and here's a poke in the eye for the "liberal" media and "activist" judges who failed, in the end, both to enforce the law or even tarnish the resumes of these creeps.

With each successive constitutional outrage from Watergate on, the prosecutions are fewer, the records better concealed, and the revisionist history cobbled together faster, while the perpetrators' careers soar.

Many were horrified when the New York Times hired William Safire; no one batted an eye when Fox hired North.

@Bamage... I spotted that, too. Remember Bush's little note to Condi, "Let freedom reign!" It was awfully cute, adding a nice little touch to the politically timed handover of "Sovereignty," which as I recall Bush had a little trouble (a lot, actually...) defining.

But as long as we're dealing in homonyms, it seems like a rather deadly form of freedom is "raining" down on Afghan civilians.

It's raining freedom, hallelujah!