In Virginia, there is little commentary on the fact that Bob McDonald has run to the middle in an effort to appeal to suburban, more progressive voters in Northern VA. I'm not saying he's embraced Obama, but he's distanced himself from his more conservative, younger self...arguing that he's learned to be more inclusive, less sexist, etc. Yet, none of the comitariat are talking about how successful McDonald has been denying his own Pat Robertson-inspired past.

"You can't govern without popular support, he has lost that.."

And yet, for all your brave words, there is little to support that. Most polls show him holding steady in the mid 50s. Most polls show, for example, that Americans would approve of more "radical" solutions for health care than the Senate is currently persuing...for example, the "Public Option" is more popular today than it was before the August shouting matches.

But, the above statement is so funny because for the last four years we were governed by a President that not only had lost popular support -- IN DROVES -- but was completely tone deaf to popular support as he lied his way through a war he lied his way into.

Where were these brave words when George Bush was creating the conditions that caused the current econmic crisis? Where were these brave words as he increased the national debt nine-fold?

Where were these brave words as George Bush promised adherence to American values and set up the foundations of a police state where warrents are ignored and torture becomes an American value?

It never fails to amaze me that those on the looney right who decry what they see as creeping tyrnany sat silent on their hands as Bush and Cheeny built the machinery needed to fully impose a coup on the Constitution. IF Obama really were a threat to the Constitution, the powers he would use to subvert it are the powers that Bush took for himself and that Cheeny still defends.

Please, please, please let him run.

While I recognize that in this day and age, you can't get away from polling and that for many a politician holding on to the job is the be all and end all, sometimes the public is just wrong. This is not to suggest that the health care proposal is perfect, rather it is to say that we can't continue the way we're going and doing nothing isn't a realistic or good political action. The Democrats should man-up, as the younger folks say -- and vote for reform and take their chances at the polls. Let it be a campaign havind done something instead of a campaign about business as usual.

So, the antichrist is stupid too? Waiting all these years to bring about the reign of evil, plotting and planning, but Satan botches the details? I mean leaving clues to suggest that the Anti-christ wasn't born in America AND giving him a name that any old Aramaic speaking guy can figure out as a sign of the devil? Seriously, you'd think Satan would work more sinister, smarter evil, oh, say, putting your spawn in Alaska and getting her on a national ticket, or maybe be a NeoCon.

Here's the question it seems to me you have to ask yourself: But for you and your support of him, would he be on the street or headed toward being homeless? If the answer to that question is yes, than you've got a serious problem with this guy and you should get out of the relationship in spite of all of his wonderful qualities. If, on the other hand, he is irresponsilbe but not in immenent danger of being homeless, as long as your finances are seperate, it doesn't really seem to matter. I guess what I'm saying if you are the difference between him having shelter and him being homeless, he's using you and once a better deal comes along that also gives him shelter, you will be history.

Any focus on the step Grandmother plays into the hand of the birthers. It doesn't matter that she was mis-tranlatted. Undertand here that they are using/twisting the words of a elderly lady in Kenya vs. a mountain of certifiable government docmentation. Even if their interpretation of the Grandmother's statement were correct, we have the State of Hawaii officially saying the statement is incorrect based on the documentation they have, as well as based on the newspaper reports, etc. It is, hands down, a slam-dunk for the documnets.

As an interesting aside, it would be interesting to know how many of the birthers are holocuast deniers, who dismiss eyewitness afadavits and accounts as inherently biased and unreliable. Just wondering.

Oh, satire. Ha.

Very red faced here.

Mia maxima culpa.

What the constitution says, for your edification:

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

So, what are you talking about?

Someone would explain why a GOP sex scandle is judged on a different scale than a Democratic sex scandle. Actually, I'm glad that they'll let Sanford stay...it shows that they've learned something (and should thank Clinton for making all adultry politically survivable), but what now are the GOP's standards? Cheating on your wife, humiliating her and your children in public is clearly in the "survivable" catagory now, so where's the line?

Fromkin was a sometimes brilliant writer with deep principles and always thoughtful...that the Post would chose to lose this indipendent voice while retaining the NeoCon booby twins of Kristol and Krauthiemer just show how far this great paper, and newspapers in general have fallen.

It is a sad day for newspapers, But I know that it will not silence the necessary voice of Fromikin.