"The Florida and Michigan party leaders did this to themselves. What part of the rules didn't they understand?" - That would likely be Mr. Obama's response to your question, lolcait.

I'll ask you the same thing; what part of the rules governing when the states were allowed to hold primaries do you think the state party officials didn't understand?

It seems that Hillary wants to take credit for winning virtual one-candidate races in contests that the others bowed out of in deference to pre-existing agreements. How, exactly is that fair?

...how, exactly, is Intelligent Design a hypothesis? Isn't a hypothesis subject to testing? And isn't testing (a.k.a. proving) the polar opposite of simply believing and isn't simple belief the whole point of ID?

I always thought Ben Stein was an ass. Now I think he's a moron too.

So, does this make Bernanke a twit?

Patriotism is an "-ism" just like any other "-ism" (Humanism, Communism, Racism, Sexism, Socialism, Capitalism, etc...). Subscription to any "-ism" usually demands that the subscriber focus attention on one set of ideologially correct values and put on blinders that prevent one from critically engaging any challenges to said "-ism."

When patriotism is judged not by one's actions, but by one's disiplay of "patriotic" symbols, patriotism becomes as thin as the flags the patriots wave.

What a tool. One could say pretty much the same thing about any presidential candidate in the history of Democracy. Clearly, all campaign rhetoric and promises will meet with a harsh dose of reality about five minutes after the swearing-in ceremony. Should McCain win in November, there are going to be a lot of people who are disappointed when he isn't able to deliver as advertised on every issue.

So, if the Republicans can't stand up to the Democrats in Congress, how can they be expected to take on the terrorists?

Jehosaphat,

"As for Fox News being "boycotted" by the Democratic candidates , I think it is because they are afraid of the tough questions that will be thrown at them and not the soft ball questions that they get from CNN and MSNBC." And then: "We don't know whether or not they will fold when the going gets tough."

Nice boilerplate Republican talking points. Is the RNC paying you to go to political blogs and post shit like this?

If you are not in the employ of the GOP, then this suggests that while you might watch these channels, you don't actually listen to the information that they present. FOX reporters aren't capable of posing a tough question. Understand that there is a difference between asking tough questions of candidates and simply talking over or yelling at candidates with whom you have disagreements. If you had bothered to watch the Obama/Clinton debate the other night, you would have seen tough and fair questions posed by the horrible MSM (I have no love for Wolf Blizer).

FOX News management instructs staff to push stories that paint Democrats in a bad light and when the facts don't work to their advantage, they insert their opinions. FOX understands that many Americans, like yourself, don't pay close attention, and even if they did, how many people have the time to fact-check everything they "report." Rupert Murdoch understands that there is money to be made in telling ignorant conservatives things that they like to hear.

Why do you think FOX doesn't call itself, "The Right-Wing News Channel," or," The Republican News Channel?" They would certainly have viewers, but they wouldn't be able to pass their Republican propaganda as anything but Republican propaganda.

Expecting Democrats to give time to FOX News is like expecting George W. Bush to give an interview to Al Jazeera.

I don't know where Salon got it's information that Fox News ratings are in the pits. I usually divide my time between MSNBC, Fox News, CNN and Headline news each evening. MSNBC is getting less of my attention in recent weeks. Keith Olberman is a total clown, Chris Matthews can't get away from his ingrained Democratic bias ever since he was the mouthpiece for Tip O'Neil. He is doing better, but his show could be better titled The Democratic National Committee Hour.

As for Fox News being "boycotted" by the Democratic candidates , I think it is because they are afraid of the tough questions that will be thrown at them and not the soft ball questions that they get from CNN and MSNBC. I am sure the candidates were advised by the DNC before hand to refuse appearances on Fox News. Then the DNC spun it as fearful of Fox bias. We saw through that in a New York minute. The Republican candidates subjected themselves to all questions by hostile interviewers from all networks. The Democratic candidates have not been through the "baptismal fires".

We don't know whether or not they will fold when the going gets tough. I can imagine Bill coming on stage or grabbing a microphone in a situation where Hillary is confronted by a problem thrown at her by some foreign dignitary, or being overridden by a Senate or House opposing one of her initiatives. A Barack Obama administration will counter with cries of "racism" if any of his initiatives meets stiff unyielding opposition. I specify his administration, not Obama. I think Barak Obama is above that. The liberal left MSM, though, will play that to the hilt.

The Democrats still have time to erase all doubts by standing up to the scrutiny of tough questioning. I advise them to do so.

You probably don't realize it, but your post makes the case for how thoughtless and simple-minded the average FOX viewer is. Did you actually read Boehlert's article? Did you read any of the comments in this thread? If you did, you clearly didn't understand any of the arguments being discussed. In fact, it sounds like you just assume that everything you don't completely understand is "liberal" or "leftist."

You should probably take your pills before you post again.